If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Time)   How Apple's HDTV turned into the Chinese Democracy of tech projects   (time.com) divider line 56
    More: Interesting, Apple HDTV, Apple, Chinese, Piper Jaffray, iTunes Music Store, CLSA, Gene Munster, Cult of Mac  
•       •       •

1892 clicks; posted to Business » on 08 May 2014 at 3:46 PM (20 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



56 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-05-08 12:06:46 PM
IMHO, the HDTV market at this point is too commoditized for it to make sense for Apple to deploy a smart HDTV.  I just do not see what they can bring to the market that other TV manufacturers, game consoles, and small streaming devices, including their own "Apple TV" can do...other than perhaps a pretty package...???  Unified functionality is not a selling feature to me.

Personally I see no compelling reason for an Apple HDTV.  Furthermore, I really hate the fact that it is impossible to buy a simple HD screen with no speakers, ZERO smart features, and nothing but a power cord and multiple HDMI inputs.  I (and I'm not alone) have invested a lot in my home entertainment system, and have multiple devices with multiple redundant applications (Apple TV/Roku, XBox/PlayStation, BluRay, etc).

A "fully loaded Smart, Feature Rich TV" does nothing for me other than cost more for features and functionality I do not need or want.

Finally, I find the idea of packaging all those features into one cohesive unit is concerning to me as if something goes bad on the separate board that runs the smart features dies, suddenly I may not be able to switch inputs or some other nonsense.

Feel free to oppose my opinion...

\I did not read the article in its entirety
 
2014-05-08 12:16:50 PM
Ahh with them still raking in money hand over fist with the iphone and ipad I can't imagine they want to get risky with a tv. Just keep on pumping out those money makers and they can just buy any company that makes a big enough innovation that they are interested in.
 
2014-05-08 12:32:35 PM

Endive Wombat: IMHO, the HDTV market at this point is too commoditized for it to make sense for Apple to deploy a smart HDTV.  I just do not see what they can bring to the market that other TV manufacturers, game consoles, and small streaming devices, including their own "Apple TV" can do...other than perhaps a pretty package...???  Unified functionality is not a selling feature to me.

Personally I see no compelling reason for an Apple HDTV.  Furthermore, I really hate the fact that it is impossible to buy a simple HD screen with no speakers, ZERO smart features, and nothing but a power cord and multiple HDMI inputs.  I (and I'm not alone) have invested a lot in my home entertainment system, and have multiple devices with multiple redundant applications (Apple TV/Roku, XBox/PlayStation, BluRay, etc).

A "fully loaded Smart, Feature Rich TV" does nothing for me other than cost more for features and functionality I do not need or want.

Finally, I find the idea of packaging all those features into one cohesive unit is concerning to me as if something goes bad on the separate board that runs the smart features dies, suddenly I may not be able to switch inputs or some other nonsense.

Feel free to oppose my opinion...

\I did not read the article in its entirety


There are a lot of people who like the built-in smart-tv functionality, but while it may work great today, how well will it work with new services and streaming video formats in five, eight, or ten years?

The big problem with an Apple TV is that their other 'lifestyle' devices are intended to have a lifespan or two, maybe three years, before an upgrade.  A TV can least for ten years easily.

Samsung has had a neat idea where they package all of the 'smart' features into a user-replaceable box.  Just buy and plug in a new 'evolution kit' and your TV gets a faster processor and all of the features of the new models.  It's a cool idea, I'd just wonder about how long it will be supported.  Will the TV I buy today be able to use an evolution kit I buy five years from now?
 
2014-05-08 12:39:36 PM

Endive Wombat: IMHO, the HDTV market at this point is too commoditized for it to make sense for Apple to deploy a smart HDTV.  I just do not see what they can bring to the market that other TV manufacturers, game consoles, and small streaming devices, including their own "Apple TV" can do...other than perhaps a pretty package...???  Unified functionality is not a selling feature to me.

