“Apple is almost certainly working on a digital television based on its iOS operating system, according to multiple sources in Silicon Valley,” Dylan Tweney reports for VentureBeat.
“An Apple-based television makes sense in light of Apple’s continued expansion out of the computer industry into the larger consumer electronics market,” Tweney reports. “But is it real?”
Tweney reports, “Apple has been testing the waters with its AppleTV, a set-top box that provides access to movies and TV from iTunes as well as other online video content. The company has a number of partnerships with movie studios and television networks, giving it an impressive content library. And its lightweight iOS operating system seems ideally suited for consumer devices (the OS is already under the hood in AppleTV)… iOS will enable Apple to transform the television into something that doesn’t just show videos, but also plays games, runs apps, lets you check your schedule and tweet about what YouTube movie you happen to watching at that moment.”
Read more in the full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Dan K.” for the heads up.]
iTV
SmartTV. Like the smart cover!
AppleTV?
Hope it looks like this:
http://www.hdtvuk.tv/2009/06/philips_cinema.html
Didn’t some analyst said by end of 2011 last year…
“Some analyst” also said Eric Schmidt was more likely to be Apple’s next CEO than Tim Cook (who he called a “long shot”).
Yes, some of analysts like Munster were talking about iTV for years, and it is just another year when this did not happen.
You mean a monitor with a tv tuner in it? How cool would Elgato built into the iPads be?
That would be COOL! … if Elgato didn’t suck.
I can see Apple playing around with this idea but I find it hard to believe that they will release a TV unless the also completely change the delivery of content.
That’s what worked with the iPod, the iPhone, and the iPad. You have to build an ecosystem that favors the consumer. The entire TV ecosystem is currently tilted in the favor of the content providers rather than the consumer.
Who else can explain consumer reasoning for spending $100 a month for a couple of hundred channels that you will never watch?
Any Apple made TV, if that is the case, will have to provide something unique and exclusive to this new content model. I bet the iCloud will have something to do with this model too.
The following represents the punctuation of a typical Apple rumor story: . . ? ? . . ?
It’s almost definitely happening.
Could it be happening?
Multiple sources say it’s happening.
Can we trust all of the sources that say it’s happening?
Not. Going. To. Happen.
http://themacadvocate.com/2011/04/13/please-shut-up-about-apple-making-a-tv/
Except a lot of people actually want it to happen. If you don’t want one then don’t.freaking.buy.one.
Yes, a lot of people want Apple to make a TV. Because they hate Apple and want it to fail.
Somehow I doubt Tim Cook will heed their advice.
This is possibly the stupidest story written about Apple. Ever. This ranks up there with Apple will produce a ray gun. Yeah right. Doofuses.
I can’t see Apple selling actual TVs. What I do see is them licensing the use of the current Apple Tv puck as an insertable device into a third-party TV monitor. Apple would have to impose a minimum hardware requirement on third party vendors (Samsung, Sony, etc…) in order for their TV to get the official Apple TV-ready certification and be advertised as such. The puck could then be upgraded annually with the Apple TV refresh cycle, without having to replace the entire TV. You’re just replacing the brains, in essence, which is much cheaper.
“and tweet about what YouTube movie you happen to watching at that moment”
Finally life will be worth living. Until that incredible moment, I can only wait in limbo.
Agreed, a life worth living. I’m always saying “I wonder what YouTube clip Seamus is watching right now … I wish he’d tweet! “. I’m sure you wonder the same about me.
Disaster! That puck is already back in the freezer. Keep thinking.
I don’t understand what Apple gains by making television sets as opposed to something that plugs into a television set (you know, like Apple TV).
I mean a TV is just a display. It’s meant to display content, not deliver it. Oh sure, there are a few “active” TVs from Sony and Panasonic, but it’s my understanding these aren’t selling very well.
Mind you, there are lots of things that didn’t sell well until Apple released its take on the idea, but here I just think the idea is inherently stupid. I don’t want the delivery system to be built in to my TV.
——RM
Why? For the same reason Apple makes both an iMac (computer with built in display) and a Mac mini (just the computer to be used with a third-party display). But Apple would rather sell you an iMac, because Apple makes more profit per unit with an iMac. That’s why there is no “headless” Mac model in between a Mac mini and Mac Pro (although such a model would be quite popular), because Apple wants to sell the all-in-one solution instead.
The current Apple TV is equivalent to Mac mini. It sells for $99. The profit per unit is $30, at most, which is why Steve Jobs kept calling it a “hobby,” even in its latest release. If Apple sold a high-quality HDTV for $999, the profit per unit could be 10x. An HDTV is something that is “shown off” in the living room. Of course enough customers would pay $999 for it to make a successful product, instead of a plastic-y equivalent size/resolution TV for $699 (plus $99 for an Apple TV add-on). In terms of profit, selling just one Apple HDTV would be worth selling TEN little Apple TVs.
Dammit. I just knew that someone would make that ridiculous comparison to the iMac when I wrote that comment. I thought about preemptively addressing it, but I figured my comment was long enough as it is.
