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

[nickmitch]

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.

Well, with a sound system, cable box, Wii and PS3,  it's Components A through C in to Component D in to Component E. If we can eliminate the cable box with the CableCARD system and integrate the sound in to the TV as well, then it's just Components A and B in to C. Building in an Apple TV or Boxee adds one to the previous equation without adding anything on the other one.

Cable companies would still have incentive to sell you better cable packages because they'd be selling (or renting) you the CableCARD.

[NWR_insanolord]

I think Apple's much more likely to continue with AppleTV-style set top boxes than to do the TV themselves. In fact, the word out there right now is that AppleTV stocks are low, which may indicate they're about to introduce a new revision.

[Morari]

[...] integrate the sound in to the TV as well [...]

Sadly, I believe that most people probably do use the built-in speakers on their television already.

More likely, you're looking at plugging in a handful of components to your receiver. All audio and video runs through a single HDMI cable per device. Then from there, one lone HDMI cable runs from the receiver to the television. Pretty straight forward. Not even today's consumers could possibly find that confusing... at least, not most of them.

The solution isn't to cram as much junk into a television as possible. The solution is to make it easier for companies to sell set-top boxes with actual functionality. Right now, the cable television providers are fighting tooth and nail to prevent just that. Bump the cable companies' locked down and mandatory boxes out of the equation and then organizations like Apple to compete to offer set-tops. Your interface would be there for streaming, for cable/satellite guides, for apps, etc. At that point, your video game consoles would probably even start to incorporate more functionality.

[nickmitch]

Lol, I meant the things for surround sound (sound ports? speaker plugs? Batmen?).

I think more consumers than you think find that confusing. Home theaters in a box are popular because more complex systems are. . .more complex. Then you still have all the extra remotes lying around and consumers who can barely learn how to program a remote.

I agree though that the problem with content is that cable companies are kind of dicks. But until HBO goes rogue, I don't think we'll be seeing a change in that anytime soon.

[BlackNMild2k1]

An All-N-One complete TV companion box would be really nice.

One box that serves as my Surround Sound reciever, cable box, DVR, wifi media streaming & internet portal and possibly Bluray/DVD player with USB inputs would be really sweet actually.

One remote to control it all... since it's all in that same box. It would be a hard sale @ $699-$999 I think, but it could catch on if marketed right.

[Stogi]

In theory, yeah that would be nice. But the good thing about keeping them separate is that you can upgrade parts at your leisure. I'd rather see small, cheap, potent machines that I match to my personal preference.

Having more then one remote is a pain in the ass though, but it's a small price to pay (literally).

[Ceric]

If I were to make a new TV here's what it would Include:

1. 3D enabled with the IR transmitter located at the top or middle side of the TV.
2. Built in Receiver Capabilities.  Come with 5.1 Wireless Speakers so its just out of the box, providing power, and syncing up.  Center would be integrated into the TV.  Possible behind screen.
3. Touchscreen Remote with location speaker.
4. All controls available from the TV itself.
5. Button to make the Remote Call out on TV.
6. Mic in Remote and TV to allow for Voice Control and clearer Skype
7. Integrated 1080p wide lens camera for Skype and uStream
8. Market for developers to develop new features
9.  DLNA Compliant.
10.  Major Streaming Apps
11. DVR capable with easy to Install and Remove Hard drive
12.  New UI that aggregates all the available Media, including live, into one place
13.  Traditional UI for the Technophobic
14.  Phone integration for Caller ID and possible phone answering.
15.  Wired and Wireless Network connection.
16.  Home Automation integration.


That's what I would do.  The thing be all you need for a great home theater system.

[Adrock]

I like Apple products but all I really want is a TV and the ability to play Netflix. I already have that so I really can't imagine Apple introducing something that I felt like I needed to get my hands on.

[Morari]

Then you still have all the extra remotes lying around and consumers who can barely learn how to program a remote.

I can agree with that. Of course, universal remotes are really quite simple to program nowadays. The main problem is that they look overwhelming and are rather expensive.

I remember having to add new components' codes to the old Logitech remote I had years and years ago. It required calling customer service and holding the remote up to the telephone. The remote had a microphone built in so that it could decipher a series of sounds into new codes. It was pretty cool, actually, but a bit of a hassle. Nowadays you would just download all of that on your computer and do it yourself.

[nickmitch]

I seriously couldn't imagine explaining that to a old person over the phone. They'd probably think you could actually talk to electronics.