Personally I see no compelling reason for an Apple HDTV.  Furthermore, I really hate the fact that it is impossible to buy a simple HD screen with no speakers, ZERO smart features, and nothing but a power cord and multiple HDMI inputs.  I (and I'm not alone) have invested a lot in my home entertainment system, and have multiple devices with multiple redundant applications (Apple TV/Roku, XBox/PlayStation, BluRay, etc).

A "fully loaded Smart, Feature Rich TV" does nothing for me other than cost more for features and functionality I do not need or want.

Finally, I find the idea of packaging all those features into one cohesive unit is concerning to me as if something goes bad on the separate board that runs the smart features dies, suddenly I may not be able to switch inputs or some other nonsense.

Feel free to oppose my opinion...

\I did not read the article in its entirety


Amen.

Sound comes out of the surround system.  The first thing I do is turn off the internal speakers because they SUCK.

Then I figure out which inputs go where into the TV and then program my Harmony Remote to switch inputs based on what I'm doing.  All the TV ever does is power on/off, send audio out to the surround system, and switch inputs based on what I'm doing.
 
2014-05-08 01:07:13 PM
That TV is going to be real hit with the psychedelic crowd

www.phil801.com
 
2014-05-08 02:35:33 PM

Endive Wombat: IMHO, the HDTV market at this point is too commoditized for it to make sense for Apple to deploy a smart HDTV.  I just do not see what they can bring to the market that other TV manufacturers, game consoles, and small streaming devices, including their own "Apple TV" can do...other than perhaps a pretty package...???  Unified functionality is not a selling feature to me.

Personally I see no compelling reason for an Apple HDTV.  Furthermore, I really hate the fact that it is impossible to buy a simple HD screen with no speakers, ZERO smart features, and nothing but a power cord and multiple HDMI inputs.  I (and I'm not alone) have invested a lot in my home entertainment system, and have multiple devices with multiple redundant applications (Apple TV/Roku, XBox/PlayStation, BluRay, etc).

A "fully loaded Smart, Feature Rich TV" does nothing for me other than cost more for features and functionality I do not need or want.

Finally, I find the idea of packaging all those features into one cohesive unit is concerning to me as if something goes bad on the separate board that runs the smart features dies, suddenly I may not be able to switch inputs or some other nonsense.

Feel free to oppose my opinion...

\I did not read the article in its entirety


Well, accept for the no speakers, not only is that available, I have one. There are plenty of them out there.
 
2014-05-08 03:31:48 PM
That's an unfair comparison. "Chinese Democracy" was eventually released.
 
2014-05-08 03:49:16 PM

GreenAdder: That's an unfair comparison. "Chinese Democracy" was eventually released.


Duke Nukem Forever.... oh wait, that did too.

We need new vaporware!
 
2014-05-08 03:49:39 PM
No one wants to buy a new TV every year.
 
2014-05-08 04:01:38 PM

Handsome B. Wonderful: No one wants to buy a new TV every year.


For five times the cost of competitors....
 
2014-05-08 04:04:44 PM

TuteTibiImperes: Samsung has had a neat idea where they package all of the 'smart' features into a user-replaceable box. Just buy and plug in a new 'evolution kit' and your TV gets a faster processor and all of the features of the new models. It's a cool idea, I'd just wonder about how long it will be supported. Will the TV I buy today be able to use an evolution kit I buy five years from now?


I've noticed a couple of UHD/2180p televisions that have moved their cable inputs from the television housing to an external box in order to future proof their connectivity options.  I imagine that it would be easy to do the same with the "smart" features.  Problem is, as you mentioned, how long will a proprietary platform last?  Would be nice if there was a VESA standard for interactive features.

And while the HD/1080p television market is saturated, the UHD/2180p market is not.  They might just be waiting to jump on that.
 
2014-05-08 04:06:52 PM

haemaker: Duke Nukem Forever.... oh wait, that did too.

We need new vaporware!


Half-Life 3.
 