Look: Computers, TVs — two different things. Nearly everyone in Apple’s market owns a good or at least decent TV. Not everyone owns a decent computer monitor. It makes sense to buy an all-in-one computer for simplicity’s sake. Buying an all-in-one TV is the exact opposite of simplicity. You already have an investment in your current TV setup. Plus, if the all-in-one device has a problem, well there goes television in that room. If your iMac has a problem, worst case scenario is you lose internet and email for awhile (assuming you can’t take care of those on your phone).
Bottom line: all-in-one computers and all-in-one TVs are two completely different ideas and cannot be compared to each other. A computer is a device. A TV is a component.
But then again, I’m on record on this very site as saying a touch-screen iPod was an idiotic idea, and now I own one. Apple has a way of making that happen.
——RM
Of course, you’d say that they are “two different things,” when it doesn’t fit your argument. 🙂
And, of course, Apple will eventually make a TV.
Why doesn’t Apple just use a box to do all those things instead of embedding it into an entire TV? I can understand if it’s some sort of removable module, but other than than it makes little sense to me since the cable box industry changes rather quickly. I’d only buy it if it had storage capabilities because that’s the feature I use the most on a cable box. Time shifting shows is such a great convenience and I’m almost certain that Apple can’t stand anyone recording programs.
I’ll bet Apple’s device won’t have dual-tuners either. I’ll likely still have to hook up a Mac Mini to take care of everything I need. Too bad. Apple’s idea might be terrific for most consumers, but it won’t be suitable for my needs.
But why would YOU need to do the time-shifting if Apple did it for you? Wouldn’t you rather watch whatever you want, whenever you want without doing anything other than accessing it?
If Apple provides a wealth of content on your schedule for a reasonable fee, they remove any reason for local storage on your part at all.
Multiple tuners? You would need NO tuners at all with this system, just a menu to select your favorites when you want them.
Think different.
The Apple TV project leverages AirPlay which itself is the logical evolution of QuickTime. AirPlay will beam multiple developing formats much the way QuickTime hosts them. The “Apple TV” itself will advance the concept of TV as a display hub.
tv is a great idea i hope they revolutionize the industry again
they will do service and hardware like always
Something’s missing in this “analysts” view – how Apple makes MONEY.
Apple will not build a TV to simply compete with all the other brands. It would need something special to make it a *gotta have* unit, but that device is *not* the AppleTV. The iPod was integrated with iTunes, the iPad with the App Store, but the AppleTV hasn’t caught on because it’s not broad enough. Limited movies and TV shows in the US only are NOT enough.
It
Won’t
Happen
Here’s how I think Apple will (or should) do it, whether there is a complete TV or the current add-on box.
People keep speculating that Apple TV will soon run apps and have its own App Store. But I think Apple will (or should) do it in a different way that takes advantage of the popularity of iPhone and iPad (and iPod touch).
The “Apple TV apps” should be iOS apps that run on iPhone and iPad. Some current apps are designed to run in iPhone mode or iPad mode, depending on the device. Future apps can have another mode. When an Apple TV is detected nearby, the app provides the “AirPlay” mode.
This does NOT mean that the iOS device is streaming the screen (frame by frame) to Apple TV over the network, and the HDTV displays the stream. That would be inefficient and too dependent on the quality of the local wireless network. Instead, when AirPlay mode is selected, the iOS device sends a small portion of the app’s data to the Apple TV. That portion then runs on the Apple TV and controls the HDTV screen directly; the iOS device becomes a custom “remote control,” specially designed for the app. At that point the only data that goes from iOS device to Apple TV are the control inputs, and periodic exchanges of app data (for example – game levels and saves).
So, if the app is a game, game data is all stored on the iOS device, but an “as needed” portion is sent to Apple TV, and Apple TV runs the game. The iOS device controls the game in the same way that you can use an iOS device now as Apple TV’s remote control.
Also, Apple TV only has enough local storage to keep and run its version of iOS. It cannot store a set of its own apps. However, using the method I described, apps (and supporting data) are stored on the iOS device and the Apple TV just has to temporarily hold a small portion of it at any given time, probably in system memory.
The marketing advantage… There does not need to be a separate “ecosystem” of Apple TV apps and a separate Apple TV App Store. Developers will want to support Apple TV mode in their apps, because the potential audience is all iOS users. The apps are “normal” iOS apps that have an additional Apple TV mode, which is hidden unless the user has an Apple TV. However, the fact that there IS an Apple TV mode will make the iOS device customer want to get an Apple TV as an extension of their iPad or iPhone user experience. In this way, Apple TV is tied directly to iPhone and iPad, instead of being mostly a stand-alone product as it is now.
I am in total agreement with ken1w. Apple is getting ready to show it’s hold card as far as the ATV goes. There is one game out already that does that. I don’t remember the exact name of the game but, I know it is a racing game. The game stays on your iOS device while the data for the display is AirPlayied over to the ATV. This in turn makes the iOS device a touch screen controller. Look at what the next Wii is supposed to be like. A console and a touch screen controller. Nitendo has an idea what Apple might be up too that is why they are moving in this direction. There are also TVs out now that has Internet Apps. like Visio. So everything for Apple now is ripe. Apple has display technology. Then take the ATV’s board out add a A5 and bring it up to 16GB and slip it into the display. Then you will have a connected TV/Game Console killer. With this ATV, they will sell more iOS devices as well.
