“Speculation has been rampant on the Internet that Apple will introduce a new version of its Mac mini, Apple’s little $500 multimedia computer, with a built-in digital video recorder at the Macworld Conference & Expo in San Francisco next month,” Daisy Whitney reports for TV Week. “Industry experts consider DVR capability the logical next step for Apple, given that its video iPod has become a game changer for portable television content in the less than two months that it’s been on the market. Apple has already joined with both NBC and ABC to deliver content to the device and is said to be in talks with most major content providers. Now the iPod is viewed as one of the critical new distribution platforms for TV content. The question is whether Apple can extend its brand magic to the home entertainment space. That’s a wide-open area, and if Apple can indeed offer DVR capability and a well-integrated video experience, it could capture a leading position in the home entertainment market as it’s done with music.”
“But Apple’s dominance in the digital music and media space does not guarantee a successful DVR strategy, said Bruce Leichtman, president of Leichtman Research Group. ‘Consumers have demonstrated that they like DVR as a feature within the cable or DBS set-top boxes,’ he said. ‘With the rollouts from DBS and cable operators continuing, and Tivo’s strong brand in the business, there is limited market opportunity for Apple in the DVR business. One should not believe that the company’s recent success with the iPod has any connection to its potential in the DVR business.’ The success might not translate for one simple reason: iTunes works on both Macintosh- and Windows-based computers, analysts said. On the other hand, an Apple DVR, by its nature, would likely live within an Apple computer, said Steve Hoffenberg, director of electronic media research at Lyra Research.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: This speculation is based upon the Think Secret reports from November 29, 2005 and December 02, 2005 which described rumors of Apple’s ‘Kaleidoscope’ code-named Mac mini digital hub DVR / Front Row 2.0 project and new content distribution system rumored for debut in January at Macworld Expo. Nobody has said Apple would sell the new box as a “Mac.” If such an “iHub” device exisits (potentially employing Intel’s “Robson” NAND flash technology for a Mac OS X-based “instant-on” appliance) along with a content distribution system, we’d expect that Apple would market it much differently than they would a new Mac model. These are all rumors, so take them with many grains of salt.
Advertisements:
• The New iPod with Video. The ultimate music & video experience on the go. From $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.00.
• The New iMac G5. Built-in camera and remote control. From $1299. Free shipping.
• Apple USB Modem. Easily connect to the Internet using your dial-up service. $49.00.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Cringely on rumored Apple ‘video locker’ content distribution system – December 10, 2005
RUMOR: Apple to debut new distribution system, partners for feature-length, TV, and video in January – December 02, 2005
RUMOR: Apple preps ‘Kaleidoscope’ digital hub ‘TiVo-killer’ for January Macworld Expo debut – November 29, 2005
RUMOR: Apple working on new home entertainment product for early 2006 – November 23, 2005
RUMOR: Apple to employ Intel’s ‘Robson’ NAND flash tech to create ‘instant-on’ Macs – November 22, 2005
This makes NO sense to me … NBC is miffed with TIVO, signs deal with Apple to MAKE MONEY on time-shifted programming … then Apple comes out with a FREE (per episode) time-shifting device? I just don’t see it. Apple seems to be going the route of keeping media creators directly involved, so my gut is that any Apple-branded media hub will NOT have DVR built in.
STONCH
Exactly dj … Apple is trying to build a distribution model based on purchasing video content … not recording it for free.
i hope apple included the “YEAR OF HD” in their planning, and makes an ATSC tuner/recorder and soon makes the files available in itunes to be HD.
“said Bruce Leichtman, president of Leichtman Research Group. ‘Consumers have demonstrated that they like DVR as a feature within the cable or DBS set-top boxes,’ he said. ‘With the rollouts from DBS and cable operators continuing, and Tivo’s strong brand in the business, there is limited market opportunity for Apple in the DVR business.”
Rather neglecting the fact that in the PC world there are plenty of cards to allow DVR functionality and more and more boxes are shipped with this as a standard feature.
DVR software is a popular area of linux open source development and a quick google will give many hits for how tos on making your own linux tivo equivalent.
For financial reasons I would not go for a DVR as that would be a luxury, but if that functionality was available at a relatively minor extra cost (i.e. markedly less than stand alone DVR) when I buy my next computer (which is essential for work and part time study use) then I would pay that little bit extra and go the DVR functionality computer route.
