“Apple’s (AAPL) rumored television, known in tech circles as the iTV or iPanel, is likely to range in screen sizes from 42 to 55 inches and cost $1,500 to $2,000, Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster said Friday,” Patrick Seitz reports for Investor’s Business Daily.
“A longtime Apple bull, Munster has predicted that the stock will hit 1,000 within two years, according to Fortune. In afternoon trading Friday, Apple shares were down a fraction, near 561.30,” Seitz reports. “”
Seitz reports, “But others aren’t so sure Apple will come out with an iTV. Forrester Research analyst James McQuivey says Apple would be foolish to come out with just another TV display, no matter how elegant.”
Read more in the full article here.
Related articles:
Apple’s coming plan to take over the TV business – May 24, 2012
Apple ‘iTV’ will revolutionize content delivery and advertising – May 21, 2012
Strategy Analytics: Nearly half of iPhone users likely to buy Apple ‘iTV’ in year one – May 15, 2012
Apple could announce the iRocket, and it could cost a billion dollars. Apple could buy a gold mine and make jewelry. Both of which are just as likely as Apple making a fucking TV.
No margin, no way to differentiate , a complete non starter.
I concur, I still say there’s no way will make a standalone tv.
Hey Einstein, read the news from two days ago. Actually listen to what Jonathon Ive said. Sure- all he’s working on is an improved version of the current AppleTV. Brilliant.
I hope the “device” is an iPanel. A beautiful high-resolution display with both wired and wireless video inputs, and absolutely nothing else.
Leave the IPTV functionality in the AppleTV that sits beside the iPanel. That way I can upgrade my $99 AppleTV as new features are added, without throwing away my $2K display.
1
Unless it could pick up international / cable content for free…
Smartest guy on here.
Apple would need a “hook” to make it a hit on the scale of iPad and iPhone. Otherwise, it’s just a “hobby.” Anything less than another home run would be considered a failure, even if the product is profitable. Everyone who thinks Apple will NOT release the “iTV” is imagining an HDTV with integrated Apple TV box. That’s not what Apple will release.
If (when) iTV is released, it will be much more. It will be something you can’t get today at any price, and something that will be very difficult for the competition to copy.
The mini iPad will be the Siri-eqremote that comes with the iPanel.
The mini iPad that we’ve heard about will be a Siri-equipped remote that comes with the iPanel.
Now we’re talking! If it wasn’t for Apple I could not retire in two years. Hope we see a split before then or up to 1K per share. I’m just sayin.
There’s are problems with making an iPad into a dedicated “remote control” and making the “iPanel” dependent on it.
First, it’s an iPad so people in the house will want to use it as an iPad. If someone else is using the iPad (as an iPad), how do you control the TV? Second, iPad’s battery needs to be recharged regularly. It would be inconvenient to control the TV if the iPad runs out of the power or is currently connect to the docking cable.
Ok, so how many times do you have to change something on the tv with the remote?
Unless, of course, you’re one of those assholes who hogs the damn thing and channel hops every thirty seconds because of your attention deficit issues. And the battery life is more than adequate for use during the day, being plugged in over night. I use Remote on my Pad and phone for controlling my music playback on my Mac Mini, I see no difference to doing the same with a tv; just do a sideways four-finger swipe between the open apps to change the tv then swipe back to whatever you were doing before. It’s what I do now. How difficult is that to understand?
Volume? Changing the channel? Selecting an “on demand” choice? I touch the remote control countless times…
Battery life is adequate for the day? That’s lame. A REMOTE CONTROL should work without even thinking about its battery or having to plug it in at night.
I did not say you could NOT use an iPad or iPhone to control the TV. That’s already being done. I use my iPhone to control my Power Mac G5 that’s connected to the HDTV. What I said was it should not be the primary (including with TV) remote control. How difficult is that to understand?
it’s getting too much as ‘analysts’ are ‘analyzing’ out of thin air (even with ‘fail’ or ‘succeed’ comments with price targets, component lists etc ) of a non existent non announced product.
as others (even staunch apple fans) have pointed out there’s numerous issues with iTV succeeding. (As an investor I hope if they do launch it, it will be a BIG hit!! 🙂 )
More interesting in a way is Apple looking into other things like cameras e.g: plenoptic camera tech (which uses multiple micro lenses to build an image – something like a 3d process. You can selectively focus AFTER you take the shot! ) . Jobs was supposed to have met the CEO of Lytro to discuss it. Camera market might be smaller than TV but one that Apple with tech could disrupt.
http://www.theverge.com/2012/1/24/2730459/apple-lytro-steve-jobs-light-field-camera
(I’m not fully conversant with camera tech or apple’s interest but it was just interesting to me as layman. Perhaps more expert readers can weigh in.
some years ago even before iPad when i read Apple bought HWPen Chinese character recognition tech I suspected that touch screen devices would be big in China. This camera tech thing smells the same way. Apple great interest in Kodak’s patents recently might be another hint ?)
