8 ms·

I still think Apple-brand smart TVs have an inherent problem, in that people won't want to upgrade them very often compared to other devices (they're basically

I still think Apple-brand smart TVs have an inherent problem, in that people won't want to upgrade them very often compared to other devices (they're basically electronic furniture), so there'll be a lot of outdated hardware out in the market. It's much easier to get people to upgrade a $100 add-on for their current TV.

loumf 15y ago
It could come in two parts, one replaceable. It makes sense if for some reason, the display part needs to be integrated more than with an HDMI cable. I think the remote control experience alone would justify it.
- tvon 15y ago
  Coming in two parts seems very un-Apple, though not necessarily a bad idea.
  - markkanof 15y ago
    On the surface it does seem unlike Apple to release a two part unit, but I could see it being sort of like the Macbooks and Cinema displays. The display is plugged into the wall and then there is just one cable that has data/video and power for the external processing unit. When it's time to upgrade the processing unit you just unplug a single cable and swap it out. The display part would be expected to last through at least a couple upgrades of the processing unit.
kenjackson 15y ago
Crazy thought... what if I could get you an $800 TV carrier/cable subsidized for $200 every two years (on contract)?
- robterrell 15y ago
  That's interesting. My cable TV bill is about the same as my mobile phone bill, and it's not subsidizing any gear. And they call me about once a week with some upsell long-term contract "deal". Maybe it should be subsidizing something. Profits in their industry are about as obscene as in mobile.
- twoodfin 15y ago
  Exactly. Apple could make the same (win-win) deal they made with the mobile carriers: Let us completely control the user experience, while you get to charge extra for a premium i(Phone|TV) plan and lock in your customers for two year contracts. In the TV case, it also solves a big problem for the cable/fiber companies, in that they know IP will be enough for everyone in a few years (and is already enough for more and more subscribers) but it will be hard to suddenly start charging $100/mo for "just Internet" when they had been charging $40. The new "iTV" plan won't be a TV or Internet plan, it will be a unified plan. It won't matter how you consume your content, the cable company will get their piece.
- rythie 15y ago
  Would seem very wasteful to be chuck a 40/50inch/whatever TV in trash/rubbish every 2 years just because it doesn't run the latest software. Whilst phones have a history of that, TV has the best part of century without it.
  - kenjackson 15y ago
    Why put it in the trash? You can use it in some other room, the garage, etc... I'd put a two year old 40" in my office happily.
    - rythie 15y ago
      Because none of your channels work anymore, they all need iOS 8 and a quad core CPU. Unless your talking about using it as a monitor?
    - prof_hobart 15y ago
      We already have all of the TVs we want in the house (two), and there's certainly no other room that would benefit from having a 42" TV in it.
      - dusing 15y ago
        Bathroom!
        prof_hobart 15y ago
        Bathroom is for quiet soak in the bath with a good book.
qeorge 15y ago
I'm not sure I agree. Apple is in a sweet spot - the more expensive the item, the more cool points you get for owning it. Having a brand new Apple TV could get you laid, real talk. I don't know of any other brand that can say that.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
jsz0 15y ago
Depending on what Apple's vision is for SmartTV functionality the A5 or A6 platform can last the life-time of 1080P HDTVs. It will be more like gaming consoles than phones/tablets/computers that are more open ended in their functionality. A SmartTV is a less versatile device. All you really need is the horse power to playback video & games at 1080P and the ability to do other interactive features. That won't change radically over the lifetime of the device. I guess the next big jump would be to 4K displays with an A14 (or whatever) platform to go with it. I could also see the add-on Apple TV continuing as a separate product for various reasons. (I don't see Apple making a projector so... I hope so at least)
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- technoslut 15y ago
  I'd also add that Airplay really eliminates the need to update your TV hardware.
- jonhendry 15y ago
  I guess the problem is that I think people will want and expect parity between apps on the TV and apps on their phone and iPad. If the TV lags behind the iPad and iPhone, that could hamper the kinds of apps that could be developed for the iTV. Of course this assumes that Apple opens up the iTV for app developers, not just for media companies who want channel apps.
  - jsz0 15y ago
    That may be why Apple has waited this long. Once you hit a certain level of performance (say a hypothetical A6 with a quad core processor, 1GB of RAM, and a very fast GPU) there's going to be diminishing returns with subsequent upgrades. We are probably pretty close to that point now. The GPU would probably be the biggest concern if they want to take on Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo. (A6 paired with a discrete GPU?)

