Apple developing Ultra HD TV controlled by voice and motion for release in late 2013 or early 2014, sources say

“Apple is reportedly continuing to develop a TV rumored to be called the iTV, which is likely to support Ultra HD (3840 by 2160) along with voice and motion control functions and Internet connectivity, according to industry supply chain sources,” Julian Ho and Alex Wolfgram report for DigiTimes.

“The sources added that Apple is banking on LG Display to be able to mass produce Ultra HD TV panels by the second half of the year,” Ho and Wolfgram report. “If LG is successful and has ample supply of the technology, Apple may try to release the TV by the end of 2013 but is more likely to do so towards the beginning of 2014.”

Read more in the full article here.

Related articles:
Apple’s Next Innovation: TV – It’s time for Apple to step in and disrupt the TV business – February 14, 2013
Apple reveals enhanced audio system for future HDTV with integrated FaceTime features – January 31, 2013
Analyst: Full television set ‘more in tune with Apple’s strategy’ than an enhanced Apple TV set-top box – December 10, 2012

52 Comments

    1. “voice and motion controlled” is very broad. If this turns out to be true, and it turns out that the details of control are the same, then yes, it would be copying. But without the details it’s no better than saying, for example, all pointer-based GUIs are the same because they all use a pointer.

      Or for another example, Windows Phone 8 is touch-screen based, but it is clearly not a copy of either IOS or Android. But by the logic of your statement it is a copy merely because it uses touch.

      So it is much too soon to say.

      1. Thank you for your answer.

        Nice to see a rational answer.

        The best with it that I agree with you. “Voice and motion controlled” is not enough to say it’s a copy or a rip-off.

        But try to say the same here about “rounded corners” and you’ll see the rants about how Bad Samsung was to copy such an innovation.

        I would love to see more good “functional copies” from one brand to the other. Products would evolve much quicker and we, the consumers, would be the winners.

          1. The statement about rounded corners (on my side) was the example on how stupid general statements can become. It’s at the same stupidity level than saying that Samsung’s phones are cheap rip-offs or “F.. Samsung in the A..” (You can read in another comment) We all know this is no longer true.

            I followed the whole lawsuit as well as other interesting cases in Germany, Australia, Korea and many others.

            Without being an “expert” I think I know quiet well the subject

        1. There’s no argument at all that consumers would, in the short run, benefit from unrestricted and unfettered copying. That’s patently obvious (heh).

          It’s the long run that IP laws are concerned with. The “let’s compete through innovation, not lawsuits” argument, while at first blush very attractive, is simply a rephrasing of “I want to copy your stuff. If you don’t like it go make new stuff.”

          I think IP law has gone too far, especially copyright. But the typical cries against it are disingenuous.

          1. The patent discussion is a complicated one and I’ll have to leave my computer soon.

            To make it short:

            There’s a major problem with the way US Patents work actually.
            You can patent things light basic forms, simple gestures (like moving your hand) and other crazy stuff like that.

            Obvious functionality or even “functionalities” shouldn’t be patentable. What should be protected is the code that implements the functionality. It’s not the permission to copy. It’s the right to implement.

            Copyright laws are there exactly for that.

            This is not perfect either, but after some amendments and fine-tuning it would be much more adapted to IT than the actual patent system is.

            1. Technology patent reform is not a new idea. The train of what you are saying here has left the station and been spoken of long ago. You are merely repeating what has been said many times before and most here already know. You add nothing new. Excuse my yawn…

            2. Hum Really?

              You don’t like my post because I rediscuss something that has allready been discussed?

              Let’s turn it the other side around. I try to discuss in a civilised manner about subjects where my opinions potentially differs from those of the person(s) I talk to.

              We try to use arguments to defend our positions and stop the discussion when we get bored or when we don’t have time anymore.

              The two inputs you gave until now were in both cases personal attacks without any rational or technical argument…

              Please explain again why I shouldn’t post while you take the right to dictate to other people what they should discuss about (or not).

