4 ms·

TVs with integrated computers have never made much sense to me. How would this ever be preferable to a set-top box, which, incidentally Apple already sells? Goo

by necubi 14y ago

TVs with integrated computers have never made much sense to me. How would this ever be preferable to a set-top box, which, incidentally Apple already sells? Good TVs are very expensive and people tend not to upgrade them very frequently (10+ years seems commonplace). Whereas the computer components are pretty cheap (~$100) and tend to get upgraded frequently. But few will buy a $1200 TV every two years. If you were Apple, would you rather sell a high margin, inexpensive product or one that is low margin and very expensive? As a counterpoint, the iMac suffers from these same issues to a lesser extent and sells very well.

zach 14y ago
A really great integrated TV experience could have, among other things: - WirelessHD with CoverFlow input selection (no rat's nest of wires, physical input slots or keep-pressing-the-button input select) - an integrated AirPort (no cable-company modem/router) - Fully modular, wireless, THX sound that always works (even with Bluetooth headphones) - Built-in Blu-Ray and program guide that don't suck - Siri, of course - Always-on AirPlay (regardless of input or power being off) - TV programming packages and customer service provided by Apple And most importantly: - One remote, or an iPod touch, or an iPhone, or an iPad, and oh yes, the iPad can watch ESPN while your TV is tuned to Dancing With The Stars.
- rbanffy 14y ago
  All of it can be achieved with a set-top-box and a TV as long as you ignore half of its electronics and use it as a dumb monitor.
  - zach 14y ago
    Yeah, and I think for most of here, there will be a "what's the big deal" factor when it comes out. Those of us who have no problem containing our video setup inside our head, who have a Harmony remote, who have a mental picture of what goes where -- we're not really going to care that much. I think we'll appreciate a fully integrated TV experience, but I don't think we're the people who will get excited about it. But let's put it this way, if you're staying at someone's house (i.e. babysitting or housesitting), the one thing you must hold a debriefing session on is how the TV, boxes and remote(s) work. That's kind of messed up. That's where the big advantage is for an Apple TV set.
    - rbanffy 14y ago
      That's the point - a TV remote should have 2 buttons at most - input select and on/off. And that's if selecting an input doesn't turn it on and selecting "off" from the input list doesn't turn it off. Or none, if it turns on or off according to the presence or absence of signals in its selected input. The set-top-box remote, OTOH, could be no more complex than an Apple remote - menu/back, play/select/pause, directions. One day I'll try tearing out every button off my TV remote and leave just the power and input buttons. Should be an interesting experiment.
  - roc 14y ago
    It's only smarter to put the electronics in an add-on box that you can upgrade more frequently if people actually upgrade add-on boxes more frequently. But do they? Tivos, VCRs, DVD players -- very few get replaced with an 'upgrade' by regular people. [1] And gaming consoles, the case to study for set-top boxes that people do upgrade, get replaced only every 5+ years. And they have massively lower market penetration. [1] Notwithstanding early adopters replacing limited early-run devices with later ones, as with early dvd players getting replaced by those that did dual-layer without a pause.
    - rbanffy 14y ago
      With a gaming console you have a commitment in the form of the titles you own and people upgrade them to get access to improved content. A game console has to offset its cost with the increased attractiveness of its improved content. A TV set-top-box is much cheaper to build than a gaming console (or, at least, should be) and the commitment will probably be with the subscribed content - and people won't upgrade them unless the new version offsets its price with enticing features. TV makers already noticed that and the push to digital is a form of making standards flexible enough to accommodate things like 2160p and 3D, shortening product life to levels analog TV sets and long-lived standards wouldn't be able to achieve.
  - pohl 14y ago
    Isn't that exactly what introduces the biggest usability problem that televisions have today: knowing how to set the monitor source channel to correspond to the set-top box one wants to use?
- wooter 14y ago
  - facetime - receive/switch call to tv
  - zach 14y ago
    So true. I can't wait until they add fax support so I can get fired by my boss in Japan.
- pasbesoin 14y ago
  Here's one: Visual mute. Broadcasters have taking to making commercials "flash" with bright, momentary images, in order to distract/attract attention. When viewing live, I find that the (audio) mute button is no longer sufficient. I'd like the screen to e.g. go 50% gray, where I can still see what's happening when I look at it, but it's no longer distracting me by "flashing" in my peripheral vision. Given that TV's all have some degree of computerization, these days, I want mine to be open source, for reasons precisely like this.
Flenser 14y ago
Good TVs are very expensive and people tend not to upgrade them very frequently (10+ years seems commonplace) This would give Apple a 10+ year lock-in to their ecosystem. They could then sell iPads as controllers and additional displays. And if the computing power in them starts to get underpowered for what people want to use them for they could sell add-on boxes connected via Thunderbolt that would have as low latency as anything inside the TV housing.

