“What might an Apple HDTV look like? Akin to the Bose VideoWave integrated home entertainment system, against which it is reportedly being benchmarked, says Global Equities Research analyst Trip Chowdhry,” John Paczkowski reports for AllThibgsD.
“‘Apple HDTV is directionally similar to Bose VideoWave TV, in terms of simplicity, image and sound quality, and reducing clutter,’ Chowdhry theorized in a summer research note republished Monday, adding that Apple, in typical fashion, will take it quite a few steps beyond as well, using its spartan-but-elegant design sensibility to virtually eliminate the more cumbersome aspects of current TVs,” Paczkowski reports.
“Whereas the VideoWave requires three cables, says Chowdhry, Apple HDTV will likely need just one. It may also be significantly thinner, though he expects it to have an equal number of built-in speakers,” Paczkowski reports. “‘Bose VideoWave HDTV is 6 inches thick and has 16 speakers,’ Chowdhry writes. ‘Apple HDTV will be one third of that thickness and will also have 16 speakers -– these 16 built-in speakers give a complete surround sound experience, without the need for any external speakers.’ [Also] while there is but one VideoWave (a $5,200 unit with a 46” screen), Apple will likely produce three models of its television across a range of price points.”
Read more in the full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Fred Mertz” for the heads up.]
I kinda secretly wish for this to be the first widely adopted and affordablr 4k (pixel) display. They can call it retina tv. 🙂
There is only such much information (resolution) in a TV signal. That’s the reason why TV screens are 1920 by 1080, as in 1080P, the maximum number of horizontal lines in the highest resolution HD. (The 1920 is the number of pixels in a horizontal line.)
More pixels than that and they are not productively used.
Computer screens are a different subject, as a computer can generate more than 1080 lines.
Maybe they could interpolate, like they do with 120/240hz rates…
If it would be used just for watching tv, I’d agree with you. But For Apple, that would be a missed opportunity. Imagine the TV used for personal slide shows and the quality and vividness of the picture on te display, or games in super HD. Movies and videos could be upscaled as currently many DVD / bluray players do when original is not in full HD. Think iPad with its 2x mode.
Amen. I’d love a large screen that also had a great picture for slide shows and presentations.
No chance since there is no content for that. Apple never releases pricey, but useless “technologies for the sake of technologies” that no one can use.
When Apple creates the platform, content follows en masse very soon thereafter.
Not with film studios, unfortunately; it took years to persuade them selling even SD video electronically. It is not like applications business, where sever hundred thousand of developers can quickly adapt.
The TV display will be a simple AirPlay enabled display. It can be driven by any iOS device including an AppleTV unit or from an iTunes enabled Mac/PC.
Content is king. Content will be paid for by a combination of a subscription and iAd supported programming. That is, TV episodes will be free.
The only things that Apple is currently figuring out is how to manage live events such as news, specials, concerts and sports. Temporary solutions for sports are the existing paid subscriptions for MLB and NHL available on the Apple TV currently.
We all know the studios are all lousy, money-grabbing thugs.
Errr. So I say
‘Book ’em Danno’
I believe a 1080p TV set IS a retina display already. At 2.5 m (8′) the pixels on your average 46″ TV are already indistinguishable from each other. Retina display is not purely a matter of PPI. It’s PPI and distance.
If my calculations are correct, a 46″ 1080p TV is 48 ppi. A display watched at 8′ would require minimum 36ppi to be considered a retina display.
I remember all the speculation before the iPhone was released. No one had it right, and I will bet no one has this right either.
True, but they did pretty much nail the iTablet on the head prior to its reveal.
They did not, actually.
Public/media/bloggers waited that iPad would be run on MacOS X and was highly disappointed that iPad turned out to be just “giant iPod touch”.
They totally missed the point — now wonder Jobs got “depressed” for a while.
Two words: Trip Chowdhry
Credible? If history is any indication, not.
What is that? A radio name?!? Or did he used to host a game show? Let me guess, “Guy Smiley” was taken…
I still don’t understand why Apple would jump into this market after what they learned from the Quicktake camera, Apple printers, etc. They just need to do what they do best, not try to compete in the mass market.
With that mentality, they wouldn’t have create a music player, cell phone or tablet.
+1
Well, your name is accurate…
@won
He was humble, said he didn’t understand, and he got various explanations. The “mass market TV” does not have an unified product solution. Thanks, Steve…It’s Apple time!
I do not see an Apple tv either. A better AppleTV unit to attach to a tv, sure, it opens up the world of digital tvs and does not require you to duplicate the mass market stuff.
Also the costs gets weird. The iPod and iPhone were different. and the costs were within a reasonable range.
And then there is the size. Does anyone really see a 50inch tv in an Apple store??
However, I am more than willing to look at anything they chose to bring out. Love my apple stuff.
Actually I was making an iList of all the stuff that I have bought from Apple. It starts with an Apple IIc and an early Macintosh Classic. Wow, I am showing my age here. 🙂
Gai is making a true point. Apple didn’t make printers that were revolutionary. They were simply rebranded printers and cameras back in the day.
Today, anything Apple makes isn’t just to be on par with current industry according to Wum Dum. Apple introduces things that are to be revolutionary and good for the consumer. Bose makes an awesome TV and Apple will have to do more than that to be something everyone will want.
Now do you get it?
There’s going to be a lot of speculation and rumors about this TV for years.
I have been a long time sceptic of an Apple branded TV set for as long as the idea has been around.
Recently I found myself ruminating the loss of Front Row and wondering why Apple got rid of it.
Then it struck me that an Apple TV set would explain why Apple ditched Front Row. It might also explain why AppleTV has been a “hobby” for so long.
I’m in the market to buy an HDTV fairly soon. HDTV’s are designed to last for years and years, so Apple is going to miss out on my big purchase…
Ah well, I suppose my Macbook Pro, MacBook Air, iMac, iPod touch, iPhone 4s, iPad 2, AppleTV, and Airport Extreme purchases will keep them afloat for a while….
TVs are built to last years. HDTVs will break down a lot more quickly, I assure you.
Wait, so if it’s like Bose, it’s going to sound like crap?
No highs, no lows, it must be Bose!
Whatever or whenever Apple comes out with this, I’ll be getting it for sure.
As an audio engineer who works in a recording studio all day, the Bose Wave family of products is nothing short of laughable. I’d never own one, although I understand why people choose to buy them. But good audio, it isn’t.
I have a $3000 TV that I could replace right now with a better one at less than $1000.
That mistake is not going to happen twice in my lifetime.
Yeah, I’ve been osborne’d. I just finished enclosing my cube-shaped addition and was planning on buying two 32″ panels and one 55″ panel this Black Friday. Now, I’m thinking I have to wait to see what Apple may or may not do.
@Wun Dum Gai:
” They just need to do what they do best, not try to compete in the mass market.”
Really?
iPhone?
I think an Apple TV will be in the form of larger, enhanced iPads in various screen sizes, with upgraded software.
I also think that Apple could throw the door wide open for independant movie and tv show producers.
Apple could also set up a 24 hour streaming live broadcast tv over the web. They could produce news, financial news current events, drama etc. and other live show and make deals to add sports. It would do a complete end around the tv networks and cable companies.
TV would be on iOS devices. They would have the cash to do this. They do’t need most of the sucky proprietary TV content.
“Apple could also set up a 24 hour streaming live broadcast tv over the web….”
I think every ISP is going to have more than a little say in this… and how well it would succeed. With every one of them now engaged in capping and throttling, odds are it wouldn’t.
(see post before this one.)
Maybe MDM and othe sites would be invited to do a quick daily Apple news summary from there perspective..