Heres a link I got from a UK (& Europe) retailer (not an IT / electronics retailer, a general type of store).
As one of their current promotions is DVR enabled PC it would tend to imply that it is an increasingly popular use of a computer if it is appearing in a definitely non specialist shop.
http://uk.aldi.com/special_newsletters/computer_base_station/
If Apple is going to get into this space, then they need to have some kind of DVR-like capability, which means users can watch at any time.
Also, if Apple thinks they’re going to get people to pay for TV shows on a per-show basis, rather than the current subscription model that cable/satellite operaters use, they’re nuts.
The *only* place I see Apple getting involved is in the delivery of high-quality (hopefully HD) movies, thereby competing with Netflix and Blockbuster. You set up a movie queue in iTunes, like you do with Netflix, and the Apple’s new set-top box downloads the latest movie from your queue to the DRM-equipped hardware, lets you know when it’s done (since it would take several hours, at least), and then you watch.
So…it takes a person 30 minutes to drive to BB to rent a movie. But that’s expensive, you have to leave the house, their selection is crap, and they may not have the movie you want.
With Netflix, their selection rocks, you don’t have to leave the house, you can create a queue, but it takes 3 days to get a movie.
Along comes iFlix–hopefully the selection rocks, the quality is HD, you don’t have to leave the house, you can create a queue…and with any luck, it takes 8 hours or less to download a movie. That means you tell it what movie you want to watch before you go to work, then you come home and watch it. Or it downloads them overnight, or whatever.
And this needs to be a subscription service, competing very closely on price with what Netflix offers…or it’ll never fly.
Far more LIKELY than an Apple PVR (since you can just buy an EyeTV anyway) is a livingroom appliance with instant-on capability that distributes media to traditional TV/stereo devices and more importantly, connects them to iTunes Music Store (which is needing a name change – iTunes “Media” Store anyone?)
While only a few Californians know what’s coming in January, it is a safe bet that an iPod for your home – in some flavor or another – is about to take the stage.
(BTW, AAPL trading at $75.29!)
Steve, give us Kaleidoscope/Maucmini and you’ll see a mass exodus from the Windows camp. It’s time for Apple to hit it big and it’s NOW.
OSX-Mac Mini-“Kaleidoscope”(?)-iPod video will RULE!!!
there’s as in: There’s future for Apple and a big one, too!
I can see them doing DVR for new episodes but for the old ones (say you started watching ‘The Office in season 2 or 3’) You can buy them right on your new ‘iDVR’.
mini DVR does not fit into Apple’s online video distribution strategy. Therefore it won’t happen.
But there will be a “iHub” for sure, that’s not recket science. January is a good date because people tend to stay indoor and watch movies during winter. Question is, are we talking about Jan. 2006 or 2007?
hairbo – I have to disagree with your assertion about pay-per-show vs. Cable subscription model (and no, I do not live in EUROPE – I’m in Texas).
My wife and I don’t watch mutch TV, but we do have cable and a built in PVR so we can watch what we like.
Tomorrow SBC is coming to install an ADSL line to replace my Cable modem and Vonage (sad – I like Vonage) and we are cutting off the Cable. Why pay more than $60 a month (we don’t even have premium channels or PPV!) for cable when I can buy each week of Law & Order with no commercials for $1.99? I already go to CNN.com for news rather than watching it.
I don’t believe I am that rare of a case. The “value” of cable television is getting less and less. Endlessly retetive commercials, so many choices that are poor quality programming, who needs it?
The New Intel CPU version of Mac OS X runs on the FAT 32 File System whew the PPC version runs on HFS. What does this have to do with the iPod? iPods formatted for Macs store your music with HFS while Windows iPods format with FAT 32. Will we have to reformat and re-load our iPods for the new Intel-inside iPods?
G – I don’t see the CASE for a Mac mini “home” causing a mass exodus from the PC platform. Instead, I see this as a trojan horse to get the Mac in the home of Windows users. They will still use Windows (for now) but they have gotten use to owning an iPod, now a Mac mini, and in a couple years when it’s time to get a new computer – well the choice will be clear. That that is then, not now.
iPod ? – I’m not trying to get PHYSICAL, but I dont buy your Intel Macs runing FAT 32 BS for one second. The file system is completely independent of the CPU. There is NO reason Apple would require a FAT 32 FS because of an Intel processor.
The reality is that if you want to use your iPod on a Windows 2000 box or whatever, it needs to be FAT so the Windows OS can see it. OS X can read either.