2014-05-08 04:08:31 PM

whipbambucket: Handsome B. Wonderful: No one wants to buy a new TV every year.

For five times the cost of competitors....


WIth a smaller screen and half the features.  But the frame is gold coloured!
 
2014-05-08 04:12:16 PM

Endive Wombat: IMHO, the HDTV market at this point is too commoditized for it to make sense for Apple to deploy a smart HDTV.  I just do not see what they can bring to the market that other TV manufacturers, game consoles, and small streaming devices, including their own "Apple TV" can do...other than perhaps a pretty package...???  Unified functionality is not a selling feature to me.

Personally I see no compelling reason for an Apple HDTV.  Furthermore, I really hate the fact that it is impossible to buy a simple HD screen with no speakers, ZERO smart features, and nothing but a power cord and multiple HDMI inputs.  I (and I'm not alone) have invested a lot in my home entertainment system, and have multiple devices with multiple redundant applications (Apple TV/Roku, XBox/PlayStation, BluRay, etc).

A "fully loaded Smart, Feature Rich TV" does nothing for me other than cost more for features and functionality I do not need or want.

Finally, I find the idea of packaging all those features into one cohesive unit is concerning to me as if something goes bad on the separate board that runs the smart features dies, suddenly I may not be able to switch inputs or some other nonsense.

Feel free to oppose my opinion...

\I did not read the article in its entirety


You either want a projector, or a "monitor"
 
2014-05-08 04:18:33 PM
Apple thrives where it enters the market first and dictates the norms of the category.  They did it with the iPod, the iPhone, and the iPad.  Each of those products revolutionized categories (mp3 players, smartphones, tablets) that either didn't exist or existed in clunkier forms that the public had no interest in.  Right now, it's hard to see how Apple could make their mark on the television market, even if they were to produce a high-end television.  Until they have something they think will change how people use TVs, they're going to sit the market out because if there's one thing Apple hates, it's being perceived as unoriginal.
 
2014-05-08 04:19:35 PM
I agree with all these comments, but I think everyone is missing the big point: Content.

As much as people hate iTunes, it was successful because it integrated seamlessly with iPods, then with iPads.

I don't have cable. I've got a Roku and pay about $30/month between Netflix, Amazon and Hulu Plus. That meets my needs. When I can't find a show, I pay $1.99/episode on Amazon for what should be on regular cable.

For the subscription method to be viable, Apple would have to consolidate all the paid and non-paid content into one package. They did it with all the record companies because they were losing their shiat after Napster, Limewire, Bearshare and everything else coming out at that time. They were desperate for a way to monetize downloads.

As bad as it may be, there's now HBOGO. Netflix and Amazon are both making deals and Hulu is doing the same.

Unless Apple can find a way to monopolize "TV Apps", it's not worth rolling out a product. They're not making money on the devices; they're making money on the downloads.
 
2014-05-08 04:27:29 PM
Don't like 90% of large LCD Panels come from Samsung and Sony anyway? Could be them saying "fark you, not this market" to Apple.
 
2014-05-08 04:38:21 PM

shut_it_down: Apple thrives where it enters the market first and dictates the norms of the category.  They did it with the iPod, the iPhone, and the iPad.


Wut? ... Apple wasn't first with an MP3 player, a smart phone, or a tablet.
 
2014-05-08 04:39:48 PM

TuteTibiImperes: There are a lot of people who like the built-in smart-tv functionality, but while it may work great today, how well will it work with new services and streaming video formats in five, eight, or ten years?


I'm kind of worried about that. Every time Netflix announces some interface change I wonder if it will continue to work on my TV. Fortunately, my computer is hooked up to my TV so I can continue to watch if it breaks.

Dinjiin: I've noticed a couple of UHD/2180p televisions that have moved their cable inputs from the television housing to an external box in order to future proof their connectivity options.


