Posted on 11/18/2012 2:24:20 PM PST by Hojczyk
The debate rages on as to whether this product will be a success. Some people argue that Apple should not even attempt to bring out such a device in a crowded market.
Apple needs this item for one reason and one reason only: to sell in the Apple stores. There is room for it there, and the company can get the full benefit of not sending the device through distribution channels, affording it price competitivity and high margins.
Other companies have smartened up their TV offerings with some amazing capabilities. It’s not unusual for any of the brands including Sony SNE
But none of these companies has a clue how to promote or even demo these nifty features. Worse, there is no standard way of doing any of the special features. Apple can fix that with this unit.
Soon everyone will be riding Apple’s coattails extolling the virtues of features that they had all along.
Apple should be able to maintain product differentiation with the design team not only making what will probably be a gorgeous TV but one with unique and easy-to-use capabilities. This means the transition to IPTV and other streaming mechanisms will be seamless.
Meanwhile, once released it will have a secondary impact: People will want to see the device but will have to go to the stores to do so. This increases store traffic, resulting in higher and higher numbers. If shoppers buy the TV, great; if not, maybe they will buy something else. You now have them in the store.
So the naysayers who continue to think that Apple should not bring out this device because the market is too crowded with cheap TVs are all missing the point. This is part of an elaborate money-making strategy.
(Excerpt) Read more at marketwatch.com ...
Hey, if Apple fanboys want to pay $1000.00 for what is otherwise a $500.00 TV on the normal market, they should be free to do so. You certainly won’t catch me buying a horribly overpriced TV though. Nice to still have choices - until the gubmit takes over the consumer electronics market.
Well, I am an Apple “fan granny”, living on a minimal income. I have given up the “cable packages”, because there isn’t much worth watching.
Depending on how this TV is structured, how they offer channels (individually vs. packaged), it might pay for itself in just a few months.
We shall have to wait and see.
In the words of John Kerry(who served in Viet Nam) I say:”Bring it on.”
Heck, even a rumor of such a venture should send the stock spiraling downward.
We cut the cable cord about 4 years ago. Streaming options from NetFlix and Amazon Prime handle most of our requirements, with a network DVR to record and play any over the air shows we want to watch. I think the only thing really missed is Food Network.
With a current generation TV, it’s already set up to stream video from a wide variety of sources and sites using wireless home networking.
I so agree. They charge you a fortune for the same programs they rerun over and over making it look like its something new. They also run movies you already have seen on your movie channels included in movie packages on the premium pay channels. Can we say fraud?
It’s about as stupid as coming out with an oversized smartphone with data but no voice, isn’t it? Will those rubes never catch on? Jeez.
They oughta hire people who know everything. Like yourself.
Vietnam? Does that rhyme with Genghis Khan?
Yeah, one stupid product decision after another has gotten Apple into the mess it’s in today. Apple never gets it right — they have no idea how to produce products people want, and they have no idea how to market anything.
Oh wait ....
How long have you worked for Microsoft?
There are a lot of value in locking people in Apple’s garden. In the short term, it may be better for margins to sell other things.
However, by getting them signed up for Apple TV, people will have to buy those things anyway, it’s better oclver the long term.
Same idea when Kodak used to give their cameras away so people buy the film.
Just flinging poo and hoping it sticks, happens with every new product intro from Apple. If Microsoft can be said to have an “ecosystem” at all, it’s populated with MS Certified cranks who come running like lemmings to trash the very product of which they’ll be extolling the virtues once somebody other than Apple figures out how to do it like Apple did.
Like clockwork, every time.
They still haven’t quite figured out how intentionally disruptive Apple is, in any new market segment they choose to enter. All they see is TV? How stupid, there are tons of TV manufacturers. They do not look at the Rube Goldberg contraptions requiring multiple remotes, they do not look at the ancillary uses into which a very large, very high quality monitor could be applied, they do not look at the content delivery that everyone loves to hate.
I think they’ll do quite well with it, but not in the established, orthodox ways that “television” and “cable” are viewed. They’re all about reslicing the pie, disintermediation of middlemen and delivering a revolutionary improvement in the experience, utility and ease of use of the device as well as the content.
There’s a very big “duh” moment coming, from several quarters, none of which have the capacity to capitalize or even compete without major acquisitions and scrambling.
How long have we been waiting for *the* iPad killer now? Three years?
Like clockwork, every time.
Yes, Microsoft fans nitpick and trash-talk every Apple device that comes out. And then when Microsoft copies it two years later it's a wonderful idea. I've seen this from the early days. MS fans trashed the mouse and GUI, saying it was for kids and would never be on a real PC. On and on over the years. iPod, a toy; then the Zune comes out. iPhone, likewise; now Microsoft phone. iPad, no one will buy it; now the Surface. If Apple is so bad why does Microsoft continually copy them? Success breeds imitation.
Anyway, I agree with another poster. Just get a TV box like Apple TV or Roku, and connect to any HD TV for under $100. You don't need to buy a new big HD set from Apple to get the features with your existing HD TV.
The thing is, there is no $500 alternative on the market. At least not yet. Look at the retina display capabilities on Apple laptop computers. That resolution far exceeds that of regular HD TV sets. I would expect a new offering from Apple to have capabilities mirroring their high-end monitors. You can hook up a computer to an HD TV and use it as a monitor, but you will be limited to inferior HD or 700i resolution. Samsung sells some excellent HD TVs that work well as monitors for computers. But if you want retina display quality with four times the resolution as HD or better, then Apple may be the ticket for now. I may be wrong; if so, please point out existing higher than HD resolution TVs on the market for $500.
How strange. No I-Pad? No MacBook Pro? No I-Pod? No I-Phone? You need to reevaluate your life. How do you live without some of those? I am actually serious. The I-Pad and IPod specifically?
Nope,Sony laptop.Great machine.
No MacBook Pro?
Nope,see above
No I-Pod?
Nope,Creative MP3 player.Great machine.
No I-Phone?
Nope,Samsung Anroid.Love it.
Plus I have 2100 songs burned onto my car's hard drive,very handy.
In fact,I live quite nicely,electronically speaking.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.