Topic: Apple's HD iTV (would you want an Apple HDTV?)

[BlackNMild2k1]

Apple is always looking for the next big thing and once it became clear that they had locked down the iProduct line with loyal customers, it is apparently time to venture into other unexplored (by Apple) territories.

With MS, Sony & Nintendo battling it out ever the livingroom through the use of Home Consoles, I guess Steve Jobs thought it would be wiser to take a more back door approach to the livingroom. Through the very device that is the centerpiece of every family entertainment room. The large HDTV.

“He very much wanted to do for television sets what he had done for computers, music players, and phones: make them simple and elegant,” Isaacson wrote. Isaacson continued: “‘I’d like to create an integrated television set that is completely easy to use,’ he told me. ‘It would be seamlessly synced with all of your devices and with iCloud.’ No longer would users have to fiddle with complex remotes for DVD players and cable channels. ‘It will have the simplest user interface you could imagine. I finally cracked it.’”

http://9to5mac.com/2011/10/21/jobs-told-biographer-that-he-cracked-the-code-to-building-an-hdtv/

There may be a little confusion as to what Steve Jobs had actually "cracked" as far as Apple getting into the HDTV game, but there was some speculation about how they were gonna make their TV different. Siri

Although Mr. Jobs was referring to Apple’s plans to build a full-fledged television, he was not actually referring to the TV set, which is how the comment has been widely interpreted. Instead, it is becoming clear that Mr. Jobs was talking about Siri, Apple’s new artificial intelligent software on the iPhone 4S.

Apple engineers and designers, spurred by Mr. Jobs, have been struggling for years to find a new interface for the television. One of the biggest hurdles, according to people with knowledge of the project, has been replacing the television set’s annoying best friend: the awkward and confusing remote control. Apple would give people a way to choose the content on their television that is as easy as choosing the content on their iPod, iPhone or iPad.

Alternative remote ideas floated by Apple included a wireless keyboard and mouse, or using an iPod, iPhone or iPad as a remote. None of these concepts worked. But there was one “I finally cracked it” moment, when Apple realized you could just talk to your television.

Enter Siri.

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/27/whats-really-next-for-apple-in-television/

I've never personally used Siri, but I hear it is quite amazing for a voice recognition app. But in order to incorporate Siri, Apple is either gonna have to update AppleTV, the little box that no one bought, or just refresh and start over with an actual HDTV (playing towards the iPad/Pod/Phone crowd, only now with a 55" Retina Display screen instead of a 4.3" one). But considering the price of an iPhone.... I don't even want to think about how much a TV 10X the size of the phone would cost. Thankfully some analyst jumped in and speculated on that already.

- Full-fledged television set. Given that Apple seeks to streamline the user experience and its recognition that users don't really want yet another set-top box, Apple will almost certainly be going for an all-in-one solution. But given that Apple does not currently offer a full suite of television content offerings, most users will likely not be able to cut ties to their cable or satellite providers. Apple's TV will instead serve as an advanced interface that still draws upon the standard signal coming in from a cable box.

- Range of sizes and twice current pricing. Munster believes that Apple will introduce its television in a range of sizes, recognizing that customers have different needs. He also believes that Apple will price its television at approximately twice the prevailing market price of similarly-sized televisions. The price premium would cover the additional hardware and software necessary for integration with the Apple ecosystem while also preserving Apple's high profit margins in a competitive market.

- Simplicity and Apple's ecosystem. Aside from the rumored Siri voice-powered interface, Munster predicts that the Apple television will integrate with iOS devices and Apple's content ecosystem for video, games, and apps, serving as another hub for digital entertainment tied into Apple. The interface will likely include a traditional remote control, but also iPad and iPhone apps for controlling the set's features, as well as Siri voice control that seeks to remove much of the complexity of interacting with television sets. Users will simply be able to input or say "ESPN" to be taken to the sports channel rather than having to look up or remember the channel number.

http://www.macrumors.com/2011/11/30/speculation-on-apples-television-set-range-of-sizes-device-integration-premium-pricing/

But would you be willing to pay that price for an apple branded TV just so you can use your iPhone as the remote and/or just talk to your TV to possibly change the channel? But what if it did more than that (as I'm sure it would) and also acted as your Cablebox/DVR/iTunes portal and gave you access to not only your own personal collection, and not only the offering that you can stream from the interwebs (Netflix/iTunes/HuluPlus) but also was your tuner for your cable allowing a much better interface than the slow antiquated UI that your current cable provider provides.

