An Apple branded television - What's the point?!

[chrono1081]

Apple doesn't make any hardware. They use third party components, such as Samsung and LG, and then pay Foxconn to build the final products. 5 years ago, nobody would have thought of Apple when thinking about smartphones.



Do you have a source then? If you are so dead sure on this, then you must have some statistics too. Otherwise it's word vs word, which leads to nowhere.

I would classify TVs in the same category as computers and gaming consoles, i.e. very tiny profits. These are products that stores use to get people in. Audio equipment and other peripherals might have higher profits because people usually buy them on top of the TV (you decide to buy a TV and then want a 5.1 audio too, but since we are lazy, you don't start shopping around).

I used to work at both stores and I know what the markup is. This is why when Circuit Cities existed and you walked into them you saw a ton of people in the audio and home theater section and virtually no one in the computer department. This is also why most of the employees had the items they were selling you, it wasn't a lie, they really did have the latest and greatest TV because they would get it for hundreds and in some cases, thousands of dollars off. (Until Circuit City ruined the "at cost" discount where employees could buy the item for what Circuit City paid for it).

Even though its been years since I worked at those places, I still have friends that do and nothing has changed. When we go to the bar I always hear stories on what the real cost of such and such an item is and what people pay for it.

 

[CWallace]

It would be a huge win for the OEM if Apple made a contract with them.

Companies like Apple are a gold mine for many other companies. Apple doesn't get the components for free, they pay for them and that is how other companies generate profit.

To build on your comments, Apple would likely place a large order for components so that is a win for the OEMs because they sell the components and get paid for them, regardless of whether or not Apple sells the finished product.

So Samsung would be guaranteed sales of 200,000 units in your scenario, which would likely appeal to them on some level.

 

[darster]

To build on your comments, Apple would likely place a large order for components so that is a win for the OEMs because they sell the components and get paid for them, regardless of whether or not Apple sells the finished product.

So Samsung would be guaranteed sales of 200,000 units in your scenario, which would likely appeal to them on some level.

And then they would sue Apple for stealing their technology.

 

[slothrob]

IApple knew that 720p was not the industry standard and that people want to see their content in the best quality possible, so they must have released the current model knowing that they were eventually give us 1080p in a future product.

Realistically, 720P is the industry standard. Most HD is broadcast at 720P and nothing is broadcast at 1080P, and I doubt very many consumers even know it. I don't know how many people own Blueray players, but if my acquaintances are any measure it is very few. Of those that do own Blueray players, most people are probably using them to mostly watch DVDs. I have to wonder how many people have ever even seen a 1080p picture.

That said, at some point Apple will have to claim 1080p and offer some token content in the format to appear current, even though it will put them above the industry standard.

 

[h1r0ll3r]

I think Apple should merge the Airport extreme, timecapsule, and Apple TV into a kind of ultimate media hub. It could stream out all your music/movies to all the tv's, computers, and iDevices in your house.

This would be killer. I'd buy that in a heartbeat.

 

[CylonGlitch]

off topic

I keep waiting for your avatar to load, but it never does...

 

[JeepGuy]

read this if u have time!
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9219535/Elgan_How_Apple_will_kill_cable_TV

The problem with his article, is that the cable providers will raise the Internet rate /gb , and lower the data cap to make up for lost revenue, in the end it could cost us more. We are already starting to see this with lowered caps, and the problem could get worse. The days of unlimited internet are coming to a close. There is a push in the industry to move to a metered model, but so far has been unsuccessful.

 

[trip1ex]

The point is easy to see.

Integration of remote and services inside the tv. No need for extra cables, second remote, etc.

And Apple could some cool stuff if they did both. The menus would surely get alot better. TV menus suck as they are now.

You could switch to internet services without changing inputs on the tv. Seems like a small thing but it is huge for usability.

EAsy integration to computer etc.

But that doesn't mean I'm sold. The price is most likely going to be too high. And I would hate to pay alot knowing the tech for the internet services might be obsolete in a few years.

The current ATV2 is only $99. Much more practical to buy a new ATV for your tv then resell your old apple branded tv and buy a new one.

It would be cool if Apple could build a tv with an upgrade slot for a new ATV.

 

[ABTsportsline]

^ What this guy said

I'm a guy who owns a Sony TV with the wifi & Google TV built-in. These TVs sell - the integration of wifi, USB ports, and a way to watch streaming content all-in-one is a huge allure. I move around a lot and don't want to have extra boxes & cables to have to set up my TV; it's convenience.

