Let me make this clear – seems to have been slightly grey in previous posts: APPLE WILL PRODUCE A TELEVISION! It won’t be TV as we know it, IT WILL BE a new generation iMAC!
Highpants has trumpeting the possibility of an Apple-made TV set since March this year “Not happy with the Apple TV set top box, Apple is launching into the Television market, the first true Smart TV’s are about to roll of the production line. Apples ethos has always been to ADD gadgets to our lives, the Apple iTV won’t be a computer, it will be a true Television Set++”
In the latest round of rumours - kicked of by Hayley Tsukayama at the Washington Post and befuddled by the Wall Street Journal’s Mark Gongloff - experts are finally admitting to reading more than their own write-ups, in the form of Walter Isaacson’s new Steve Jobs biography . . .
Just a thought: Wouldn’t Apple Inc be better off making a 40 inch iMac, all the technology we’re raving about below, loaded into a pc with the biggest IPS monitor money can buy, ease of use, integration. Surely a new Cinema sized iMac makes more sense than just ANOTHER smart TV?
In the latest round of rumours – kicked of by Hayley Tsukayama at the Washington Post and befuddled by the Wall Street Journal’s Mark Gongloff – experts are finally admitting to reading more than their own write-ups, in the form of Walter Isaacson’s new Steve Jobs biography . . .
Tsukayama says “The new biography on Steve Jobs has a major product reveal: Apple may drop a full-fledged television.” quoting Isaacson:
‘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.’
The usual suspects have jumped on the – bad journalism – bandwagon, painting deep and meaningful pictures at just how wise they are at reprinting someone elses speculation.
Our favorite reliable source for news Reuters, signed off with Lucas Shaw’s rundown of the unfolding speculation: As the media mines Walter Isaacson’s Steve Jobs biography for every nugget it can find, some analysts have concluded Apple may have its own television set ready by late 2012.
In Isaacson’s biography, out in stores Monday, Jobs says he’d “like to create an integrated television set that is completely easy to use.” The “integrated” TV would be synced with other Apple devices, as well as the recently launched iCloud storage system.
Isaacson elaborated: “He very much wanted to do for television sets what he had done for computers, music players, and phones: make them simple and elegant.”
The biographer appeared on CBS’ “60 Minutes” program to discuss everything from Jobs’ early life to his ultimately unsuccessful battle with pancreatic cancer.
An Apple job listing earlier this year, added fuel to the fire, advertising for someone to work on “new power management designs and technologies” for use on various Apple products, including a “TV.”
One of the critical aspects is the idea of Apple offering a subscription service for content. The device would presumably replace and offer more content that the $99 Apple TV set-top box, which already offers access to several third-party apps, such as NBA, MLB, and Netflix.
More recent reports have also claimed that Apple was on the verge of unveiling such a subscription service for video content. However, competitors like Amazon have already beaten Apple to the punch with their own streaming services, though they offer a smaller catalog of content than what Apple could potentially provide.
Apple rival Google entered the TV space late last year with combination of set-top boxes and TV sets that include its Google TV software. Google’s strategy has been to blend in with TV content provided through a cable operator and let users execute Web searches while watching programming.
The Apple TV rumors haven’t sold everyone on the idea that a hulking great television is the new game-changing device in Apple’s hand. For starters, Google’s already beaten Apple to the punch with Google TV-integrated televisions: Google doesn’t sell the sets themselves, but it would be almost an overstatement to say that response to Google TV has been lukewarm thus far. In fact, Sony just dropped the price of its Google TV-integrated televisions earlier this month, discounting them anywhere from $300 to around $700 in an effort to capture more of the market.
There’s also the simple truth that a television sales just can’t deliver the kind of profits that Apple is used to seeing on its hardware devices. Apple has never been a contender for hard-won tech consumer products, they like to be a little ahead of the game and TV’s are so yesterday.
“TVs are very low frequency purchases, meaning if Apple built intelligence into the sets, their replacement cycles would be far longer than for lower cost consumer electronics” said Gdgt’s Ryan Block
TVs are a highly commoditized, low-margin business. Profits are often so hard to eke out even many TV companies barely want to be in the TV business. To put it another way, Apple only likes to play in verticals where they can maintain industry-leading margins.
Venture Beat has an interesting take on the long winded rumor: Apple is almost certainly making a TV, but it’s probably not aiming to replace the big screen in your living room. Instead, the company will likely start with a product aimed at being your second (or third) television.
Focusing on smaller TV’s: It’s much easier for Apple to deliver smaller TVs because they won’t compete directly with consumers’ existing and expensive big screen sets. It also means that Apple won’t have to fight with entrenched TV manufacturers when it comes to price: The company would certainly have a hard time charging a premium when companies like Vizio are driving down big screen prices heavily. A 26-inch Apple branded television around $400-$500 would be much easier to swallow.
Also, focusing on smaller TVs sidesteps the replacement cycle problem — consumers typically don’t buy new TVs very often — completely. If it’s priced competitively, Apple could easily tempt consumers into buying multiple small TVs and replace them often.
Guess the Mill will keep churning . . . .