Rogers, BCE vying for a bite of Apple’s iTV

Canada’s largest telecommunications companies are squaring off in a fight about the future of television.

While the iTV product remains cloaked in secrecy, sources say Cupertino, Calif.-based Apple has approached Rogers and Bell as it actively pursues partnerships with Canadian carriers.

“They’re not closed to doing it with one [company] or doing it with two,” said one source who is familiar with the talks. “They’re looking for a partner. They’re looking for someone with wireless and broadband capabilities.”

Another source, also speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Rogers and Bell already have the product in their labs.

All three companies declined comment.
[...]

The product reportedly integrates Siri, Apple’s voice-recognition software that acts as a personal assistant on the latest iPhone, into television sets to help viewers make programming choices.

Viewers can then control the TV by voice or hand gestures, all from the comfort of a couch. An on-screen keyboard, meanwhile, can also be activated in a similar manner, allowing viewers to surf the web, conduct video chats and use social media sites such as Twitter and Facebook – all without any physical interface.

Jeffries analyst Peter Misek said an analysis of Apple’s patents suggests its iTV product will likely be interoperable with mobile devices, while also functioning as a gaming platform.

He notes Apple is in a good position to “leverage” potential partnerships with carriers to gain access to a wide array of content. “We believe it is likely to be offered by AT&T and Verizon in the U.S. and Bell and Rogers in Canada,” he wrote in a research note on Monday.

Now does that mean that they are offering it their current mobile partners that also have cable setups in peoples homes and that it's possible that these TV's may be subsidized by expensive cable/internet packages with contract terms that will be forced onto customers should they want an iTV at a reasonable price?

I have no idea, but if it did, would you still want one?

[BranDonk Kong]

The only reason Apple would want to make a TV is so they could sue Samsung for also making TVs. No interest at all, in anything that Apple makes. The more I work on iPhones and iPads, the more I can't stand them.

[Ceric]

I hate for my TV to be just controlled by Siri.  Wouldn't work with no Internet.  Apple would know what I did. 

Though I be interested in hearing about the noise filtering Tech.

[BlackNMild2k1]

The only reason Apple would want to make a TV is so they could sue Samsung for also making TVs. No interest at all, in anything that Apple makes. The more I work on iPhones and iPads, the more I can't stand them.

Actually Lenovo already has an ICS (Ice Cream Sandwhich) HDTV and I would assume they are working with Google to patent the hell out of it to block Apple from even thinking about suing anybody for anything.

http://www.theverge.com/2012/1/8/2692442/lenovo-k91-brings-android-4-0-to-the-worlds-most-advanced-55-inch-tv
Lenovo K91
- 240Hz 1080p IPS LCD display
- 1.5GHz dual-core QualComm 8060 Snapdragon processor
- 1GB of Ram
- 5Mp camera
- video on demand, internet apps and regular television content
- speech recognition technology
- cloud support

[Plugabugz]

Given there's a TV channel with the name ITV here (and had it for some time) i doubt it's going to be called that here.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Apple will sue them and fight to get the name since they likely filed trademarks back in 1997 or something. And I wouldn't put it past them to try, they seem very sue happy when it comes to getting what they want.

[Shaymin]

If it's the ITV I'm thinking of, they were founded the same year Steve Jobs was born (1955).

I still find it amazing they got Apple Records, but iTV isn't a fight Apple will win in the UK.

[Stogi]

iVision

[TJ Spyke]

Apple didn't own the "iPhone" name either, they bought the rights from the company that already owned it. I suppose they could call it iTV everywhere except the United Kingdom.

As for a Apple branded TV, not likely. We know it would be overpriced (especially compared to other TV's that have the same features), be locked to prevent any devices Apple doesn't want, and not as functional.

[Morari]

I don't want an Apple anything, let alone some over-priced, dumbed down "smart" TV. I'll stick with a nice open source solution like Boxee.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Just for clarification, what the difference between a Boxee, a Roku & AppleTV?

I'm thinking of getting something Netflix capable for the downstairs TV and a wifi Bluray player is still too expensive and I'm only kinda familiar with a Roku. (p.s. Apple TV is not in consideration, but I was just wondering how it differs from the other 2)

[BranDonk Kong]

WiFi BluRay players are like $80 now...anyway, the best media player is a modded PS3 if you ask me, mainly because of BluRay and because it has the best version of Netflix.