You mean like a cable box? My smart TV has dick when it comes to cable. Sure, it can tune cable channels but it doesn't have a guide. That's kind of the strange thing, though. It has Netflix and Vudu but not a channel guide. I didn't mind my cable box. It wasn't particularly pretty but it had a remote IR receiver so I could tuck the box behind the entertainment center.
 
2014-05-08 04:42:47 PM

shut_it_down: if there's one thing Apple hates, it's being perceived as unoriginal.


Especially with acquired or purchased tech. I think swype is a local company - I read something in a local business journal where apple had a lot of interest but as soon as they found out swype had a deal for android phones apple was no longer interested in the product at all.
 
2014-05-08 04:43:28 PM
Devices in my house that can stream netflix.

My Tivo
My Television
My Blu-Ray Player
My XBOX 360
My PS3
My Nook
My Nexus 7
My phone
My laptop
My netbook
My desktop computer

The last thing I need is another "smart" device.

// I use the tivo for streaming now. Because it being on is a prerequisite for watching TV. The Tivo (also always on) is too slow/clunky because netflix was sort of shoehorned into it after the fact. And the XBOX360/PS3 means I would have to turn on an additional device.
 
2014-05-08 04:50:42 PM

lordargent: Devices in my house that can stream netflix.

My Tivo
My Television
My Blu-Ray Player
My XBOX 360
My PS3
My Nook
My Nexus 7
My phone
My laptop
My netbook
My desktop computer

The last thing I need is another "smart" device.

// I use the tivo for streaming now. Because it being on is a prerequisite for watching TV. The Tivo (also always on) is too slow/clunky because netflix was sort of shoehorned into it after the fact. And the XBOX360/PS3 means I would have to turn on an additional device.


Amen. I'm even sort of a tech head and have had smartphones and tablets and consoles out the ying yang. I just zone out when I hear 'smart tv'. I just assume it's a thing that will do things that I can already do with a bunch of other things. So, in closing... fark smart tv's.

/though if apple makes them, people will buy them, even if they cost twice as much.
 
2014-05-08 05:12:20 PM

JohnBigBootay: lordargent: Devices in my house that can stream netflix.

My Tivo
My Television
My Blu-Ray Player
My XBOX 360
My PS3
My Nook
My Nexus 7
My phone
My laptop
My netbook
My desktop computer

The last thing I need is another "smart" device.

// I use the tivo for streaming now. Because it being on is a prerequisite for watching TV. The Tivo (also always on) is too slow/clunky because netflix was sort of shoehorned into it after the fact. And the XBOX360/PS3 means I would have to turn on an additional device.

Amen. I'm even sort of a tech head and have had smartphones and tablets and consoles out the ying yang. I just zone out when I hear 'smart tv'. I just assume it's a thing that will do things that I can already do with a bunch of other things. So, in closing... fark smart tv's.

/though if apple makes them, people will buy them, even if they cost twice as much.


I use it for netflix streaming now (just cut the cord on cable and am going streaming). Saving about $70 a month.
,youtube (there are some decent HD science videos there)
,twitch on occasion (though the twitch app is a hack and not an official smart TV app).

The rest of the apps, I don't care about.

// Smart TVs are just TVs with shiatty proprietary HTPCs built in.
 
2014-05-08 05:13:20 PM

lordargent: The Tivo (also always on) is too slow/clunky because netflix was sort of shoehorned into it after the fact. And the XBOX360/PS3 means I would have to turn on an additional device.


Fun fact, TiVo is fundamentally slow because of they way it accesses its file system and manages context/menu/application changes.  Everything else is a result of those two things.
 
2014-05-08 05:33:05 PM

InterruptingQuirk: That TV is going to be real hit with the psychedelic crowd

[www.phil801.com image 800x800]


I feel like anything is possible...
 
2014-05-08 05:35:38 PM

Publikwerks: Endive Wombat: IMHO, the HDTV market at this point is too commoditized for it to make sense for Apple to deploy a smart HDTV.  I just do not see what they can bring to the market that other TV manufacturers, game consoles, and small streaming devices, including their own "Apple TV" can do...other than perhaps a pretty package...???  Unified functionality is not a selling feature to me.

