5 ms·

Every product has a cycle. The iPhone is mature now. It basically does everything I need it to do. Only a radical change in what the product _is_ will make any

Every product has a cycle. The iPhone is mature now. It basically does everything I need it to do. Only a radical change in what the product _is_ will make any difference from herein. Can't see it. Time to move on. The watch is still an iPhone accessory. That's going to take time to mature, and will eventually be a mass market product (or more likely the non-Apple equivalents if Apple don't figure it out). Too many technical problems for the time being, but things will improve. In the meantime, Apple desperately need their next big thing, and it seemed incredibly obvious to me even years ago that a full TV was a no-brainer. TV interfaces suck, I mean they are just _awful_, have you used a modern TV? If you don't own one, try out the controls next time you're at a friend's house. Be prepared to feel alternating waves of anger and despair. It's so so bad, if modern TVs were websites they'd have flashing GIFs and a sign saying "Welcome to our homepage!" Actually, it's worse than that. It's like using a broken flash animation over a dial-up connection with the latency of relayed semaphore. The fact that Apple _haven't_ yet launched a full TV makes me think they have completely lost the plot. Steve talked about it on many occasions, and he was absolutely spot-on (as usual) in his analysis of current products, so where the heck is it? The market is there, the disruption potential is unbelievably huge, the timing is perfect. Tim had it right when he predicted "apps" (interactive channels) would be the future of TV, but not in the ludicrous form of a mac mini intruding into my living room with cables hanging out the back of a TV, especially if it's wall-mounted. If there's one thing the consumer world does not need, it's more stupid third-party boxes plugged into the back of TVs. Modern TV UIs are utter, utter, garbage. They're the dumb phones of the contemporary consumer electronics landscape. This is exactly the type of market Apple usually walk into and completely monopolise. How on earth have they not done this yet? Who doesn't want control of the biggest screens in the house? That are increasingly going to integrate with mobiles? That connect to Games Consoles, which you could... replace. I mean, for the love of god, the potential is ludicrous, what on earth is wrong with them?

