Agreed.
It may be part of their strategy, but if it is the extent to which they plan to push apple into the livingroom, then again, we are looking at minimal numbers and potentially a bigger failure than AppleTV.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Pachter: Apple 2013 Console
- Thread starter TheChefO
- Start date
Agreed.
It may be part of their strategy, but if it is the extent to which they plan to push apple into the livingroom, then again, we are looking at minimal numbers and potentially a bigger failure than AppleTV.
Agreed.
It may be part of their strategy, but if it is the extent to which they plan to push apple into the livingroom, then again, we are looking at minimal numbers and potentially a bigger failure than AppleTV.
I don't know. To be honest, I believe pretty much everything Apple does is designed to make money, and they've probably turned a profit on AppleTV, even if it didn't take off. Apple is still in the display business, and it generates them some revenue, even though they are probably a minute percentage of the overall display market. People tend to look at anything other than market domination as a failure, but that's just a sideline spectator sport. A small business is still a good business for Apple, as long as it's profitable.
Considering how many people already have incredibly expensive, or high-quality tvs they'd be unlikely to replace just to gain a few built in media functions, I'd say the integrated tv route is unlikely, at least as a grand strategy.
I'd say think of new customers, not existing ones. I did a quick google, in 2009 35 million flat panel tv's were sold in the USA alone. For reference that's far more than the Xbox 360 sold in 2009 worldwide. That sure is a tempting revenue stream to want to tap into for Apple, especially if those 35 million families currently have no Apple product in their household. A lot of these busineses can only work with rediculously large numbers of customers in your ecosystem. Notably stuff like music, movie and tv licensing, you can only strike favorable deals if you have an absurb amount of customers. So tapping into untapped markers, like being built into tv's, I think is key.
I'd say think of new customers, not existing ones. I did a quick google, in 2009 35 million flat panel tv's were sold in the USA alone. For reference that's far more than the Xbox 360 sold in 2009 worldwide. That sure is a tempting revenue stream to want to tap into for Apple, especially if those 35 million families currently have no Apple product in their household. A lot of these busineses can only work with rediculously large numbers of customers in your ecosystem. Notably stuff like music, movie and tv licensing, you can only strike favorable deals if you have an absurb amount of customers. So tapping into untapped markers, like being built into tv's, I think is key.
35 million TVs in 2009.
18.7million NG consoles in 2009. (not counting just xbox just as we wouldn't count just Samsung, or Sony, or LG, or Westinghouse, or Phillips, or Pioneer, or Panasonic, or Sharp, or Vizio, ... you get my drift.)
There are how many sizes, pricepoints, and brands in the tv segment?
How much of this can Apple realistically look to grab?
The other point:
Being limited to just a TV offering limits the sales uptake of itunes in the livingroom.
As has been pointed out in this thread, say you really like the Apple TV product that you saw at a friends or a store ... are you really going to open the wallet and replace the relatively new/expensive big screen LCD/Plasma/LED you have now for the likely expensive Apple TV?
Or would you rather just connect a (significantly cheaper) STB?
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't know. To be honest, I believe pretty much everything Apple does is designed to make money, and they've probably turned a profit on AppleTV, even if it didn't take off. Apple is still in the display business, and it generates them some revenue, even though they are probably a minute percentage of the overall display market. People tend to look at anything other than market domination as a failure, but that's just a sideline spectator sport. A small business is still a good business for Apple, as long as it's profitable.
By Display market I take it you mean Apple Monitors.
That's kinda a prerequisite for a Mac. Goes with the whole Apple product ecosystem.
Just as I'm sure they don't make a ton on Mice, but it'd be kinda odd to have to have a logitech mouse on your Mac.
I'm sure they likely didn't lose much if at all on AppleTV, but I'm also sure they didn't sell anywhere near what they intended ... just as I'm sure Kin wasn't a money sink for MS, but I doubt they internally thought of it as anything but a failure.
I wouldn't consider TVs expensive. You can get a 42-inch plasma for about $700 or less. The median or average size of big screens is probably around that size.
Sure there are Sharp Elites and 70-inch TVs costing over $5000 but that's a small segment of the market.
Also if they bet on gaming, I bet it would be casual gaming. Stuff they already have on their devices and the kind of stuff people play on Facebook and other social networking sites.
Sure there are Sharp Elites and 70-inch TVs costing over $5000 but that's a small segment of the market.