Wasn’t the iPanel the iPad and didn’t it cost 999.99?
I’ve heard that the major TV makers are making next to nothing when it comes to profit. Supposedly, it was like $10-$15 per set. I don’t think consumers really want or need to spend a lot of money on a decent TV. I can’t see Apple selling a lot of TVs at that price unless Apple can offer some special content that can’t be had anywhere else. I’m sure Apple will be able to sell a few TVs to loyal Apple customers, but I don’t see it going much beyond that. One can already buy smart 3D TVs for around $1000, so why would most consumers want to pay $500 more for something with similar capabilities. All I’d want to buy is a more powerful implementation of the current AppleTV device for even twice the price or even better and turn it into a gaming console.
We all agree, and I’m sure Apple does as well, that any TV device Apple creates must be so far advanced from current functionality, even with add-on boxes, that it drives a consumer to want to purchase it.
In other words, an iTV would have to be something spectacularly special to get people to drop $2,000+ on it. And I don’t think Apple would release anything less.
However, I’m tired of Munster coming out every 6 months for the past several years with another “analysis” or “prediction” which he pulls out of his *ss to keep this rumor going.
Content Content Content
I don’t think it’s going to be a new tv
Everyone has one
I think that Mr. Jobs was talking about the industry as a whole considering iTunes, iCloud and the vehicle to move that content to a tv through iPad, iPhone, AirPlay etc
iPhone wasn’t about another phone it was about the user experience
iPad wasn’t about another computer it was about the user experience
So for tvs it won’t be another tv it will be the user experience
Apple has already sold us many vehicles such as iPad
Apple has most of the content through iTunes
So what is missing is the user experience to tie them together
Then apple will have another magical product
It will bypass cable companies
The content will be scalable to the user
It might even bypass the telcos so we can stream content without high user fees
The big screen has been done to death and there are no margins to work with and no likelihood that people will replace a working big screen.
Apple’s solutions are always software based. Get it in your head. Apple could make programming available that is not time based and not dependant on the various sources. Behind the scenes, Apple could make everything you want available on the net and for the few things you have that are on old media, it could do the ‘complicated’ work of starting and connecting the legacy device and playing it without much user input.
Whatever the iTV turns out to be, it won’t be “just another display”. When has Apple ever released a “just another” anything?
it seems to me that apple needs to make an actual tv in order for iOS to be the primary input. it’s a pain in the ass to have to switch inputs all the time. when I walk into my apartment I can immediately start streaming whatever I’m listening to over air play, I want to be able to do that with apple tv.
Glassless 3D TV with holographic imagery.
Remember when Steve introduced the iPhone? It was all about the software and the lack of physical buttons. Now go look at your TV — how many buttons on it? Now go look at your remote……..
And while I draw attention to that discrepancy, what really makes people like their smartphone is what it does, not truthfully how many buttons it does or doesn’t have. So back to the TV: It’s just the display device like the iPhone screen is a display device. What does a TV do, along the vein of what did a phone do before the iPhone came along? That’s where Apple *could* take things. The iPhone is a portal into our lives, from entertainment to our calendar. Before it phones were voice connections to people we needed to talk to. Can a TV be a portal into our lives? The interesting difficulty, in marketing terms (and maybe public acceptance) is that all products have been stressing mobility of late, and big screen TVs are the epitome of stationary! On the other hand, most of us highly mobile and highly outfitted mobilists realize the inherent value in a stationary anchor to our digital lives. Right now iCloud is trying to be that for us, but we’ve all asked for a “home sharing” solution, a “home storage” solution for common access media, etc. If you’re truly mobile, you have a MacBook Air — with an underweight SSD (underweight vis-a-vis your audio/video library needs). A stationary Apple product could finally solve that.
Why aren’t we talking Cinema Display? It would make sense.