Slashdot Mirror
CNET UK Credits Claim That Apple Will Release Networked TVs
r2k writes "While the Apple rumours posted yesterday highlight some of the most commonly talked-about opinions, a writer for CNet UK sat down with Mahalo's Jason Calacanis, who told CNet he knew for a fact that Apple is developing fully networked LCD TV sets. As the writer points out, Apple dropped 'Computer' from its company name for a very good reason."
TFA does not tell more except it is 802.11n. Not sure whether I am paranoid, but will anybody on road will be able to hack in my TV and show something I don't want to see?
hilarious
...they could open up a whole new market.
i see a net-equipped TV, with a minimal ARM-based computer built-in, running a lightweight itunes; shows are bought and played entirely with the remote, which has a simple kb for searching for stuff and entering credit card info.
owners could then download shows straight to the tv, which has an upgradable hard drive/flash module
people don't necessarily want a computer, they want to watch tv
On one hand it's a logical progression: integrate an AppleTV into an LCD screen, analogue to an iMac. On the other hand, you'd expect the TV to be usable long after the computer has become obsolete, so you end up with a TV that contains useless parts (and knowing Apple, limited options for connecting other peripherals).
You know, except for Apple the PC market has pretty thin margins :)
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Which is exactly why they add value by building in an HD content delivery system...
Why buy a TV, and a Blu-Ray player, and a load of discs when you can buy AppleTV and rent/buy your content without levering your fat ass off the couch?
Now how much would you pay...? :)
Sure, the margins on LCD TVs are low, but if someone says they can save $300 or more by not needing an HD source, they might pay almost that for a shiny Apple logo...
Liked this comment? Why not buy me something nice
Phillips showed one off back in 2004. A very quick search turns up several good examples with varying features and capability.
That won't stop the Apple fanbois from drooling and going "OMG STEVE'S SUCH A GENIUS!" and acting like Apple invented it, though.
i don't want DRM in my TV set
btw I recently got a big LCD and hooked up the x360 to it, now i get to enjoy all the 1080p goodness without paying a cent for content thanks to usenet and x360 being able to play HD mpeg4 :) oh and you get a games console on side :P
Yes, because having finger prints all over the TV screen is just what everyone wants to improve their viewing experience.
By reading this signature, you hereby agree with the content of the above comment.
This is precisely the opposite of what we want.
People don't want a TV OR a computer, they want to watch/see media. The TV is only a screen with built in receiving components. So separate the screen from the components, and you end up with a controller and a screen. The pc is the best controller possible. It's upgradeable not just in hardware but also software, to enable upgrades of both types of technology while keeping the same display.
You should be able to choose which software you use to manage your media, not just blindly accept whatever comes down the pipe. Your suggestion seems to accept that big media will run the (video based) internet.
Not for me thanks. I'd prefer the stream to be open and I choose what to view. Letting the media companies decide what content my device can view is not an option. If companies want to cater for people who want an easy life then let them cater to that market with simple locked down boxes, but I should be able to build a device to my specs too, and still be able to access the big media content.
Building a set proprietary functionality into a display device is backward.
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
I entirely agree - that's two articles in a row now that's not been about actual news, but news - based on rumour - that they might make some announcement in future. Why not just wait until the actual news itself?
There are enough perfectly good articles about actual news that get rejected - why take up valuable space on the page with posts based on rumour about vaporware, that will either turn out to be dupes if the thing's released, or false if it's not?
(On another note, anyone noticed tagging recently seems to be broken in any browser except Firefox? I now have to wait for that to load, in order to tag the article "Vaporware"...)
exactly. there will be a convergence of the TV with the PC, but it's not the PC that will be replaced. you replace specialized hardware with generalized hardware, not the other way around.
right now we have a bunch of redundant communication networks and hardware appliances. we have radios, telephones, and TV all using very specialized communications networks, and all running on application-specific hardware. but with the widespread adoption of broadband internet access, there's no need to have different communications infrastructure for sending audio data for radios, audio data for telephones, and video and audio data for TV, when all of this data can be transmitted digitally over the internet. soon all of these parallel technologies will be merged into the more generalized/flexible internet.
it's more efficient to run a single generalized data network like the internet than having a bunch of parallel application specific networks because it allows for better allocation of resources and eliminates redundant infrastructure. not only that, but the internet is also an open/democratic network (at least while there's net neutrality). like the computer for which the internet was originally developed, it gives users complete freedom of access, which is a stark contrast with the closed proprietary networks of traditional radio/TV/telecom. this decentralization of media distribution allows independent artists, musicians, film producers, etc. to reach billions of users around the globe without having to go through the traditional distribution channels which are tightly controlled by a handful of media conglomerates.
it's become harder and harder for big TV networks like NBC or radio networks such as Clear Channel to act as the gatekeepers of information. because of this, we're seeing a free culture developing where cultural contribution isn't a privilege reserved for major label artists, Hollywood studios, or corporate execs that have up until now decided what the public watches on TV. neither Apple nor anyone else is going to convince consumers to go back to the cultural bondage of pre-internet media.
a LCD TV is simply an LCD monitor with a built-in tuner card. why buy a TV and a set-top box when you can just have an HTPC or media center pc that can be used to check e-mail, surf the web, burn DVDs, play games, etc., etc.? a computer with a tuner card can watch both, regular TV as well as internet video streams like Miro (Democracy Player). it just doesn't make sense to replace the computer with a locked down and functionally crippled equivalent.
i imagine that once open wireless internet access becomes a common public infrastructure across the country we'll start seeing AM/FM radio being replaced by portable smart devices that can stream internet radio. people want freedom of choice, so that's the direction that media convergence will take.
How long before someone figures out how to jailbreak the TV and reload it with Mythbuntu?
Then it might actually be useful.
If the iPod and iPhone are any indication, I don't want the gilded cage of an Apple TV set.