Also if they bet on gaming, I bet it would be casual gaming. Stuff they already have on their devices and the kind of stuff people play on Facebook and other social networking sites.
Also if they bet on gaming, I bet it would be casual gaming. Stuff they already have on their devices and the kind of stuff people play on Facebook and other social networking sites.
That's not the draw though.
Casual gamers already have quite a few choices:
Wii
Kinect
Ipad/pod/phone/Android/Winphone
DS/3DS/PSP/PsVita
PC/Mac/Netbook/Notebook
There is no reason for a consumer to say: "I have to buy that Apple TV because I want to play x game" when they can play the same thing on multiple devices currently which supply the experience rather well.
Granted, I'm by no means suggesting that Apple will absolutely not go down this route. I just think if they choose to, it won't be fruitful (no pun intended).
The only proven method of moving/selling tens of millions of units into the livingroom is a dedicated games console+ (which these days means much more than the old days of a strictly games machine).
Much like my viewpoint on Nintendo, perhaps they wouldn't need to compete on hardware (specs), but relying on coming up with an innovative interface which is enough to offset the deficiency in hardware spec will not be easy.
I think WiiU will be the first example of failure to repeat the success of Wii's interface over HW theology.
Perhaps Apple has some magic up it's sleeve, but I don't see it.
The perfect endgame IMO of innovative interface is a infinite resolution Kinect with zero latency.
Within that construct, you can do pretty much anything, even without buttons.
35 million TVs in 2009.
18.7million NG consoles in 2009. (not counting just xbox just as we wouldn't count just Samsung, or Sony, or LG, or Westinghouse, or Phillips, or Pioneer, or Panasonic, or Sharp, or Vizio, ... you get my drift.)
There are how many sizes, pricepoints, and brands in the tv segment?
How much of this can Apple realistically look to grab?
That's 35 million in USA only, world wide that number is of course far higher. They don't need to grab everyone in the tv segment, just the main players. Samsung and Panasonic on the higher end, and Visio down below. "Smart tv's" are slowly becomming standard, and if Apple/MS don't get their stuff built into them then the tv makers wil just go it alone as they have already started to. In other words, Apple/MS can partake in revenue from being built into tv's, or they can hand it all over to the tv makers. With or without them it will happen.
The other point:
Being limited to just a TV offering limits the sales uptake of itunes in the livingroom.
As has been pointed out in this thread, say you really like the Apple TV product that you saw at a friends or a store ... are you really going to open the wallet and replace the relatively new/expensive big screen LCD/Plasma/LED you have now for the likely expensive Apple TV?
Or would you rather just connect a (significantly cheaper) STB?
There is no limting here, it's all about being present in another segment. Being built into tv's does not mean Apple or MS would stop making phones and tablets. If you already have a tablet then at soem point you'll be able to easily use that on your tv doing just what an stb would do. If you don't have a tablet but the new tv you bought happens to have Apple built in, then use that. If you have an old tv and don't have a tablet but are a gamer, then a video game console like the 360 will let you do it all. You guys are thinking too black&whtie here, being built into tv's doesn't mean they will forgo every other hardware line they have. Different hardware is targetted at different markets, and there is a large market out there that will both not buy a video game console and will not buy a tablet. Of those 35 million tv's sold in 2009 in the usa, a chunk of them fell into that category. They currently represent zero revenue stream for Apple and Microsoft. That situation I guarantee you wil change!
TheChefO said:Pachter may be talking out of his ass ... but WiiHD is here. Not when he said, but it wasn't vaporware..
but thats like me predicting that Sony will launch a ps4, sometime in the future between 2-4 years from now! Or, Mercedes will replace their AMG models to something more powerful in the future!!! Omg! I must be psychic! Hey while I'm at it:
- oil will continue to be important for the world for atleast the next 10 years
- electricity cars will become better than today
-new intel chipset will be more powerful than the previous one!
While I'm correct, the info is worthless and any idiot could have guessed it.
First, I don't see how anyone could describe Apple TV as a failure. 4 million were sold in 2011. Its not like Apple is pouring 100s of millions into marketing the device nor does it seems as if Apple is giving the same love to the Apple TV version of iOS that it gives to iphone/ipad/itouch version. Apple has described Apple TV as a hobby and that probably due to the belief that Apple TV in its current offering isn't really all that innovating or disruptive. If Apple is going to try to enter the TV arena its not going to do so without trying to change the way we watch television. Sticking Apple TV hardware into TVs isn't really going to accomplish that type of change.