by necubi 14y ago

zach 14y ago

A really great integrated TV experience could have, among other things: - WirelessHD with CoverFlow input selection (no rat's nest of wires, physical input slots or keep-pressing-the-button input select) - an integrated AirPort (no cable-company modem/router) - Fully modular, wireless, THX sound that always works (even with Bluetooth headphones) - Built-in Blu-Ray and program guide that don't suck - Siri, of course - Always-on AirPlay (regardless of input or power being off) - TV programming packages and customer service provided by Apple And most importantly: - One remote, or an iPod touch, or an iPhone, or an iPad, and oh yes, the iPad can watch ESPN while your TV is tuned to Dancing With The Stars.

rbanffy 14y ago
All of it can be achieved with a set-top-box and a TV as long as you ignore half of its electronics and use it as a dumb monitor.
- zach 14y ago
  Yeah, and I think for most of here, there will be a "what's the big deal" factor when it comes out. Those of us who have no problem containing our video setup inside our head, who have a Harmony remote, who have a mental picture of what goes where -- we're not really going to care that much. I think we'll appreciate a fully integrated TV experience, but I don't think we're the people who will get excited about it. But let's put it this way, if you're staying at someone's house (i.e. babysitting or housesitting), the one thing you must hold a debriefing session on is how the TV, boxes and remote(s) work. That's kind of messed up. That's where the big advantage is for an Apple TV set.
  - rbanffy 14y ago
    That's the point - a TV remote should have 2 buttons at most - input select and on/off. And that's if selecting an input doesn't turn it on and selecting "off" from the input list doesn't turn it off. Or none, if it turns on or off according to the presence or absence of signals in its selected input. The set-top-box remote, OTOH, could be no more complex than an Apple remote - menu/back, play/select/pause, directions. One day I'll try tearing out every button off my TV remote and leave just the power and input buttons. Should be an interesting experiment.
- roc 14y ago
  It's only smarter to put the electronics in an add-on box that you can upgrade more frequently if people actually upgrade add-on boxes more frequently. But do they? Tivos, VCRs, DVD players -- very few get replaced with an 'upgrade' by regular people. [1] And gaming consoles, the case to study for set-top boxes that people do upgrade, get replaced only every 5+ years. And they have massively lower market penetration. [1] Notwithstanding early adopters replacing limited early-run devices with later ones, as with early dvd players getting replaced by those that did dual-layer without a pause.
  - rbanffy 14y ago
    With a gaming console you have a commitment in the form of the titles you own and people upgrade them to get access to improved content. A game console has to offset its cost with the increased attractiveness of its improved content. A TV set-top-box is much cheaper to build than a gaming console (or, at least, should be) and the commitment will probably be with the subscribed content - and people won't upgrade them unless the new version offsets its price with enticing features. TV makers already noticed that and the push to digital is a form of making standards flexible enough to accommodate things like 2160p and 3D, shortening product life to levels analog TV sets and long-lived standards wouldn't be able to achieve.
- pohl 14y ago
  Isn't that exactly what introduces the biggest usability problem that televisions have today: knowing how to set the monitor source channel to correspond to the set-top box one wants to use?
wooter 14y ago
- facetime - receive/switch call to tv
- zach 14y ago
  So true. I can't wait until they add fax support so I can get fired by my boss in Japan.
pasbesoin 14y ago
Here's one: Visual mute. Broadcasters have taking to making commercials "flash" with bright, momentary images, in order to distract/attract attention. When viewing live, I find that the (audio) mute button is no longer sufficient. I'd like the screen to e.g. go 50% gray, where I can still see what's happening when I look at it, but it's no longer distracting me by "flashing" in my peripheral vision. Given that TV's all have some degree of computerization, these days, I want mine to be open source, for reasons precisely like this.

Flenser 14y ago

Good TVs are very expensive and people tend not to upgrade them very frequently (10+ years seems commonplace) This would give Apple a 10+ year lock-in to their ecosystem. They could then sell iPads as controllers and additional displays. And if the computing power in them starts to get underpowered for what people want to use them for they could sell add-on boxes connected via Thunderbolt that would have as low latency as anything inside the TV housing.