Personally I see no compelling reason for an Apple HDTV.  Furthermore, I really hate the fact that it is impossible to buy a simple HD screen with no speakers, ZERO smart features, and nothing but a power cord and multiple HDMI inputs.  I (and I'm not alone) have invested a lot in my home entertainment system, and have multiple devices with multiple redundant applications (Apple TV/Roku, XBox/PlayStation, BluRay, etc).

A "fully loaded Smart, Feature Rich TV" does nothing for me other than cost more for features and functionality I do not need or want.

Finally, I find the idea of packaging all those features into one cohesive unit is concerning to me as if something goes bad on the separate board that runs the smart features dies, suddenly I may not be able to switch inputs or some other nonsense.

Feel free to oppose my opinion...

\I did not read the article in its entirety

Well, accept for the no speakers, not only is that available, I have one. There are plenty of them out there.


I can second this, I have one too.  It has zero features beyond playing TV (yes, it has speakers).  Its the bottom-of the line Toshiba.  Can't remember the model number, sorry.
 
2014-05-08 05:40:37 PM

foo monkey: lordargent: The Tivo (also always on) is too slow/clunky because netflix was sort of shoehorned into it after the fact. And the XBOX360/PS3 means I would have to turn on an additional device.

Fun fact, TiVo is fundamentally slow because of they way it accesses its file system and manages context/menu/application changes.  Everything else is a result of those two things.


IIRC, the recordings are prioritized over anything else ... and it's always recording.

Which is kind of what you want ... but the home media apps reach a new level of slowness and are basically not even worth the bother.
(not sure if this is still the case on the series 4s).
 
2014-05-08 05:41:24 PM
What I find ridiculous (besides what Endive Wombat has already said) is that they seem to be coming out with new TV's they want us to upgrade to every couple of years or so.

First it was buy a flatscreen TV.  Then buy a bigger flatscreen TV with a brighter screen.  Then it's buy a Flatscreen HDTV, now it's buy a Smart (Flatscreen) TV.

I frankly still have my regular old flatscreen, and we only got that maybe 3 years ago.  No need for "smart" features when I still can plug it into a DVD player, and I can use the Wii to run Amazon Prime and Netflix through it.  Why spend a thousand dollars or more on something to replace something that's working perfectly fine now?
 
2014-05-08 05:48:53 PM

lordargent: Devices in my house that can stream netflix.

My Tivo
My Television
My Blu-Ray Player
My XBOX 360
My PS3
My Nook
My Nexus 7
My phone
My laptop
My netbook
My desktop computer

The last thing I need is another "smart" device.

// I use the tivo for streaming now. Because it being on is a prerequisite for watching TV. The Tivo (also always on) is too slow/clunky because netflix was sort of shoehorned into it after the fact. And the XBOX360/PS3 means I would have to turn on an additional device.


Same here.  Between my Kindle Fire, my tablet, the travel laptop, my PC and the Xbox360 I'm set for all viewing needs wherever.  Even cut out cable since everything I watch is either on Hulu, Amazon streaming or Netflix, or will be there eventually.
 
2014-05-08 06:05:10 PM
I've had a Samsung HDTV for about 4 years or so now.  It can be connected to the network and does have all sorts of build in apps.  A browser, youtube and a few others.  The interface is clunky and slow.   But that is not the main problem.  The main problem is that nothing is ever farking updated.  Samsung's answer seems to be 'its been 2 years, time to buy a new 50" TV wingster!'.  Fark that.

Like up thread, I just want a big farking monitor with lots of inputs.  I'm fine with built in speakers.  I just need a good display panel.  I'm happy with a media PC or a appliance hooked HDMI to it.  At least that is build to get updates to media applications.  Its a hell of a lot easier to buy a new $100 appliance if you really have to than drop many multiples of that on a new large display.
 
2014-05-08 06:19:15 PM

Publikwerks: Well, accept for the no speakers, not only is that available, I have one. There are plenty of them out there.


It's generally hard to get the very best panels without having a bunch of other crap shoehorned in like SmartTV features and 3D. When I was buying my new TV a few years ago, I got the Samsung UN55D8000 because I couldn't get the same panel and the slim bezel without buying all the other extras. There needs to be a special line for home theater buyers that dispenses with all the extra fluff.

/Although, I did manage to get the Samsung for $1850 at Amazon with free home delivery, and the price for that line is still above $2000, even though the panel is only slightly better for the new ones.
 
2014-05-08 06:23:23 PM

Dinjiin: TuteTibiImperes: Samsung has had a neat idea where they package all of the 'smart' features into a user-replaceable box. Just buy and plug in a new 'evolution kit' and your TV gets a faster processor and all of the features of the new models. It's a cool idea, I'd just wonder about how long it will be supported. Will the TV I buy today be able to use an evolution kit I buy five years from now?

I've noticed a couple of UHD/2180p televisions that have moved their cable inputs from the television housing to an external box in order to future proof their connectivity options.  I imagine that it would be easy to do the same with the "smart" features.  Problem is, as you mentioned, how long will a proprietary platform last?  Would be nice if there was a VESA standard for interactive features.

And while the HD/1080p television market is saturated, the UHD/2180p market is not.  They might just be waiting to jump on that.


What they really need to do to make a smart TV useful is to integrate not just the smart features, but also  cable card slot and DVR functionality with a good interface. THAT would actually be useful because you could just hand the TV on the wall instead of having a bunch of boxes hanging off. Otherwise, a smart TV isn't every useful because every other box connected to it does the internet features better than the TV does. If you are going to need an external box for cable TV anyway, there's just no point to integrating anything else into the TV.
 
2014-05-08 06:24:52 PM

wingnut396: I've had a Samsung HDTV for about 4 years or so now.  It can be connected to the network and does have all sorts of build in apps.  A browser, youtube and a few others.  The interface is clunky and slow.   But that is not the main problem.  The main problem is that nothing is ever farking updated.  Samsung's answer seems to be 'its been 2 years, time to buy a new 50" TV wingster!'.  Fark that.

Like up thread, I just want a big farking monitor with lots of inputs.  I'm fine with built in speakers.  I just need a good display panel.  I'm happy with a media PC or a appliance hooked HDMI to it.  At least that is build to get updates to media applications.  Its a hell of a lot easier to buy a new $100 appliance if you really have to than drop many multiples of that on a new large display.


Both Panasonic and Sharp make "Professional Displays" that are just a panel in an enclosure without speakers.  Since they cater to the digital signage/newsroom/legacy connector market, some of them have switchable input cards that can be configured for RGB, HDMI, SCART, whatever.  Most come with at least a couple HDMI inputs - and if you have an HDMI-capable AV receiver you really only need one.  The nice part is they generally have ridiculously thin bezels since they don't have any unnecessary crap in them.

The downside is the price.  They generally cost more than a consumer TV, but they're built with better components.

An example:
http://www.panasonic.com/business/digital-signage/TH-42LF30U.asp
 
2014-05-08 06:41:55 PM

Ivo Shandor: haemaker: Duke Nukem Forever.... oh wait, that did too.

We need new vaporware!

Half-Life 3.


You're messing with my emotions there pal.
 
2014-05-08 06:47:38 PM

RottNDude: wingnut396: I've had a Samsung HDTV for about 4 years or so now.  It can be connected to the network and does have all sorts of build in apps.  A browser, youtube and a few others.  The interface is clunky and slow.   But that is not the main problem.  The main problem is that nothing is ever farking updated.  Samsung's answer seems to be 'its been 2 years, time to buy a new 50" TV wingster!'.  Fark that.

Like up thread, I just want a big farking monitor with lots of inputs.  I'm fine with built in speakers.  I just need a good display panel.  I'm happy with a media PC or a appliance hooked HDMI to it.  At least that is build to get updates to media applications.  Its a hell of a lot easier to buy a new $100 appliance if you really have to than drop many multiples of that on a new large display.

Both Panasonic and Sharp make "Professional Displays" that are just a panel in an enclosure without speakers.  Since they cater to the digital signage/newsroom/legacy connector market, some of them have switchable input cards that can be configured for RGB, HDMI, SCART, whatever.  Most come with at least a couple HDMI inputs - and if you have an HDMI-capable AV receiver you really only need one.  The nice part is they generally have ridiculously thin bezels since they don't have any unnecessary crap in them.

The downside is the price.  They generally cost more than a consumer TV, but they're built with better components.

An example:
http://www.panasonic.com/business/digital-signage/TH-42LF30U.asp


Use Samsung version at work in lieu of projectors.  They have one other great feature, 24/7 duty cycle.  You never have to turn them off.
 
2014-05-08 07:16:01 PM
Feel free to oppose my opinion...

since this is Fark...you sir are totally ghey and your opinion sucks big-bootay balls
 
2014-05-08 08:00:26 PM

BizarreMan: Then I figure out which inputs go where into the TV and then program my Harmony Remote to switch inputs based on what I'm doing.


I've been a Harmony convert for at least the past six years, but I wasted a bunch of money on the Harmony 1000 and it was a disaster.  The goddamn thing was slow, without buttons you couldn't switch channels quickly without looking at the remote, and I farking hated the thing.

The Harmony 650, however, is probably the best remote I've ever owned.  And since they're going for $49 refurbished, I've collected seven of them just in case the three I need go bad.  I could not be happier with any other remote.  It's farking fantastic.  And the "favorite Channels" you can program on the LCD screen make it idiot proof for visitors who don't have the channel lineup memorized.
 
2014-05-08 08:33:04 PM
No Subby, Chinese Democracy was a real project that somebody was working on. Apple's HDTV is rumors based on speculation based on hearsay based on totally made up shiat.

Most of the features people talk about for an Apple HDTV could be added to the little Apple TV box, which can be sold to anybody with an HDTV. Why would Apple bother making their own TV set?
 
2014-05-08 08:49:05 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again: the monitor part of a TV will outlast whatever "smart" features you include. Just give me a dumb monitor and let me plug whatever boxes I want into it.
 
2014-05-08 09:24:37 PM
A clue for the clueless:  Apple has never announced a TV.  Oh, they have also never announced a smart watch.  But it sure is funny to watch pundits and companies react as if they had.
 
2014-05-08 09:30:39 PM

gingerjet: shut_it_down: Apple thrives where it enters the market first and dictates the norms of the category.  They did it with the iPod, the iPhone, and the iPad.

Wut? ... Apple wasn't first with an MP3 player, a smart phone, or a tablet.


They were the first to perfect those products and actually make them desirable to consumers.
 
2014-05-08 09:48:43 PM

haemaker: GreenAdder: That's an unfair comparison. "Chinese Democracy" was eventually released.

Duke Nukem Forever.... oh wait, that did too.

We need new vaporware!


Don't worry, Half-Life 3 is here for you.
 
2014-05-08 09:52:26 PM

BizarreMan: Endive Wombat: IMHO, the HDTV market at this point is too commoditized for it to make sense for Apple to deploy a smart HDTV.  I just do not see what they can bring to the market that other TV manufacturers, game consoles, and small streaming devices, including their own "Apple TV" can do...other than perhaps a pretty package...???  Unified functionality is not a selling feature to me.

Personally I see no compelling reason for an Apple HDTV.  Furthermore, I really hate the fact that it is impossible to buy a simple HD screen with no speakers, ZERO smart features, and nothing but a power cord and multiple HDMI inputs.  I (and I'm not alone) have invested a lot in my home entertainment system, and have multiple devices with multiple redundant applications (Apple TV/Roku, XBox/PlayStation, BluRay, etc).

A "fully loaded Smart, Feature Rich TV" does nothing for me other than cost more for features and functionality I do not need or want.

Finally, I find the idea of packaging all those features into one cohesive unit is concerning to me as if something goes bad on the separate board that runs the smart features dies, suddenly I may not be able to switch inputs or some other nonsense.

Feel free to oppose my opinion...

\I did not read the article in its entirety

Amen.

Sound comes out of the surround system.  The first thing I do is turn off the internal speakers because they SUCK.

Then I figure out which inputs go where into the TV and then program my Harmony Remote to switch inputs based on what I'm doing.  All the TV ever does is power on/off, send audio out to the surround system, and switch inputs based on what I'm doing.


True dat.
 
2014-05-09 01:41:16 AM

GreenAdder: That's an unfair comparison. "Chinese Democracy" was eventually released.

Also, GnR was actually working on Chinese Democracy.
 
2014-05-09 02:41:29 AM
The decision at the Apple board room went like this:

Exec 1: "I think we should invent televisions next."

Exec 2: "I don't know. TVs have been around for like a century."

Exec 1: "So?"

Exec 2: "So they're not like smartphones or mp3 players. We can't just convince everyone we invented the TV."

Exec 1: "I think we should invent a little set-top box for the TV instead."

Exec 2: "Er...."

And that's how we got AppleTV.
 
2014-05-09 09:17:32 AM

Endive Wombat: Furthermore, I really hate the fact that it is impossible to buy a simple HD screen with no speakers, ZERO smart features, and nothing but a power cord and multiple HDMI inputs.


Heck, I don't even want multiple inputs. Just one single HDMI input and then use an AV receiver to handle all the input switching. It'd be nice to not have to have a bunch of cables running up to the tv but instead go to a box that can be placed in a cabinet or other out of the way location. Another possibility would be for the tv to not even have a power switch. If there is a signal on the HDMI cable, it's on. If not, it's off (ok, low power standby). The marketing departments of tv manufacturers are the enemy here. They're the ones who insist on stuffing tvs full of junk that adds little value but allows them something to advertise. Too bad they can't make the leap to competing on the physical aspects of the tv. They could get into wars on having the thinnest, lightest weight display. A 65" screen that can be hung on a pair of finishing nails? Sounds good. One that can hang using double sided tape? Even better.
 
2014-05-09 10:00:33 AM

karmachameleon: They were the first to perfect those products


No. All those products still have problems, that's why they are constantly updated and "made better."

karmachameleon: and actually make them desirable to consumers.


Yes. They are masters of marketing.
 
2014-05-09 11:11:21 AM
Some kid, in his 20s, was trying to tell me how "Apple TV is  going to be the next BIG THING".  This was two years ago, and he didn't like it when I laughed and explained that Apple has been touting Apple TV since the early 00s.  Kid then tells me I'm too old to understand technology.  I'm sorry, you snotty little shiat, but I've been in many flavors of I/T since the days you were filling your diaper.

/I've seen things
//Terrible things
///And things that never came to fruition
////Like Apple TV
 
2014-05-09 01:57:24 PM

Gary-L: Some kid, in his 20s, was trying to tell me how "Apple TV is  going to be the next BIG THING".  This was two years ago, and he didn't like it when I laughed and explained that Apple has been touting Apple TV since the early 00s.  Kid then tells me I'm too old to understand technology.  I'm sorry, you snotty little shiat, but I've been in many flavors of I/T since the days you were filling your diaper.

/I've seen things
//Terrible things
///And things that never came to fruition
////Like Apple TV


Next time, smack him upside the head with an AOL CD and be done with it.
 
2014-05-09 03:15:09 PM

karmachameleon: They were the first to perfect those products and actually make them desirable to consumers.


One man's "perfect" is another man's "why would you do this and why won't you let me change it?"
 
Displayed 50 of 56 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report