I thought it was obvious: TV’s and all the sattelite/dvr software is butt-ugly and way too complicated. An AppleTV where you pay a la carte and buy shows via the web is what Apple is offering. Can you imagine a ‘dvr’ so simple your mother could use it? That’s the trick. Never mind auto-syncing with your bloody cell phone/ipad.
Ken’s idea also still skips the real problem: data caps/bandwidth. I believe a new streaming technology is required, the content needs to be HQ, AND consume less bandwidth to replace cable/satellite.
I do believe iOS devices will be the remotes and game controllers. IOS app scaling is also an issue that would require solving.
My idea is to make the Apple TV popular “despite” the restrictions posed by the TV networks and bandwidth. Make it popular as an extension to the iPad and iPhone user experience (for running apps especially games), not as a standalone product that is only used to “watch TV” (because that’s where those external restrictions come into play).
If just 10% of current iPhone and iPad users device owned an Apple TV because it made using their iPhone/iPad a lot more “fun,” there would be a 10-fold increase in the Apple TV user base. Once those number get up there, THEN Apple would have the clout to negotiate to lessen some of those TV-related restrictions.
Question , how many convert their videos to apple approved codecs ??
That’s why Apple TV won’t be the succes iPhone is .
Ffmpeg: open source use it all the time. Works like a champ.
I can’t see Apple replacing the whole living room set-up (receiver, X-box, Wii, Playstation, DVD and/or BluRay player, and other add-on device – ATV, Tivo, etc.). And TV’s are pretty low-profit items – it’s such a competitive market. Not to mention the fact that they tend to last quite a few years, so people aren’t buying new ones every 3-4 years. And finally, what would we do with our old ones if Apple offered one? Lots of people have already invested several thousand dollars in high-end, large models.
On the other hand, what I’d love to see is a device (TV or set-top box) that simplifies my content and choices among the devices I already have. Imaging a Mission Control that shows you what’s offered on each of those devices, and a universal remote (or App) that can quickly and conveniently control each one. I’ve got a Harmony remote. It’s OK, but still not the ideal solution.
Also, I should point out that having “multiple sources” and only being able to say “almost certainly working on” doesn’t lend any more credibility to this rumor than the fact that multiple websites have been promulgating this rumor for several years. All just a collective circle-jerk of wishful thinking? Or a misinterpretation of the development process of the AppleTV in its current form? Are they talking hardware? Or just software? Time will tell (or so rumor has it).
Here’s another one – Apple will license its iOS for use in all major appliances and automobiles – anything that would benefit from a brain and connectivity. Waaaaait a minit! Didn’t somebody already try that?
And one final thought: I’m sure Apple’s working on tons of stuff all the time, and that much (most?) of it never sees the light of day, if it doesn’t meet their criteria for a successful or satisfying product.
APPLE FAIL
Who still watches TV?
There will be no Apple branded television sets. Technology analysts have simply run out of ideas for what Apple may cook up next. The set top box, like AppleTV, can provide any service or interface Apple wants to provide to any HDTV without having to replace every set on the planet. No Apple branded TV sets. Ever.
Apple was supposed to be licensing AirPlay to CE hardware manufacturers. There may not be Apple branded sets but there may be AppleTV logo’d sets.
Once the specs of ATV settle into the established broadcast specs (ie it supports 1080p etc..) then it will be a little more safe to include the technology in an all-in-one TV where it can’t be upgraded. But I still prefer the model of the external ATV box that I can upgrade every so often.
Like Google, Samsung will rue the day it woke the sleeping giant!
I definately can see the understanding behind some of the naysayers… What I think it’s important to remember is apple is a gadget company now AND everything they do/release is a step towards something bigger.
An appleTV (set) is an obvious area for them to redefine. Currently, the add-on appleTV still relies on other manufacturers, and none of them are really innovating or redefining TV’s much at all.
I’ve been thinking about my iMac as a TV for years, but it’s just too useful as a computer. But, imagine an AppleTV set with iOS like GUI that can combine all the channels you view with all the online content/portals, with access to all your media from your iMac (I.e like current apple tv) PLUS access to FaceTime via a built-in camera and online content(as in current apple tv). AND it’s 30″ and above in size… AND the best IPS LED 3D display with awesome sound… AND even more advanced iPhone/iPad/iPod interactivity… Chuck in some SSD storage…
I mean who could really say no to that?? If apple disrupts the TV set market and redefines it(like they did with the iPhone) they’d finally bring the Internet to the tv an viceversa…
Seriously come on- an over sized slightly simplified iMac styled TV would rule the market and no doubt create whole new revenue streams for the networks too! …”With our powers combined…”
Nuff said. 😛
And it would be the ultimate way to own the living room/home entertainment area even more 🙂