Also consider that only half the allure of Apple products is based-on what they're capable of processing. The other half is the excellent design & style. If Apple makes a contemporary Apple-styled LCD TV with built-in ATV2 and wifi, I would buy it to replace my Sony (Google TV sucks compared to ATV).

The sad thing is it would only cost Apple maybe $50 to add ATV to a TV chassis but you know they'd charge a $500 premium

 

[APlotdevice]

The point is easy to see.

Integration of remote and services inside the tv. No need for extra cables, second remote, etc.

And Apple could some cool stuff if they did both. The menus would surely get alot better. TV menus suck as they are now.

You could switch to internet services without changing inputs on the tv. Seems like a small thing but it is huge for usability.

EAsy integration to computer etc.

But that doesn't mean I'm sold. The price is most likely going to be too high. And I would hate to pay alot knowing the tech for the internet services might be obsolete in a few years.

The current ATV2 is only $99. Much more practical to buy a new ATV for your tv then resell your old apple branded tv and buy a new one.

It would be cool if Apple could build a tv with an upgrade slot for a new ATV.

Perhaps a compromise? Keep AppleTV a separate device, but give it and "AppleTV ready" television sets a Thunderbolt port. When the two are connected ATV would replace the default UI.

Besides giving us a cheaper upgrade path, this could have the advantage of still being able to work with other television sets (in a diminished capacity). And Thunderbolt could potentially supply enough power to the ATV, so that a separate power cable wouldn't be needed with a compatible TV.

 

[rdowns]

The sad thing is it would only cost Apple maybe $50 to add ATV to a TV chassis but you know they'd charge a $500 premium

I think that ship has sailed. One of the reasons no one is effectively competing with the MacBook Air and iPad is due to their price. Apple (Cook) is a master of the supply chain. THey are also all about mass marketing now. If they come out with a TV, it will be priced competitively.

 

[ABTsportsline]

I think that ship has sailed. One of the reasons no one is effectively competing with the MacBook Air and iPad is due to their price. Apple (Cook) is a master of the supply chain. THey are also all about mass marketing now. If they come out with a TV, it will be priced competitively.

I'll respectfully disagree with you and say the market share is based more on Apple's excellent design & style rather than competitive pricing. I don't know anyone who purchased a Mac over a PC because it was cheaper

In fact I can't think of anything Apple sells (except for the ATV2 itself) that is competitively priced in its market segment. I wouldn't expect the TVs to be any different

 

[rdowns]

I'll respectfully disagree with you and say the market share is based more on Apple's excellent design & style rather than competitive pricing. I don't know anyone who purchased a Mac over a PC because it was cheaper

In fact I can't think of anything Apple sells (except for the ATV2 itself) that is competitively priced in its market segment. I wouldn't expect the TVs to be any different

MacBook Air and iPad.

 

[k12g3]

Realistically, 720P is the industry standard. Most HD is broadcast at 720P and nothing is broadcast at 1080P, and I doubt very many consumers even know it. I don't know how many people own Blueray players, but if my acquaintances are any measure it is very few. Of those that do own Blueray players, most people are probably using them to mostly watch DVDs. I have to wonder how many people have ever even seen a 1080p picture.

That said, at some point Apple will have to claim 1080p and offer some token content in the format to appear current, even though it will put them above the industry standard.

You are talking about broadcast television. It was my understanding that the AppleTV was meant to watch movies and TV shows, making it a home theater addition rather than a replacement for TV. DirecTV offers 1080p resolution, and a lot of shows are filmed in 1080p for BluRay purposes. It just makes no sense to me that Apple would release something that is not the latest and greatest without a plan to eventually upgrade it. Its the same thing people thought about iOS's notification center. No one could figure out why they didnt just implement this feature from the very beginning? Its because they had a plan ;]

 

[kolax]

Here's what I think Apple could do to a TV that would make it stand out from the market:

1. Instant on - so many TVs take about 7-10 seconds from power switch to displaying something. Flash-based with effective stand-by mode to combat this.

2. Stylish and sleek with a thin bezel. I think very thin bezel with pointy edges looks sleek, like the OLED TVs that have been demoed.

3. Apple TV box built in.

4. An iOS based GUI without any bloat.

Now, this is probably what I think will be the main feature. In order for any device to work with the Apple branded TV, they have to make it compatible. Apple doesn't want people using a 3rd party DVD player and being stuck with the crappy interface of that DVD player..

Apple wants 3rd party companies to develop things like Blu-Ray players or cable boxes and use Apple's iOS SDK for the user interface.

 

[Tiggs]

Don't see a point either. Too much headache for so little gain. The real issues to work on/with are the providers.