loumf 15y ago

It could come in two parts, one replaceable. It makes sense if for some reason, the display part needs to be integrated more than with an HDMI cable. I think the remote control experience alone would justify it.

tvon 15y ago
Coming in two parts seems very un-Apple, though not necessarily a bad idea.
- markkanof 15y ago
  On the surface it does seem unlike Apple to release a two part unit, but I could see it being sort of like the Macbooks and Cinema displays. The display is plugged into the wall and then there is just one cable that has data/video and power for the external processing unit. When it's time to upgrade the processing unit you just unplug a single cable and swap it out. The display part would be expected to last through at least a couple upgrades of the processing unit.

kenjackson 15y ago

Crazy thought... what if I could get you an $800 TV carrier/cable subsidized for $200 every two years (on contract)?

robterrell 15y ago
That's interesting. My cable TV bill is about the same as my mobile phone bill, and it's not subsidizing any gear. And they call me about once a week with some upsell long-term contract "deal". Maybe it should be subsidizing something. Profits in their industry are about as obscene as in mobile.
twoodfin 15y ago
Exactly. Apple could make the same (win-win) deal they made with the mobile carriers: Let us completely control the user experience, while you get to charge extra for a premium i(Phone|TV) plan and lock in your customers for two year contracts. In the TV case, it also solves a big problem for the cable/fiber companies, in that they know IP will be enough for everyone in a few years (and is already enough for more and more subscribers) but it will be hard to suddenly start charging $100/mo for "just Internet" when they had been charging $40. The new "iTV" plan won't be a TV or Internet plan, it will be a unified plan. It won't matter how you consume your content, the cable company will get their piece.
rythie 15y ago
Would seem very wasteful to be chuck a 40/50inch/whatever TV in trash/rubbish every 2 years just because it doesn't run the latest software. Whilst phones have a history of that, TV has the best part of century without it.
- kenjackson 15y ago
  Why put it in the trash? You can use it in some other room, the garage, etc... I'd put a two year old 40" in my office happily.
  - rythie 15y ago
    Because none of your channels work anymore, they all need iOS 8 and a quad core CPU. Unless your talking about using it as a monitor?
  - prof_hobart 15y ago
    We already have all of the TVs we want in the house (two), and there's certainly no other room that would benefit from having a 42" TV in it.
    - dusing 15y ago
      Bathroom!
      - prof_hobart 15y ago
        Bathroom is for quiet soak in the bath with a good book.

qeorge 15y ago

I'm not sure I agree. Apple is in a sweet spot - the more expensive the item, the more cool points you get for owning it. Having a brand new Apple TV could get you laid, real talk. I don't know of any other brand that can say that.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

jsz0 15y ago

Depending on what Apple's vision is for SmartTV functionality the A5 or A6 platform can last the life-time of 1080P HDTVs. It will be more like gaming consoles than phones/tablets/computers that are more open ended in their functionality. A SmartTV is a less versatile device. All you really need is the horse power to playback video & games at 1080P and the ability to do other interactive features. That won't change radically over the lifetime of the device. I guess the next big jump would be to 4K displays with an A14 (or whatever) platform to go with it. I could also see the add-on Apple TV continuing as a separate product for various reasons. (I don't see Apple making a projector so... I hope so at least)

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
technoslut 15y ago
I'd also add that Airplay really eliminates the need to update your TV hardware.
jonhendry 15y ago
I guess the problem is that I think people will want and expect parity between apps on the TV and apps on their phone and iPad. If the TV lags behind the iPad and iPhone, that could hamper the kinds of apps that could be developed for the iTV. Of course this assumes that Apple opens up the iTV for app developers, not just for media companies who want channel apps.
- jsz0 15y ago
  That may be why Apple has waited this long. Once you hit a certain level of performance (say a hypothetical A6 with a quad core processor, 1GB of RAM, and a very fast GPU) there's going to be diminishing returns with subsequent upgrades. We are probably pretty close to that point now. The GPU would probably be the biggest concern if they want to take on Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo. (A6 paired with a discrete GPU?)