IF real I hope it isn’t a Pippin II.
I’ll be the first in line.
FEI: I parallel squatted 555lbs 2x!!!
(for everyone’s info)
From the article: “‘With the rollouts from DBS and cable operators continuing, and Tivo’s strong brand in the business, there is limited market opportunity for Apple in the DVR business.”
This is ridiculous – like saying 5 years ago that portable hardrives are already being sold by others, so Apple shouldn’t bother with the iPod. It’s not just the technology; it’s how it’s designed, what pricepoint you position it at, and what unique & useful features you give it that are most important. Further, DVR is still low in market penetration, even among cable users. But it’s popularity is on the upswing, enough so that Apple could make a pretty penny grabbing some share, even if it doesn’t wind up dominatng the market, ala iPod.
Having said that, I think dj is right – besides the good points he makes, Apple seems to be in a mindset of accomodating content providers, rather than irritating them. True or not, just the rumors of a DVR device from Apple would almost certainly prompted this recent rash of additions to iTMS’s video offerings, and it wouldn’t surprise me if Jobs agreed to not include the feature in return for their cooperation. I’m not happy about it, and I think Apple will be pissing away a huge advantage by not offering DVR, but I’m not hopeful we’ll see it for as long as iTMS video sales are seen as the centerpiece of the company’s strategy.
I think we’ll see the introduction of less than a computer, but also less than a home video appliance as we’ve traditionally known them to be. Like some recent rumors suggest, I think Jobs is going to try and carve out a new niche with a wirless, internet connected, video distribution device of media content that’s stored online.
I too was of the camp that Apple would never go the DVR route since it was selling shows over iTMS. But now, I think they will.
DVR capability will be in just about all mainstream PCs because of Intel’s Viiv. So Apple will have to include it just to remain competitive.
There are benefits to each (no ads vs. ads) so I wonder how Apple will restrict or market both choices in a way that will get people to keep buying at the iTMS.
hairbo – I think your idea of “iFlix” is right on the money. Let’s see if Apple really does this. If so, I would sign up. I would much rather spend $2.99 to rent a movie than keep paying NetFlix to send me scratched discs.
Question: do you think HBO makes more money off the subscriber fee it gets through Comcast than it would through making its shows available through iTMS, the day after they air?
Answer: Comcast is going to be pissed at Apple if this happens. I know many people who have cable just so that they can get HBO.
I would gladly pay a per episode fee for each new ep of the Sopranos this spring, and i would still go and buy the DVD set when it came out.
Initially you may be able to biuld a scheme without DVR capabilitities but within a year I doubt that it would be particularly sustainable. Fact is I have just got free program viewing (on a limited amount of cahannels so far) up to a week after first airing. Cable, satellite will all be offering this very soon and the only extra that Apple can offer here is to be able to download at a small cost shows after the 7 day limit and backlogs of programming along with new unsceduled content. Now that is certainly a useful start but with most pcs having recording capabilities soon it simply isn’t viable long term. Therefore this capability will have to come be it immediately or by this time next year at the latest i feel if Apple is going to be big in this market and sustain it. A subsctition option will also have to be built for this at some stage.
me,
Your idea doesn’t scale for the larger market. It’s commendable that you guys only watch a little tv, but lots of Amuricans watch tons of TV, and if it’s a pay-per-show model, then it gets very expensive very fast. A lot of people watch more than 30 shows a month (don’t forget to include sporting events, etc), and so people would quickly spend way more than $60/month.
abqMac,
I think it’s still gotta be a subscription model for the iFlix idea. I want to pay 1 flat fee/month and then be allowed to rent as many movies as I care to watch, a la netflix (but perhaps I’m in the minority). if they have hardware-bound DRM, then Apple could ensure that a user only has a certain number of movies on the iHub at a time–which would make it akin to Netflix’s model of 3, 5, or 8 movies checked out at a time.
Apple’s stragegy is to sell iPods and to provide content for those devices. Selling videos on iTunes is one way to do that, but Apple does not make much money selling the content in that way.
If Apple can make buying a video iPod more attractive by making a DVR device to go with it, then absolutely they will do it.
Dk makes a good point.
An Apple DVR would have to pretty dang compelling to get me to switch from the DVR built into my cable box. It’s just too convenient — no extra remote to deal with, and the DVR functionality is integrated right into my digital cable’s interactive program guide.