[Morari]

BNM, It would probably be more apt to compare D-Link's Boxee Box to the likes of a Roku or GoogleTV. You can download and run the Boxee software on just about anything, but the Boxee Box stands as about the only consumer set-top running it.

I have a Roku in my bedroom, actually. I also have an old Asus O!Play Air and a Patriot Box Office stored away somewhere. The Roku is certainly adequeate if you want to do streaming content, particularly from NetFlix or Hulu. It's not good for much beyond that though, and isn't going to be very satisfying for delivery of local content over your network. Plus, the interface is pretty basic.

GoogleTV fits a similar mold. I haven't played with one since the last update though, so I can't say much about it in its current state. It still seems very much focused on streaming content and little else, however.

The Boxee Box would easily be my all-around choice given the experiences I've had with most of the other contenders. It has a simply beautiful interface and affords a lot of flexibility in exactly what content it provides and how. It is hands down the best set-top for local content, while still providing a pretty robust set of apps for streaming content, as well as a full web browser for anything else. The only real detractor is if you're someone interested in Hulu. It's not available on the Boxee Box due to legal trickery. It can be hacked into the Boxee application, though that's only helpful if you're running a dedicated HTPC.

The Boxee Box also just saw the release of an coaxial adapter to integrate live TV into the set-top via over-the-air or cable signals. It's a neat addition for the sake of offering a concentrated programming guide. I don't get but three or four sub-stations or PBS out here though, so I have no reason to try it.

Edit: I misread... I thought you had put GoogleTV, not AppleTV. lol. I'm not personally familiar with AppleTV. It seems to be pretty tightly intergrated with iTunes, right?

Brandogg, does the PS3 offer the extended network hooks that the 360 now does? I'm sure that either one would work well enough for a basic set-top. I wouldn't want to rely on them as my sole means of television entertainment though.

[BlackNMild2k1]

@ Morari
I forgot all about GoogleTV... I haven't heard anything about it since it never really took off.
I know Lenovo has an Android TV (which I posted above), but I don't know anything about that yet either.


So Boxee is definitely the way to go to stream Netflix and local content to another TV in the house?
it's mostly HD Netflix I want it for, but local content will get me to use that TV more often too.

WiFi BluRay players are like $80 now...anyway, the best media player is a modded PS3 if you ask me, mainly because of BluRay and because it has the best version of Netflix.

yes, but can it stream content from my computer upstairs? I'm willing to pay maybe $40-50 for a wifi bluray knowing that I'm most likely never gonna watch actual blurays on it. But I will pay more for a wifi meda box that can stream content from the internet and my computer upstairs.

edit: I just did some checking online and I can't find a single quality Bluray player with built in wifi (no dongle) for under $120
I can get a Roku 2 XS for $90, but I would really like to do local streaming too.


I've been reading reviews on Amazon.com for the Boxee and now I don't know if it's worth $170 or should I just say forget the local streaming for now (since I probably wouldn't use it that much anyway) and just go for Netflix streaming on the Roku 2 for half the price (and it comes with free casual games).


But I do have a question.
XBMC
what is it and how different does it make an AppleTV box?
because I can get an AppleTV for $100 and that does local streaming too, but will it still get everything that the Roku 2 does?

[Morari]

So Boxee is definitely the way to go to stream Netflix and local content to another TV in the house?
it's mostly HD Netflix I want it for, but local content will get me to use that TV more often too.

You'd be hard pressed to find a device nowadays that doesn't support NetFlix. All of the set-tops will also have rudimentary local playback. For my money though, the Boxee Box is the best overall solution. If nothing else, it has the best interface bar none and is consistently being updated to fix issues and introduce new features.

I don't believe that there are any consumer devices that come with XBMC by default. It can certainly be put onto a lot of things, however. Boxee is actually a fork of XBMC. If you wanted to go the route of a custom HTPC, then XBMX is a great choice. It has a few advantages over MythTV, even. I don't know if Zotec still does this or not, but they used to offer hardware bundles marketed specifically for XBMC builds.

The other options is use the built in Windows Media Center on a space PC. It is by no means as robust as some other options, but it's already right there for you. Plus, it's about the only way you can do encrypted cable signals... if that's something you'd be interested in. The last Xbox360 updated added in a bunch of nice hooks for it as well.