            3. Oh are we hurt because we’re so late to the patent reform party? It is already widely acknowledged we need patent reform and you add nothing to the discussion. Get over yourself. Love how you try to elevate yourself disingenuously and smugly above the discussion by being “oh so civilized”. Take it elsewhere Thurston Howell IV. Sorry but you are a big turnoff precisely because of your sense of mock outrage. Perhaps you shouldn’t try so hard to put yourself up on a pedestal.

          1. It depends in which way these patents overlap and many many other things.

            If company A has a patent on how your TV reacts when you sneez and company B has a patent on how your TV react when you close your eyes and move your head at the same time… Which company owns THE patent (the one to rule them all)

            That’s where the problem is when you patent “What” instead of “How”… I really don’t care who copies the “What” in this case.

            My poost was partially a reaction to the neverending Samsung copied the “FillWithTrivialObject” patent Apple owns on this site.

            Just by pure curiosity… What if Samsung owns the crucial patents to implement the gesture control and not Apple. What should Apple do in your opinion?

    2. That Samsung TV looks cool, but…
      1. Has it disrupted any business model anywhere?
      2. Has it created any significant new revenue streams for Samsung?
      3. Has it destroyed any competitor’s marketshare or profit-share?

      Nope.

      Having a cool device is one thing even if it sells well. Having a device that completely changes the way we use TVs and/or destroys the current way companies make money on TVs is something altogether different.

      1. 1. Has it disrupted any business model anywhere?

        Nop sir, but an interesting one. And it integrates quiet well in the Samsung/Android ecosystem. It’s not only a TV but a solution. In this view, it’s an interesting product.

        2. Has it created any significant new revenue streams for Samsung?

        I don’t know and I don’t care. Why should any customer care about the fact that a company makes insane benefits with a product. I’m even more happy to hear about a company that sells gazillions of “whatever” and makes a minimal profit with it. That’s the proof people pay the right price for the product.

        3. Has it destroyed any competitor’s marketshare or profit-share?

        I really hope no company will ever destroy a competitor and own the monopole for a product… This is really the worst case scenario for customers. If you consider you’re here for Apple I can accept your statement, but well… I give money to a company to get a nice product, not to please shareholders.

    3. If I recall correctly, the rumor mill about an Apple television were making the rounds well before Samsung debuted their “smart” televisions. The thing I don’t see anyone responding to your comment with is that we (or at least I) currently don’t know who has patented this technology. Samsung may have released product first… did they patent it first? I’d like to see an article on that.

      Of course, we don’t truly know what Apple is going to ship beyond it being a television.

      1. Prior art and patents are problematic subjects.
        It has allready been discussed with someone else here and I won’t repeat the same again. 🙂

        Anyway… I mostly agree with what you say… Patents and release dates are (or can be) different things.

        The iTV is fiinally just a rumor… Let’s see if something comes out of this or not

    1. Sir Troll please.

      Hey… Let me help you with down-voting. I’ll give me one star. Do you feel better now?

      But what’s about the facts?

      If this rumor is true, wouldn’t it be a complete rip-off?

      Except for the screen resolution, it’s the exact description of Samsung’s technology.

        1. I didn’t expect less from people here. Let me thank you for that.

          So copying is OK when it’s Apple…

          Oh yeah… Right. Your God said it:
          We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas. (1996)

          I would love to see a little fine (Lets say a few Billions) and a ban for Apples TV worldwide… THAT would be a nice return on investment for Apple.

            1. I don’t play with people’s religions (normally).

              But when I came on this site (which was a total accident), I was so amazed by the amount of FUD that was spread here that I couldn’t resist.

              My bad.

              You must admit that it wasn’t hard… People who post here (Not all… I must admit) are really the caricature of the perfect fanboy.

            2. Oh yeah because FUD and misinformation doesn’t exist on Fandroid or other sites about Apple. Nice try fuzzball. The fact you don’t know squat about context in what Steve Jobs said about Picasso’s statement about stealing says volumes of your allegiances and agenda. We ignore you Troll King for your disingenuous, blatherings and overall lack of comprehension. Please leave where your kind is not wanted. We may be fans of Apple here but not as delusional as you think we are nor as delusional as you apparently are. Bah Bye!