toufka 11y ago
It seems that Apple bet a lot on the TV in the past few release cycles, but that the cable/network execs derailed that plan. In the bay area there were a bunch of Apple TV billboards put up, only to hear within a week that Apple was "frustrated with negotiations over its TV service[1]. There seemed to have been big launch plans that were shelved when Apple couldn't pull all the content producers on board for a grand debut. Seems Apple didn't quite get their way this round, and as a result there are a lot of stale products out there. [1]http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-is-frustrated-with-its-tv-streaming-negotiations-2016-1?op=1 http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-is-frustrated-with-its-...
- valleyer 11y ago
  I can't tell if you're kidding, but the billboards are for the new Apple TV that came out late 2015, and they have nothing to do with that rumor article. Similar themed TV ads are still running.
gwright 11y ago
> In the meantime, Apple desperately need their next big thing, Why 'desperately'? They have a product line that generates a billion dollars in profit every five days. They have over $200 billion of cash on hand. That doesn't sound like a desperate situation.
- randomsearch 11y ago
  Because they are heavily over-reliant on a single product that is highly vulnerable to market shifts, and has seemingly little room left for growth. It takes time to gain traction in a new market, so their NBT should be here by now.
- Nicholas_C 11y ago
  Earnings treadmill
  - randomsearch 11y ago
    Better way to put it, thanks. Not Nicholas Carr, btw?
    - Nicholas_C 11y ago
      Not I.
Redoubts 11y ago
Modern TVs are garbage, but the cable box from my provider is orders of magnitude worse. A proper Apple TV might work for cord cutters, but it will never be sufficient for Cable & Satellite subscriptions. There you have a horrible, laggy interface foisted upon you.
DAddYE 11y ago
100% agree, without consider another market is IMO a no brainer: Gaming! They have the biggest AppStore out there and yet they waited many years to let people playing with it on tv in a indecent way! I'm not saying that a powerful AppleTV an improved AppStore market can replace PS/XBONE but has a great potential to compete with WII as iPhone did with Gamboy. Talking about Nintendo. I don't yet understand why they bought Beats. I would bought Nintendo or steal a contract from them to license their titles (Mario, Zelda etc... will run perfectly on a iOS TV device)!
- scarface74 11y ago
  Games are not the next big thing either. Console gaming revenue all together was only $25 billion. (http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2015-04-22-gaming-will-hit-usd91-5-billion-this-year-newzoo http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2015-04-22-gaming-will...) Beats was a profitable, high margin business, the gaming industry - not so much. But with gaming moving toward mobile, why risk actually going into the gaming industry where success or failure is based on luck when they get a 30% cut of all money spent on iOS without any risk?
superuser2 11y ago
After Apple strong armed the record labels into giving up DRM, the content providers would not be crazy to do their utmost to sabotage an Apple play for ownership of the living room. Imagine the money to be made when you can exclusively license major releases to specific brands of equipment in specific countries. The mechanism is there in HDMI to say "this Blu-Ray only works on Samsung TVs that are less than 6 months old." Imagine what Samsung would pay a studio for that! The mechanism is there to use computer vision to make sure you are actually watching ads. The networks must be salivating. Every copyright owner wants their own subscription service and player and geographical exclusive deals. Apple would serve its customers, the consumers. The MPAA's members know that. Apple TV may be allowed to exist now, but not for long.
- thirdsun 11y ago
  > The mechanism is there in HDMI to say "this Blu-Ray only works on Samsung TVs that are less than 6 months old." Imagine what Samsung would pay a studio for that! Imagine what I and probably several other potential viewers would pay for that. Not a cent. The current movie and film situation already is pretty bad, unlike music which I can buy anywhere without DRM. I happily pay for things I enjoy and usually buy 10-20 albums monthly + streaming for preview purposes. With movies these days, I mostly can't buy them. Furthermore I don't see how the end of DRM has been any problem for the music industry. If they made a mistake it was probably the shift to streaming.
Riod 11y ago
Not sure if Apple would see much of a return from this though. Thus not sure if it will happen. TV lifecycles are long; each replaced just under a decade. It's a tough business with low returns on invested capital. The other issue is content. Would make sense for them to partner up with Netflix. Netflix has streaming rights (don't know how precisely streaming is defined in their contracts), and Apple knows how to make consumer devices that users want and will pay for. Would be good to see an improved version of the Apple TV box (sans wires).
scarface74 11y ago
TV is not the next big thing. They are low margin, bulky, and on a very long replacement cycle. I've read 7 years. In most developing markets, cheap tablets are the main source of viewing video. Once you get a HDTV, you keep it until it breaks - hence the failure of every new TV technology since HD.
snowwrestler 11y ago
The TV as a product category basically does not exist anymore. Instead it has splintered into three categories: panels, computers, and services. The panel manufacturers are now building computers into all their panels. Unfortunately, they suck at software and do not have any services. The service providers are also building computers into their service boxes. They are much better at software, and obviously have services. Apple is a computer maker who is trying to become a service provider. Unfortunately for Apple, the existing service providers are not as dumb as the music industry was and will not give Apple their lunch. Panels are a commodity with low margins and slow replacement rates. Which is why neither Apple nor service providers are trying to sell panels.

toufka 11y ago

It seems that Apple bet a lot on the TV in the past few release cycles, but that the cable/network execs derailed that plan. In the bay area there were a bunch of Apple TV billboards put up, only to hear within a week that Apple was "frustrated with negotiations over its TV service[1]. There seemed to have been big launch plans that were shelved when Apple couldn't pull all the content producers on board for a grand debut. Seems Apple didn't quite get their way this round, and as a result there are a lot of stale products out there. [1]http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-is-frustrated-with-its-tv-streaming-negotiations-2016-1?op=1 http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-is-frustrated-with-its-...

valleyer 11y ago
I can't tell if you're kidding, but the billboards are for the new Apple TV that came out late 2015, and they have nothing to do with that rumor article. Similar themed TV ads are still running.

gwright 11y ago

> In the meantime, Apple desperately need their next big thing, Why 'desperately'? They have a product line that generates a billion dollars in profit every five days. They have over $200 billion of cash on hand. That doesn't sound like a desperate situation.

randomsearch 11y ago
Because they are heavily over-reliant on a single product that is highly vulnerable to market shifts, and has seemingly little room left for growth. It takes time to gain traction in a new market, so their NBT should be here by now.
Nicholas_C 11y ago
Earnings treadmill
- randomsearch 11y ago
  Better way to put it, thanks. Not Nicholas Carr, btw?
  - Nicholas_C 11y ago
    Not I.