In terms of gaming, if whatever Apple brings to the TV market ends up being hugely successful and offers gaming software, its going to affect the console market. Its not going to do this with competitive hardware or a bunch of exclusive software that rivals Halo or COD. Its going to present the same problem that Android and iOS represents for Sony's Vita and Nintendo's 3DS and what consoles represents to PC gaming. Its going to offer such a huge userbase of potential consumers, that the platform will siphon off a big portion of capital that big publishers would have otherwise allocated to typical console development.
In terms of gaming, if whatever Apple brings to the TV market ends up being hugely successful and offers gaming software, its going to affect the console market. Its not going to do this with competitive hardware or a bunch of exclusive software that rivals Halo or COD. Its going to present the same problem that Android and iOS represents for Sony's Vita and Nintendo's 3DS and what consoles represents to PC gaming. Its going to offer such a huge userbase of potential consumers, that the platform will siphon off a big portion of capital that big publishers would have otherwise allocated to typical console development.
Airplay has the potential to be popular. There are anecdotes about people at gatherings pulling out their iPhones to show pictures or videos on the big screen.
But yeah, to be disruptive, they have to turn the current TV distribution paradigm upside down. Enable the cord-cutters to get TV a la carte, paying only for channels you want. But the programmers won't go for that. ABC will push all the ESPN channels and make you pay for them all.
But yeah, to be disruptive, they have to turn the current TV distribution paradigm upside down. Enable the cord-cutters to get TV a la carte, paying only for channels you want. But the programmers won't go for that. ABC will push all the ESPN channels and make you pay for them all.
Apple has sold over 4.2 Million iOS-based Apple TVs
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...sold_over_42_million_ios_based_apple_tvs.html
Tim Cook still thinks AppleTV is a hobby for Apple.
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...sold_over_42_million_ios_based_apple_tvs.html
Apple converted its original Apple TV product into a $99 iOS-based device in September 2010. Since then, the company has sold more than 4.2 million of the set top boxes, with nearly a third of those sales occurring in the last quarter.
...
However, Cook's comments do not appear to suggest that Apple is gearing up to make TV a central part of its plans for 2012, unlike efforts by Google to reanimate its Android-based Google TV product and Microsoft's focus on TV features of the company's Xbox 360 game console, which the company's chief executive Steve Ballmer gave significant mention to in his final keynote at CES.
Samsung and other companies have made so called "Smart TVs" central to their marketing strategies.
Steve Jobs previously noted that a TV set top box is difficult product to market, as any hardware vendor would have to compete against cable or satellite providers.
...
Tim Cook still thinks AppleTV is a hobby for Apple.
Notes of interest from Apple's Q1 2012 conference call
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...rest_from_apples_q1_2012_conference_call.html
EDIT:
Apple earns record $13B on sales of 37M iPhones, 15M iPads and 5.2M Macs
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...s_of_37m_iphones_15m_ipads_and_52m_macs_.html
Apple now largest computer maker, sold more iPads alone than HP sold PCs
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...r_sold_more_ipads_alone_than_hp_sold_pcs.html
I see Apple taking iPad from room to room (bedroom, living room, studyroom, dining room, kitchen, garage, backyard, cockpit, class room, offices, ...). They'll never be done. I also don't think there is any real need to zero in on the living room only. It's a limiting move because people don't crowd around in that room anymore. We are a much more mobile society these days, and we like to take our stuff anywhere (or any room) we go. I look at my son. He's usually all over the place.
The first batch of iPad textbooks are ok, but have room for improvement. I think Apple will do better when they add workbooks to the selection. Most parents want to help their kids learn/practise but they don't know how to formulate good questions, let alone solve them. Asian parents see these exercises as competitive advantages for their kids. ^_^
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...rest_from_apples_q1_2012_conference_call.html
Apple on Tuesday posted a massive holiday quarter with record sales of more than 37 million iPhones, 15.43 million iPads and 5.2 million Macs. Following the news, Apple executives participated in a conference call with analysts and the press, and notes of interest follow.
...
1.5 million iPads already in use in education.
More than 600,000 copies of iBooks Author have been downloaded since it was announced last week.
More than 3 million downloads of the iTunes U application for iOS since last week.