            3. indeed…

              But hey, I must admit that I’m positively surprised. I expected much more feedback like peterblood’s one.

              Compared to what I’ve seen in other threads on this site I think I can say a got a fair amount of positiv feedback and some interesting discussions.

              People like this guy are the worse that can happen to Apple. The little money they bring in by buying every possible toy with an Apple does not compensate the bad image the give to the company.

            4. I don’t think so. It angers me to be summarily dismissed because my view is different from others even though based on observation and research, not sticking my head in the sand like some are. Folks like DistortionFieldOff are not really looking for honest discussion, they are here to amuse themselves by being confrontational. The only ones here who give this person much positive feedback are known as less than supportive Apple types. He offers nothing of value but repeats old threads and trollish misinterpretations bringing up the unoriginal and tried and true “rounded corners” and “Great artists steal” arguments. BOR-ring! You instantly won’t make friends that way. I disagree with a lot of people in friendly arguments that don’t end up as vitriol but DistortionFieldOff is a definite DistortionTurnOff.

      1. I knew you would attract a response from Mr. silverhawk1 – a poster who knows but one response to any comment that doesn’t worship this once great company. You are a troll if you don’t blindly accept the failure of the current management of the company, its lack of innovation, its lack of vision and its clueless, hapless CEO. Take satisfaction that the conventional wisdom is moving away from the silverhawk’s of the conversation and increasingly in your direction.

          1. Don’t be flattered by anything Ppeterson says as he is one of “your kind” and is routinely ignored here. You and he both are precisely the kind of anti-Apple trolls yourself spewing your own brand of brand acid. The irony is you are precisely that which you find so objectionable here. Look in the mirror but of course folks of your ilk are so blind you fail to see yourselves as you truly are.

            1. Oh… Another personal attack.

              I had missed that one.

              So I’m an anti-Apple troll? I hadn’t noticed that sentences like “This kind of reaction can be the one which makes it possible for Apple to win again the crown” was the perfect example of me beeing an anti-Apple troll.

              But hey… Ok… You talk about “my kind” of people. Let me give you some infos about my personal IT:

              – Phone (Amoi N821)
              – Tablet (iPad2)
              – Desktop (Good old whitebox)
              – Laptop (Cheap HP)
              – Servers (5*DELL CS24-SC used for HA and clustering testing)

              As you can see there is one Android device, one iOS device, 0 Samsung and one Apple. No brand fidelity at all… I use what I need when I need it.

              Please explain me again in which way you’re the perfect example of rationality while I’m a fanatic you seem to describe.

              I’m curious about your answer

            2. Sure but explain to me why you then misspoke the true meaning of Picasso’s line of “great artists steal” to serve your own misinformation purposes? Purposeful misunderstanding and spin on stuff like that SCREAMS Troll so don’t be so coy and cute.

              So you own one Apple device which qualifies you to be impartial? Despite your desperation in trying to prove we are religious zealots for Apple just because we approve of the direction Apple is going and their overall superiority no one here is ashamed of that. We do criticize Apple when they screw up. We don’t need someone of your ilk coming in and putting us down for his personal amusement or offhanded dismissal. This shows definite character flaws on your part.

              Disagreement is fine but your instant challenging disingenuousness and smug lines like:
              “Could it be that Apple… Copied???
              Let the shouting contest begin… It will be a pleasure to read your answers explaining how “this is not the same because…””
              …show that you are just childishly trying to inflame on this site. Samsung is in hyper mode trying to outguess Apple moves and they know that Apple will probably be coming out with their own iTV or whatever it will be called. Until we see Apple’s solution there really can’t be a discussion of “copying” now can there? But this isn’t the only thing premature or immature about your life now is it? There may be similarities eventually revealed between the two but Apple will always apply their own unique approach just as they did to smart phones and iPads/tablets.

