Who Would Buy a Non-Spying Apple Smart TV set?

bobob

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Jan 11, 2008
2,929
1,700
Following on this Friday USA Today article:

Why are TVs so cheap now? Well, your smart TV is watching you and making extra money, too

"Your smart TV is watching you. And making money off you as well.

That’s why the prices of TVs have fallen so dramatically over the last five years.

A mix of lower LCD prices, more intense competition and new ways to profit off the consumer once the set enters our homes have turned the boob tube into something more like a razor. And we, the viewers, are the razor blades.

Bill Baxter, the Chief Technology Officer for TV set giant Vizio, referred to it as the "post-purchase monetization" of the TV on a recent podcast interview with the Verge.

Translated, that means that more ads are coming at you via prominent branded movie and TV channels on smart TVs. These channels share ad revenues with set manufacturers like Vizio, Samsung, LG, an avenue that didn't exist in the pre-streaming era. They also profit by selling data of your viewing histories to programmers and marketers. "

I was wondering what the market would be like for a non-spying Apple smart TV set?

I realize there will be the usual haters who come out in every HomePod discussion, but it is a similar dynamic. The HomePod costs much more than the cheapo Amazon and Google smart speakers, but it has the huge value-added advantage of not making back it's money as a loss leader by spying on you.

Personally, I would pay double for an Apple smart TV set which complies with Apple's industry leading privacy policy.
 

priitv8

macrumors 68040
Jan 13, 2011
3,537
445
Estonia
That is why you should never let your smartTV loose on the internet. And it is pretty trivial to disconnect it from public internet, if you so wish.
I am perfectly happy with my split setup - aTV does the internet part and the "smartTV" sits dumb as a screen (albeit a perfect one at that).
 

velocityg4

macrumors 601
Dec 19, 2004
4,657
1,199
Georgia
Don't connect it to the internet. Just use an Apple TV if concerned. They can't monitor you if they can't communicate with the TV.

Given that I use external devices only and haven't yet connected a Smart TV to the internet. I couldn't imagine paying Apple's premium. I just need the TV to be a nice screen.
 

vertical smile

macrumors 601
Sep 23, 2014
4,118
5,221
There has been an Apple Television set rumor for 15 years. It pops back up every once in a while, but never happens and probably never will.

The profit margins for TVs are very small, and Apple would have to charge a ridiculously large amount to make their usual high mirgins.
 

priitv8

macrumors 68040
Jan 13, 2011
3,537
445
Estonia
The profit margins for TVs are very small, and Apple would have to charge a ridiculously large amount to make their usual high mirgins.
To get a rough idea, maybe we should take a look at LG OLED television sold by Bang & Olufsen?

techradar said:
The base model of the B&O BeoVision Eclipse comes at $9,995 (£7,495, AU$13,990) and that’s for the 55-inch model and doesn’t include the floor mount. If you go for the larger, 65-inch model, and want the floor mount, you’re looking at $15,595 (£10,795, $19,990), which is a ton of cash.
Source: techradar.com
 

Audit13

macrumors 601
Apr 19, 2017
4,417
1,112
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
But it rotates so nicely towards you on it's electrical stand!
And that BeoRemote One has killer looks!
The remote certainly looks high tech but I prefer my harmony 700 :)

I have my main OLED perfectly positioned in front of my main listening position and the bedroom tv is positioned in the centre at the foot of the bed. Electrical rotation would be wasted on me too :)
 

Topfry

macrumors regular
Apr 19, 2011
107
23
Following on this Friday USA Today article:

Why are TVs so cheap now? Well, your smart TV is watching you and making extra money, too

"Your smart TV is watching you. And making money off you as well.

That’s why the prices of TVs have fallen so dramatically over the last five years.

A mix of lower LCD prices, more intense competition and new ways to profit off the consumer once the set enters our homes have turned the boob tube into something more like a razor. And we, the viewers, are the razor blades.

Bill Baxter, the Chief Technology Officer for TV set giant Vizio, referred to it as the "post-purchase monetization" of the TV on a recent podcast interview with the Verge.

Translated, that means that more ads are coming at you via prominent branded movie and TV channels on smart TVs. These channels share ad revenues with set manufacturers like Vizio, Samsung, LG, an avenue that didn't exist in the pre-streaming era. They also profit by selling data of your viewing histories to programmers and marketers. "

I was wondering what the market would be like for a non-spying Apple smart TV set?

I realize there will be the usual haters who come out in every HomePod discussion, but it is a similar dynamic. The HomePod costs much more than the cheapo Amazon and Google smart speakers, but it has the huge value-added advantage of not making back it's money as a loss leader by spying on you.

Personally, I would pay double for an Apple smart TV set which complies with Apple's industry leading privacy policy.
I would consider an apple tv set too; it seems to be a reasonable solution to several problems. But I dont see why it would need to be drastically more expensive than the competition...