...
iCloud has more than 85 million customers. [iCloud was launched less than a year ago right ? EDIT: Launched on October 2011, 3-4 months ago]
...
iPhone unit sales were up 128 percent year over year, and revenue saw a 133 percent increase from the first fiscal quarter of 2011.
The quarter ended with about 6 million iPhones in the channel at the end of the quarter.
Demand in China has been "staggering." Apple saw strong iPhone sales even in the last quarter, when the iPhone 4S hadn't launched.
...
The iPad saw a 111 percent increase in unit sales from holiday 2010 to holiday 2011. Revenue from the iPad also saw a 99 percent increase year over year.
Cook looked at weekly data after the Kindle Fire launch. Not an "obvious effect" on the numbers for iPad plus or minus.
There is "clear" cannibalization of the Mac by the iPad. But he thinks that there's a lot more cannibalization of Windows PCs by the iPad, which makes it a trend he's fine with.
...
Apple TV is doing "very well," Cook said, with a bit above 2.8 million units sold last fiscal year. 1.4 million of those came in the most recent quarter.
...
iPod unit sales were down 21 percent year over year, with a 26 percent decline in revenue.
...
EDIT:
Apple earns record $13B on sales of 37M iPhones, 15M iPads and 5.2M Macs
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...s_of_37m_iphones_15m_ipads_and_52m_macs_.html
Apple now largest computer maker, sold more iPads alone than HP sold PCs
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...r_sold_more_ipads_alone_than_hp_sold_pcs.html
Cook stated that "in terms of competitiveness, the ecosystem for iPad is in a class by itself," comparing the 170,000 apps designed specifically for iPad against "just a few hundred" tablet-oriented apps for other platforms.
"I think people really want to do multiple things with their tablets. We don't really see these limited function tablets and ereaders being in same category."
Cook said other offerings "will sell a fair number of units, but I don't think that people that want an iPad will settle for limited function."
Cook added, "We're just going to continue to innovate like crazy in this area. And we think we can continue to compete with anyone that is currently shipping tablets, or that might enter in the future."
I see Apple taking iPad from room to room (bedroom, living room, studyroom, dining room, kitchen, garage, backyard, cockpit, class room, offices, ...). They'll never be done. I also don't think there is any real need to zero in on the living room only. It's a limiting move because people don't crowd around in that room anymore. We are a much more mobile society these days, and we like to take our stuff anywhere (or any room) we go. I look at my son. He's usually all over the place.
The first batch of iPad textbooks are ok, but have room for improvement. I think Apple will do better when they add workbooks to the selection. Most parents want to help their kids learn/practise but they don't know how to formulate good questions, let alone solve them. Asian parents see these exercises as competitive advantages for their kids. ^_^
The iPods are not overpriced compared to the competition.
Ehmm Overpriced or "expensive" has nothing to do with profit. Apple makes a healthy profit on everything they sell, the products that doesn´t earn enough is dropped..
Hello Final Cut! Hello X-Serve! etc etc
it might be that apple hardware is expensive, but it's still affordable for most people and everyone knows there is no complain about the quality (yes, sometimes they fail, but that's an exception, it's not like you'd expect the next iPad to have issues).
Another point of apples latests products is, that they improve the key points rapidly to make consumers want a new version, although they have something perfectly working.
And the 3rd point is, there is very few choice, you can buy some 8/16/32GB versions and maybe different colors, that's it, whenever there is some new feature/tech, you have it on all levels of that device family. you have no feeling like you spent tons of money and still don't have the best, until the next generation arrives.
To project this to TVs, apple would probably need 37/42/50inch TVs (no choice between 10sizes * 3resolutions * storage size * other permutation parameters), flat as iPad1 (you would not expect something not stylish from apple, would ya?), high quality overall and in a price range affordable for like 10M ppl a year who are willing to buy apple products.
And the key point of a TV is probably the size and resolution, you won't drive sales by some A5 with twice the cores of the last years' iTV and you won't double the size and resolution, as that's not the strength of apple (by that I mean, for screens, they rely on samsung etc. )
IMO that doesn't sound like it would have margins and sales common to other apple consumer products, correct me if I miss some aspect.
Wouldn't it be way better to drop your iphone/ipad on some kind of wireless charging station and have your iTunes, games etc. on TV via wireless hdmi? maybe with some gesture controls?
