Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Steve Jobs Told Employees in 2010 That Apple Would Not Release a Television
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Would things be better if Apple had a strong lock on everything like TV source, internet source, music source, etc?
The idea of not reinventing the wheel is sound. Look at the way Microsoft has attempted that over the years, always with disastrous results. The TV is becoming just a vehicle for connecting to the outside world anyway and it makes more sense to be that portal than just the display in the corner of the room unless some way can be found to make that a lot better.
Back in the 80's, Bosch invented antilock brakes. They built a great system which revolutionized the auto industry but they didn't say, "Oh, now we should build a car." They let carmakers do that and they in turn incorporated Bosch ABS into their products. Apple likely sees a similar path for transforming our TVs without actually having to make and sell the TVs.
Back in the 80's, Bosch invented antilock brakes. They built a great system which revolutionized the auto industry but they didn't say, "Oh, now we should build a car." They let carmakers do that and they in turn incorporated Bosch ABS into their products. Apple likely sees a similar path for transforming our TVs without actually having to make and sell the TVs.
I never thought a TV was practical. There are too many sizes, too many technologies to cover. The TV Screen should be basic, no more than a monitor. It needs little else than a screen, an input, and perhaps some audio. Let others make them. Everything else goes in an Apple TV box.
Apple TV needs an HDMI in so it can go in line with your cable box, and we all need some very good control API for the cable and screen. HDMI is actually getting there, with its data abilities. But Apple is good at developing APIs, they can go the rest of the way. Get that together and now you've got yourself a product.
Apple TV needs an HDMI in so it can go in line with your cable box, and we all need some very good control API for the cable and screen. HDMI is actually getting there, with its data abilities. But Apple is good at developing APIs, they can go the rest of the way. Get that together and now you've got yourself a product.
Steve died 3 years ago....3 years can be a century in terms of technology! Stop this stupid quotes please!
People are always so shocked that he said stuff and did the opposite. What business would succeed by letting its competitors know the exact detail of it's plans??
I actually hope Apple does NOT release a TV. I just want them to improve the Apple TV and get all the content there. Then it can be used with ANY TV, as opposed to TV made my Apple that will cost way more than I'd be able to afford. Honestly, I think a 42" Apple television would probably start at $1500. At least. Which is way too much.
Unfortunately, this quote is still relevant. There is no way for a company that makes a profit of $10 billion a quarter to 'move the needle' with TV sets. Apple won't be going there.
I still have doubts about whether a TV with integrated AppleTV features is a good idea or not, as it means they need to offer multiple sizes, and given the premium nature of Apple's usual products with big screens, it seems a poor area to try to break into as there are lots of good, affordable HDTVs out there.
The mini set-top box always seemed the better idea, as the one model is suitable for everyone, regardless of the size of their TV. The main issue really is that you need to put that box somewhere, which is where devices like Google's Chromecast are interesting, though I'm not sure if it'd suit Apple as Apple devices really need to be seen.
Unless of course they can make one really tiny so it simply has to be out of the way, using either power over HDMI or USB as required, and then make the Apple branding a bit more prominent on the TV.
I think it's a fair point that TV's aren't replaced very often though, but with an Apple TV having access to a third party app marketplace that wouldn't matter, as Apple would still be making a cut from app-sales, plus those apps can be enriching other iOS and Mac devices, so it's not as if the Apple TV alone needs to make a huge impact as the halo effect is just as important.
The mini set-top box always seemed the better idea, as the one model is suitable for everyone, regardless of the size of their TV. The main issue really is that you need to put that box somewhere, which is where devices like Google's Chromecast are interesting, though I'm not sure if it'd suit Apple as Apple devices really need to be seen.
Unless of course they can make one really tiny so it simply has to be out of the way, using either power over HDMI or USB as required, and then make the Apple branding a bit more prominent on the TV.