Redoubts 11y ago

Modern TVs are garbage, but the cable box from my provider is orders of magnitude worse. A proper Apple TV might work for cord cutters, but it will never be sufficient for Cable & Satellite subscriptions. There you have a horrible, laggy interface foisted upon you.

DAddYE 11y ago

100% agree, without consider another market is IMO a no brainer: Gaming! They have the biggest AppStore out there and yet they waited many years to let people playing with it on tv in a indecent way! I'm not saying that a powerful AppleTV an improved AppStore market can replace PS/XBONE but has a great potential to compete with WII as iPhone did with Gamboy. Talking about Nintendo. I don't yet understand why they bought Beats. I would bought Nintendo or steal a contract from them to license their titles (Mario, Zelda etc... will run perfectly on a iOS TV device)!

scarface74 11y ago
Games are not the next big thing either. Console gaming revenue all together was only $25 billion. (http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2015-04-22-gaming-will-hit-usd91-5-billion-this-year-newzoo http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2015-04-22-gaming-will...) Beats was a profitable, high margin business, the gaming industry - not so much. But with gaming moving toward mobile, why risk actually going into the gaming industry where success or failure is based on luck when they get a 30% cut of all money spent on iOS without any risk?

superuser2 11y ago

After Apple strong armed the record labels into giving up DRM, the content providers would not be crazy to do their utmost to sabotage an Apple play for ownership of the living room. Imagine the money to be made when you can exclusively license major releases to specific brands of equipment in specific countries. The mechanism is there in HDMI to say "this Blu-Ray only works on Samsung TVs that are less than 6 months old." Imagine what Samsung would pay a studio for that! The mechanism is there to use computer vision to make sure you are actually watching ads. The networks must be salivating. Every copyright owner wants their own subscription service and player and geographical exclusive deals. Apple would serve its customers, the consumers. The MPAA's members know that. Apple TV may be allowed to exist now, but not for long.

thirdsun 11y ago
> The mechanism is there in HDMI to say "this Blu-Ray only works on Samsung TVs that are less than 6 months old." Imagine what Samsung would pay a studio for that! Imagine what I and probably several other potential viewers would pay for that. Not a cent. The current movie and film situation already is pretty bad, unlike music which I can buy anywhere without DRM. I happily pay for things I enjoy and usually buy 10-20 albums monthly + streaming for preview purposes. With movies these days, I mostly can't buy them. Furthermore I don't see how the end of DRM has been any problem for the music industry. If they made a mistake it was probably the shift to streaming.

Riod 11y ago

Not sure if Apple would see much of a return from this though. Thus not sure if it will happen. TV lifecycles are long; each replaced just under a decade. It's a tough business with low returns on invested capital. The other issue is content. Would make sense for them to partner up with Netflix. Netflix has streaming rights (don't know how precisely streaming is defined in their contracts), and Apple knows how to make consumer devices that users want and will pay for. Would be good to see an improved version of the Apple TV box (sans wires).

scarface74 11y ago

TV is not the next big thing. They are low margin, bulky, and on a very long replacement cycle. I've read 7 years. In most developing markets, cheap tablets are the main source of viewing video. Once you get a HDTV, you keep it until it breaks - hence the failure of every new TV technology since HD.

snowwrestler 11y ago

The TV as a product category basically does not exist anymore. Instead it has splintered into three categories: panels, computers, and services. The panel manufacturers are now building computers into all their panels. Unfortunately, they suck at software and do not have any services. The service providers are also building computers into their service boxes. They are much better at software, and obviously have services. Apple is a computer maker who is trying to become a service provider. Unfortunately for Apple, the existing service providers are not as dumb as the music industry was and will not give Apple their lunch. Panels are a commodity with low margins and slow replacement rates. Which is why neither Apple nor service providers are trying to sell panels.