If you could additionally buy some pad that connects via bluetooh to your iOS device, you'd have your console, and you could have double the speed every year, not the same stuff for 10 years, IMO a great selling point.
if you look at this years report from apple, the iPod sales seem to decline, and I doubt it's because of any other competition than of their phones. and I think you'd prefer one device, over individual devices to:
-listen to music on the go
-phone/message/email
-surf the net
-play games on the go
-play games on your couch
-watch movies on your TV
Another point of apples latests products is, that they improve the key points rapidly to make consumers want a new version, although they have something perfectly working.
And the 3rd point is, there is very few choice, you can buy some 8/16/32GB versions and maybe different colors, that's it, whenever there is some new feature/tech, you have it on all levels of that device family. you have no feeling like you spent tons of money and still don't have the best, until the next generation arrives.
To project this to TVs, apple would probably need 37/42/50inch TVs (no choice between 10sizes * 3resolutions * storage size * other permutation parameters), flat as iPad1 (you would not expect something not stylish from apple, would ya?), high quality overall and in a price range affordable for like 10M ppl a year who are willing to buy apple products.
And the key point of a TV is probably the size and resolution, you won't drive sales by some A5 with twice the cores of the last years' iTV and you won't double the size and resolution, as that's not the strength of apple (by that I mean, for screens, they rely on samsung etc. )
IMO that doesn't sound like it would have margins and sales common to other apple consumer products, correct me if I miss some aspect.
Wouldn't it be way better to drop your iphone/ipad on some kind of wireless charging station and have your iTunes, games etc. on TV via wireless hdmi? maybe with some gesture controls?
If you could additionally buy some pad that connects via bluetooh to your iOS device, you'd have your console, and you could have double the speed every year, not the same stuff for 10 years, IMO a great selling point.
if you look at this years report from apple, the iPod sales seem to decline, and I doubt it's because of any other competition than of their phones. and I think you'd prefer one device, over individual devices to:
-listen to music on the go
-phone/message/email
-surf the net
-play games on the go
-play games on your couch
-watch movies on your TV
A wireless dock sounds fine. If Apple makes one, I will probably leave it on the coffee table. The pad or phone can act as a remote control. The control software should start up automatically when I plug it in.
If it's a wired dock, then I will leave it beside the HDTV. The keyboard, mouse and screen can stay in my studyroom via some sort of Remote Desktop protocol. They can also use iPad for this setup. They already sell keyboard for iPad anyway. Adding a mouse or track pad to it should be trivial.
If it's a wired dock, then I will leave it beside the HDTV. The keyboard, mouse and screen can stay in my studyroom via some sort of Remote Desktop protocol. They can also use iPad for this setup. They already sell keyboard for iPad anyway. Adding a mouse or track pad to it should be trivial.
Okay, here's another GPU via Thunderbolt on Mac...
How Is This Supercharged MacBook Air Editing Crazy HD Video? (Updated)
http://gizmodo.com/5879314/how-is-this-supercharged-macbook-air-editing-crazy-hd-video
Vaio Z did it via LightPeak last year.
Apple has already filed patents on Thunderbolt for iOS devices:
http://www.techradar.com/news/compu...-hints-at-thunderbolt-for-ios-devices-1052081
How Is This Supercharged MacBook Air Editing Crazy HD Video? (Updated)
http://gizmodo.com/5879314/how-is-this-supercharged-macbook-air-editing-crazy-hd-video
Now, to be fair, this particular MBA is cheating—sort of. The rig is using an external graphics card hooked up via Thunderbolt, imbuing the Air with superpowers that can't yet be crammed into its thin chassis. It chews through uncompressed 4k video that would make a normal MBA crawl on its knees.
...
No real reason I chose to show it running under Windows 7 other than I've been surprised that we haven't seen any demos of Windows running TB before now. It actually works pretty good in it's current beta state. That said the Mac OS kicks @ss running the same config. Please keep in mind that half the battle is getting alpha/beta Windows 7 64bit drivers for each TB device. All TB devices need drivers at some level. All necessary Mac OS driver are already shipping.
The Mac + TB is really last years news and we all want more TB peripherals to start shipping and to start showing Intel and PC makers that there is lots of interest on both sides and it will benefit all TB users. I have no preference on OS and use both everyday.
Vaio Z did it via LightPeak last year.
Apple has already filed patents on Thunderbolt for iOS devices:
http://www.techradar.com/news/compu...-hints-at-thunderbolt-for-ios-devices-1052081
Similar threads
- Replies
- 21
- Views
- 2K
- Replies
- 73
- Views
- 8K