[Ceric]

You can stream things from you Computer to your PS3.  I do it every day.

The PS3 is my TV for all intents and purposes.  I have an Antenna but its for things like the Superbowl.

The PS3 is DLNA compliant so any DLNA server will work.  I am using PlayOn since a got the Lifetime subscription for dirt cheap since I was in the Beta.  It allows you to stream a lot of online channels and media from your computer.  Before that I used TVVersity to stream from my Computer and really liked it.  Vista on with Windows has a built in one but its flakey.

It is definitely doable.  Cable and like is just way to expensive if your not a sports nut.

[BranDonk Kong]

Only thing with streaming from PC to PS3 is you either need a wired connection or Wireless N to stream 1080p (typically). That really shouldn't be an issue these days though. The PS3 itself basically just has Netflix (and Vudu) and DLNA support, but a modded PS3 can run Showtime Media Player which lets you do all of this, but nothing would beat an XBox 360 or PS3 native version of XBMC, which will probably (definitely) never happen.

[Morari]

I am using PlayOn since a got the Lifetime subscription for dirt cheap since I was in the Beta.

Same here. I used it pretty extensively with my O!Play and Box Office. I haven't touched the program since, though. You have to keep your PC running for PlayOn, so you might as well start thinking about an HTPC at that point... or at least a dedicated server/NAS.

[NWR_insanolord]

It doesn't work on my campus network, but when I'm home I use Plex Media Server with my AppleTV. It provides a great interface and pulls a lot of data for all my videos from internet databases. Once I'm out of school and have some money coming in I intend to get a full on media center PC.

[Lithium]

I just have a home theatre PC with a blu-ray drive running XBMC, then i use a wiimote+ and glovepie for a remote/mouse. Thats probably the best thing you can get for a set top box. I just use one of my older PCs for this but if you want to get one from scratch life hacker has a good guide on this


Zotac Zboxes are also popular HTPCs

[nickmitch]

I'd like to see what Apple would do with a TV. Steve Jobs once made a great point that TVs get a bit complicated at times. You've the TV, a cable box, a box top, BluRay Player, a home theater receiver, and all that jazz. Each one comes with it's own remote, connections, etc. Though, most universal remotes kinda take away some of the fuss. The best anyone could to is build all of those things in to the TV. Like an Apple TV with all the connections for your surround sound and BluRay player. Also, maybe the cable box is built in with some sort of system that works for the cable companies.
But maybe Apple could do something creative with the idea.

[Ceric]

I'd like to see what Apple would do with a TV. Steve Jobs once made a great point that TVs get a bit complicated at times. You've the TV, a cable box, a box top, BluRay Player, a home theater receiver, and all that jazz. Each one comes with it's own remote, connections, etc. Though, most universal remotes kinda take away some of the fuss. The best anyone could to is build all of those things in to the TV. Like an Apple TV with all the connections for your surround sound and BluRay player. Also, maybe the cable box is built in with some sort of system that works for the cable companies.
But maybe Apple could do something creative with the idea.

CableCARD was suppose to allow you to not need a cable box.  HDMI is suppose to enable communication to all the other devices so in theory they could all be controlled from a centralized unit.  This doesn't happen in reality because of Standards compliance or the lack of.

If Apple wants to build a TV with a good Reciever built in I be all for it.

[nickmitch]

People like to dump on Apple a lot, but I'd really like to see them do for TVs what they did to smartphones. They basically made it cool for everyone to design phones as nothing more than magical rectangles. If they made those features standard for TVs, we might finally be able to move on as a society. . .or you know, just undo some clutter.

To be honest, you'd actually be making the TV itself extremely complex at the cost of making the setup infinitely easier. I know Apple doesn't like complicated things, but it'd still work. Though, TVs might start getting thicker again.

[Morari]

Televisions have standardized input/outputs. No reason to build anything into them other than to have a checklist of throwaway features on the back of the box. Let the set-top boxes battle it out for features. Televisions should look good and nothing more. Smart televisions are a joke. If you want to see progress, we need to force the cable and satellite companies to adopt open standards with their boxes and a la carte pricing with their channel lineups.

I don't know much simpler the setup need to be than plug Component A to Component B using an HDMI cable? It's good that things have a barrier or entry, otherwise people would just become even dumber and lazier.

[BranDonk Kong]

I'm against "Smart TVs." Sell me a nice TV, and let other companies compete for the content that goes into it.