AppleTV: no longer a hobby

[kiranmk2]

The thing is no one knows how good the gTV is going to be. Google have only unveiled the bare bones. Frankly it sounds underwhelming on paper - in the UK, catchup services like iPlayer and 4OD are starting to be installed into Blu-Ray players and TVs. Also, no mention has been made about playback of personal media. It's highly likely that Google will let apps do this so Boxee and XBMC apps will probably appear quickly taking full advantage of the hardware.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

But watch when they screw all of the current AppleTV owners when the 'new and improved' unit is incompatible with the legacy hardware... Yeah, Apple could do that. Then, without Apple support, the legacy AppleTV units become what? A bookend? For those luck to have purchased two of them, a matched set?

How can Apple look more than reactive now?

Apparently, just like with the Newton, Apple staked a claim to advanced technology, years ahead of its time, and let others take it to a new level. It almost sounds like Xerox PARC who dumped Ethernet, Laser Printers and the idea for the operating system that both Apple and Microsoft use today (among many other technologies)...

 

[fpnc]

But watch when they screw all of the current AppleTV owners when the 'new and improved' unit is incompatible with the legacy hardware... Yeah, Apple could do that. Then, without Apple support, the legacy AppleTV units become what? A bookend? For those luck to have purchased two of them, a matched set?...

I don't understand your point. If a new Apple TV is introduced the existing units won't stop working overnight. Sure, the new hardware might get features that wouldn't be available on the legacy units but that type of issue happens all of the time in the computer world. Besides that it would be kind of hard for Apple to change either the iTunes Store or iTunes itself in a way that would break the existing Apple TV while not also affecting the millions and millions of iPods and Macs/PCs that are also relying on the current system.

 

[CWallace]

GoogleTV looks to me to just be a software layer inbetween the TV and the content designed to serve up ads (which is how Google generates the significant share of their revenues).

AppleTV has always struck me as Apple's alternative to the DVD player. You use it and the iTMS to rent or purchase content. It may not be quite up to the level of a DVD played on an up-scaling player, but it's not low-resolution garbage, as well.

I understand the plurality of folks on this forum are very concerned about video and audio quality, but I expect they are not the plurality of the general public. Still, they're the ones who are the "first adopters" and that they have not embraced it in droves has no doubt helped contribute to it staying as a "hobby" within Apple because it's not making them serious money.

But it's also not costing them serious money, which is rather unique in the set-top box market. Tivo has been hemorrhaging cash for quite a long time. Windows Media Center could not gain any traction as a standalone product and is now bundled with the OS. And WebTV generally went nowhere. The cable and sat companies can make it work because they can charge so much for the content it covers the cost of the box.

 

[ipedro]

But it's also not costing them serious money, which is rather unique in the set-top box market. Tivo has been hemorrhaging cash for quite a long time.

Not only is AppleTV not costing Apple "serious money" but it's in fact increasingly profitable.

It may not be a runaway hit by Apple's standards but if AppleTV were a spinoff single purpose company, the AppleTV would be a pretty big hit.

Tim Cook cited tripling profits and the strategic importance of having a presence in the living room market as the reason why Apple will continue to support and develop AppleTV.

Google has set the agenda for internet+TV to become mainstream. Although they may not be competing directly with AppleTV yet (although Google is already experimenting with rentals), simply putting the concept in the mind of so many users will benefit the market and allow Apple to improve or reboot AppleTV.

 

[Phantom Gremlin]

Therefore, Apple needs to do the following:

1.) Hire at least two more good engineers ...

This is perhaps the most annoying aspect of the current situation. Apple could do so much better with so little effort that it's really sad to see that they have simply refused to update the hardware in so many years.

Right now there are dozens of tiny "streamer" companies that are trying to play in this space. Those companies are lucky to have two good engineers on their entire payroll. And yet they are consistently delivering better hardware than Apple. As to firmware/software, that's another story. The companies are often simply using reference designs, and have absolutely no ability to deliver stable firmware.

 

[goobot]

looked at googles and it looks cool. especially this

 

[dynaflash]

This is perhaps the most annoying aspect of the current situation. Apple could do so much better with so little effort that it's really sad to see that they have simply refused to update the hardware in so many years.

Right now there are dozens of tiny "streamer" companies that are trying to play in this space. Those companies are lucky to have two good engineers on their entire payroll. And yet they are consistently delivering better hardware than Apple. As to firmware/software, that's another story. The companies are often simply using reference designs, and have absolutely no ability to deliver stable firmware.

My own opinion (for what is worth) is it's better to use a precision rifle than a shotgun. My guess is Apple is waiting to see how the competition plays out. Which really is not a bad idea. Consider ... the iPod came around when there had been several years of fairly successful hand held mp3 players ... the market had been evolving for some time before the iPod became the tip of the spear. Obviously the iPhone was brought into a pretty mature market where Apple could see what was lacking and tried to fill that space ... and by most measures has become quite successful. The iPad is probably the only device in recent Apple history that is kind of striking out on its own to a new marketplace.

Given the foibles of how "people" (read: not geeks) might feel the most comfortable consuming media besides cable and dish, it really does make sense for Apple to wait a bit to read the tea leaves on this one as much as it may piss most of us geeks off. I personally have no problem using Apples "hobby" day to day and kind of enjoy seeing what happens down the road. Having said that, it seems to me that the google tv announcement is only more gas under the pilot light that Apple lit on the living room space that is the current appletv. One can only hope that Jobs and Co. finally decide its time to rise to the occasion! However if not, my family and I are very much enjoying both of Apples "hobbies".

I still ask myself how well the *mass market* will take to a device that gets most of its content off of the internet. Again, not geeks but every day people. From what I see its not enough. But who really knows? Should be interesting to say the least! Let the games begin!

 

[smiddlehurst]

Hmm, interesting:

http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/28/the-next-apple-tv-revealed-cloud-storage-and-iphone-os-on-tap/

The new architecture of the device will be based directly on the iPhone 4, meaning it will get the same internals, down to that A4 CPU and a limited amount of flash storage -- 16GB to be exact -- though it will be capable of full 1080p HD (!). The device is said to be quite small with a scarce amount of ports (only the power socket and video out), and has been described to some as "an iPhone without a screen." Are you ready for the real shocker? According to our sources, the price-point for the device will be $99. One more time -- a hundred bucks.

Not only will this be priced to sell (like hotcakes), it seems that Apple is moving away from the model of local storage, and will be focusing the new ATV on cloud-based storage (not unlike Amazon's streaming scheme).

See this is something that makes a lot of sense to me and seems to be a logical development for Apple. iTunes is a massive advantage for Apple and taking it to the cloud would give them such a big selling point in the market it's hard to overstate just how big a jump forward it would be. Your entire content library, available on-demand to any iTunes-aware device with an internet connection with Genius working alongside for new media based on purchasing habbits? Not to mention having the ability to store it all locally if you wanted to? I really don't see how Google or even Microsoft could step up and match that right now, they just don't have the service or relationships or brand name (or combination thereof) that Apple do. Add on a subscription service (which, again, would make a great deal of sense if Apple are moving iTunes to a full cloud solution) and you've got a real monster ready to go.

The problem, of course, is not just the technical side but the content providers. They've been dragging their heels on stuff like this for a while now so it'll be interesting to see what Apple can do to get them to move. If they manage it though this could genuinely be the product that breaks through in the living room of the average consumer, especially if they price point is anything like accurate (plus with that hardware the box could be the size of.... well the size of an iPhone board without the screen or battery, especially if they off-shored the power supply).