              You are a very transparent inflamer. You really don’t want a true discussion or you would have approached this board differently instead of with an immediate chip on your shoulder. You’re like an arsonist who sets a fire and then stands back to watch. BTW ppeterson’s (who plays Devil’s Advocate but does it better than you do which doesn’t say much) approval of you would be expected here. Don’t be flattered Thurston. You and your sense of false bravado can take a hike and come back when you’ve learned some manners.

            3. Wow…

              You’re really crazy…

              I don’t think your rants are worth any further answer. At least you won’t get any from me.

              I think it’s you who should “come back when you’ve learned some manners”…

              Until then… Get a life…

            4. “I don’t think your rants are worth any further answer. At least you won’t get any from me.

              I think it’s you who should “come back when you’ve learned some manners”…
              Until then… Get a life…”

              Wow. ditto manipulative palsy. I think your comments are best directed back at yourself. You still didn’t answer MY questions so I dismiss YOU as a typical troll in denial. You’ve done nothing to prove otherwise.

  1. Unlikely Apple will merely create a TV, albeit with voice/motion control. This would not address the real problem everyone has with their TV setups:

    Too many, hard to use, remotes and no clean integration of components. If/when they invent something that fixes that issue, then we will see a truely Apple kind of disruption.

  2. UltraHD? Let’s see – Sony invents “True HD” 1080P – which no cable company, or television station supports – now we’re going to go to UHD, which isn’t even supported by Blu-ray, AppleTV or any gaming consoles?

    How many years down the road will it be before that’s even useful?

    1. Sorry to break the news but that’s how innovation works. If you are an early adopter, you pay the price. If not, you just wait until something is accepted by the mass market.

      1. I understand the trappings of being an early adapter … I pride myself on being an early adapter. I bought one of the first 1080p sets available, and a blu-ray player to use with it. I can’t justify buying a UHD set if I don’t have a device to show off the technology. I would gladly buy a UHD set, if there was a UHD disc player, UHD AppleTV or UHD game console to use on it.

    1. Yup. I may be in the minority but I still think the Apple iTV is coming. Maybe the hold up has been the 4K technology? But I do believe that there is too much buzz around this for it to be a mistake. And clearly Apple is trying to make a push with content in some fashion. That may be through the current AppleTV, the new ITV or something separate from these. I just wish they would hurry up.

  3. Determining need is a risky business and in the past Apple has been better at it than others.

    My initial reaction is I don’t need or want to talk to my TV. I don’t want to use gestures with it. My biggest problem with TV is not how the device works. I’m fine with the remote control. My biggest problem with TV is in how the bureaucracy of content delivery works. I want to watch what I want, when I want, where I want. My primary TV is my iPad these days.

    That being said, I didn’t think I needed an iPod when I first heard about it. Nor did I think I needed an Apple phone until I saw it, and I was sure that if the Apple tablet was anything less than a tablet Mac, I couldn’t use it. Shows you I don’t know what the hell I need until Apple shows me, so can’t wait to see what I really don’t need next!

  4. I don’t buy this for a second. 4K TVs currently cost $20K. Even if by next year Apple could sell a 4K for a quarter of that price, it would still be $5,000. They’re not going to move product at the price point.

  5. What is the typical annual volume for HD TVs? In the States there are about 100M households and maybe 70% own HDTVs. My guess is that a TV is replaced every 5 years making the market about 20M in the US.
    If Apple were to take 1% of that market that would equate to 200,000 units. Multiplied by $5K equal $1B.

    I agree the price point of 5K is too high. 3-4K would be in the range of high end units but they are usually 70 inches or more nowadays.

    Apple could run this as a hobby like the Apple TV. Only problem is that inventory costs would be high so they would need to sell all they can make.

  6. No no noooo 4K ..it only translates to upscaled trash for now. Apple gimme affordable OLED 60-70″ 1080p displays with voice control and a simple interface a’ la Jobs cracked code ….Wozzie could supervise this 🙂

Add Your Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.