I think it's a fair point that TV's aren't replaced very often though, but with an Apple TV having access to a third party app marketplace that wouldn't matter, as Apple would still be making a cut from app-sales, plus those apps can be enriching other iOS and Mac devices, so it's not as if the Apple TV alone needs to make a huge impact as the halo effect is just as important.
Totally. TV market is oversaturated and margins are awful. Keep making Apple TV better. What Apple really needs is more live programming. Maybe buying large content owner/provider is an answer?
So, when it is clear that you're wrong you can only insult others? That has a name.
----------
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/18888521/
setting aside that reports about the veracity of this book are suspect, Steve Jobs is dead. So what he said or didn't say is moot.
If Tim Cook wants Apple to release a real TV then it will happen. I suspect that he doesn't, for many of the same numbers game reasons that Steve apparently didn't, rather than 'Steve said no'
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
If Apple were to take over the "cable experience" it would be without a cable contract. And that might be a good thing.
Imagine every network had an app. It worked on all iOS devices including the Apple TV. You could subscribe via iTunes to the app directly, perhaps even sets of apps (so like you subscribe to NBC and you get NBC, USA, Bravo etc) or sign in with your cable info.
So then those of us that really only watch 4-5 channels could just buy those, but those that insist they want everything could have their old school cable.
But all off those apps so you don't have to rent some fancy box. And if the systems allowed you to see all of a current season after it aired rather than this 5 episode stuff you wouldn't have as much need for a DVR. Perhaps they could even do a 'free' tier where you can see the ep 24 hours later and 2 previous without paying but if you pay then you get to see it 'live' and all the aired eps of the season.
I have to agree with Steve on this one. TV's are a terrible business.
What's the point in having Apple features in the display when you can have them on an ATV with any model for a hundred bucks?
I know some people look forward to voice integration, but all I need is Siri telling me she can't help right now when I'm looking for a movie.
What's the point in having Apple features in the display when you can have them on an ATV with any model for a hundred bucks?
I know some people look forward to voice integration, but all I need is Siri telling me she can't help right now when I'm looking for a movie.
Exactly. First that he's dead so his views are moot. Second that the numbers are old. Who knows what they are know. They might be such that it makes more sense.
Although I still maintain that its more logical that they won't make a 'tv' in the sense of the tuners etc, but rather an extension of their Cinema Display lineup. Add HDMI inputs, increase the frame rates etc. Make it 'cinema' worthy as well as computer worthy. They might not create a 60 inch model but perhaps just the current and a 40" which would be fine for many. If they want to go larger they can go to a 'real television'. for the tv stuff, add an Apple TV box and enjoy
The folks who want to buy cable channel a la carte would find that world very disappointing very quickly unless their tastes run very mainstream. The popular channels subsidize the unpopular ones. With a la carte, say goodbye to watching the Tour de France and stuff like that. Should be plenty of cheap reality tv to watch instead, though.
Steve is right. Making TV/Monitors is best left to the cut throat marketplace. Apple TV (box) is the right direction. There is so much more Apple could do with this box.
For example, I pay $100 a month to Comcast ONLY to watch college football 4 months a year. The best scenario for me would be if on my Apple TV there is a College Sports Icon where I can drill down to select school/sport. I would then select my Pay For View event purchase and be able to watch the live broadcast (or a replay). I would even settle for "replay only" provided it was available 24 hours after the event.
I would dump Comcast in a heartbeat...and only pay for what I want/need.
This as opposed to paying for hundreds of channels of useless content.
For example, I pay $100 a month to Comcast ONLY to watch college football 4 months a year. The best scenario for me would be if on my Apple TV there is a College Sports Icon where I can drill down to select school/sport. I would then select my Pay For View event purchase and be able to watch the live broadcast (or a replay). I would even settle for "replay only" provided it was available 24 hours after the event.
I would dump Comcast in a heartbeat...and only pay for what I want/need.
This as opposed to paying for hundreds of channels of useless content.
Last edited:
