If Apple Ships A Flat Screen Apple TV In 2012, Would You Buy One?

[Gareth]

Uncle Wig wrote:
We did that too - but it's a poor workaround unless your tv is near your computer or you want to do A LOT of printing of solid black pages!

The obvious answer to your problem is an iPad.

[RAMd®d]

Is there some assumption that we all NEED a new TV?

I didn't see one. Why do you ask? The question was really straight forward.


All they can do ultimately is show "TV" on it. I can't imagine what the big deal could be.

And that's the difference between us and Steve. He apparently did. Now that still will not wow some people. They will rush to loudly proclaim "UNDERWELMED!" showing how disinterested they are, or how Steve once again FAILED because only 90% of the target market liked the product. Or it might not sell at all. We'll know when we know.


Have you set up a new tv lately, one that has built in wi-fi and networking, surround, 3d, etc?

Hey, even older TVs such as my Sony XBR32 and the early rear projection TVs had daunting menus and instruction manuals that always managed to leave out some tidbits or not explain proprietary lexicon. As if Industry Standard Lexicon wasn't confusing enough to the consumer.


However, I always download a PDF User Manual on an item I am interested in buying.

I've done likewise on occasion, otherwise I prefer to DRTFM it. But isn't that just a *little* geeky? How many of our parents or even other people who don't use/play with computers would even know how to find a pdf, or even know that they could? A lot of people still think that TVs are plug n play. Silly rabbits.


I just got a tv hooked up to Comcast's doohickie... blah, blah, blah

Really? That's what you're going with?

More than a fews people would look at a Comcast whatever or a Roku and say "HUH?!" "WHAT Tab A, WHAT Slot B??" let alone know about Plex and where to find it. Let's not pretend that if something had gone awry with your installs, the first thing you'd do is call India for some hand holding. Let's own up to the fact that your familiarity with tech gear, limited as it may be (doohickie, whatzit) would be enough for you to try to figure it out and maybe even ask questions here or Google for info, before gnashing of teeth and uncontrollable wailing set in.

Comcast modems may just about be a household phrase, but WDS, Netflix and Hulu on TV, and TV menus are still Greek to a lot of folks. I can't tell you how many TVs I've scene in the homes of friends with the picture still at Pop! setting used in store demos, and maybe with just a liiiiitle too much orange in the skin tones. Yeah, there are consumers that are more TV tech savvy, but I don't think they're a significant percentage of the viewing audience.

I think *most* people in the market for a TV today just don't realize what they should know about TVs before they go shopping and are susceptible to information overload and slick sales people. Of course we can laugh at them because we're so much smarter and superior.

If there is an Apple TV (and not an AppleTV) and it does for TVs and TV viewing what the iPod and iPad did for music and tablet computing, I'm in.

Currently, for me, HDTV is 720p (and occasionally 1080p) video served up on my mini and LED ACD. I'd like 1080p on a 42-46" screen, to start. Then I could off my CRT Sony and DTA converter.

So yeah, I'm interested in what this might be, if it ever is.

But it's way too soon for me to take the shot.

[GGD]

RAMd®d wrote:
Is there some assumption that we all NEED a new TV?

I didn't see one. Why do you ask? The question was really straight forward.

Because none of the poll choices really apply to "I'm not in the market for any TV because I don't need one".

The closest is "No. It will be blank, or blank, or maybe even blank. Not in my future at all. ", but that seems to imply that the rejection is due to something about this hypothetical product rather than lack of need.

[guitarist]

RAM's points are good, and reveals why there's a big open spot in the market for a TV that can take it to the next level, make it as fun and easy to set up as what iPods and iPads did for their bazillions of fans.

TVs obviously are far less disposable and have way less turnover than laptops tablets and phones. Even those of us who want one aren't going to ditch our TVs and go buy one, it may take 3-5 years to see the adoption rate start to develop. It'd be interesting to see Apple perform in a market like this, with a very different, much longer product adoption and turnover rate. I can only guess that it's the firmware updates and iOS updates that will determine how they evolve, rather than rapid hardware replacement schedules.

What's the typical lifespan of a TV? Compared to a computer or phone? Four times as long? Five times as long? 6, 7 years? Ten years, for some people? A much different market to compete in.

[deckeda]

I didn't really think Apple would consider making a TV up until a few days ago, but now I understand it's just inevitable melding of computers and TV tech. The other day Visio announces PCs. Now Lenovo has a TV coming, and with Android 4.

The ingredients have been here for a few years now---these are just large [LCD, usually] computer monitors with some dedicated software built in.

I think all the computer makers are poised to change how TV work. Apple knows how to write great software and iOS is expected there. Everyone else will run their TVs on Android, because it's the only other OS that's ready to go that's designed to perform major, but simple tasks with only a button press or two.

Two years from now when these things have taken over the market MS will get around to making a version of Win Mobile to do the same, and use their relationships with the PC name to push aside some of the Android TVs.

[Sam3]

The problem with RAM's points are that Apple will not cater to the average mom and pop, the grandparent, the less tech savvy. Apple has always catered to the premium end of the electronics industry, but the people who buy at that end are already pretty tech savvy. The average joe, the one who's TV's are set to basic settings, who don't understand the awful TV UI, buy the low-end TV's, they don't have the money or see the value of the premium brands.

[michaelb]

i wasnt thinking that simplifying setup would be apples new innovation. i would guess more along the lines of getting content from a computer onto a tv.

[Grateful11]

I was pleasantly surprised at how easy it was setup our little over a year old 55" Vizio was. I thought with the fancy
Bluetooth remote with a slide out keyboard it would be a real PITA but it was the easiest one I've setup yet. The built
in WiFi was nothing more than putting putting in the WPA2 PW and that took care of that. Everything just clicked, I can
control the DVR and the Panasonic BluRay with the remote and it basically programmed itself for those.

I still believe I could rip all of our DVD collection, load them on iTunes to the current AppleTV and I would be set. That
would be so cool to be able to instantly pull up one of about 300 or 400 movies at will.

[mrbigstuff]

I get all my TVs for free, so probably not ;-)

[Uncle Wig]

silvarios wrote:
[quote=Uncle Wig]We did that too - but it's a poor workaround unless your tv is near your computer or you want to do A LOT of printing of solid black pages!

Solid black pages? Why would you print solid black pages? Why would you need to print very many pages at all? Are you really calibrating/configuring every single feature?
Why should I have to print any pages at all? The point is, an E-manual in place of a printed manual is a poor idea. You're also missing that if I hadn't been there, my dad's experience would have been even worse. Like a lot of older people, he is less tech savvy than the population of this forum (although he tries).