
Foxconn Chief Confirms The Apple iTV  - nikunjk
http://techcrunch.com/2012/05/11/foxconn-chief-confirms-the-apple-itv/
======
raganwald
Apple _must_ build an iTV. Remember XBox? Microsoft still hasn’t made its
investment back, but what it did do was buy them another decade of Windows
dominance on the desktop, because gaming consoles could have been the post-PC
devices that took over from PCs.

Now it turns out that phones and tablets are the post-PC devices, but thing
might be very different if everyone owned a Sony PlayStation that also
streamed movies and music into the home.

So what about Apple and their post-PC devices? If someone else figures out how
to replace televisions with a connected device, they can also roll sideways
into tablets and phones. If you subscribe to game of Thrones on your TV, you
are going to want to buy the tablet that integrates wit the TV so you can
watch an episode in your bed. You are going to want the phone that integrates
with it so you can use your phone as a remote... From anywhere in the world.

Apple cannot allow anyone else to make this happen. Either televisions need to
remain dumb terminals connected to coax, or Apple needs to own them. Apple
cannot sit on their hands and watch Google (or maybe Amazon) figure this out.

------
roc
Originally, I didn't see an argument for Apple getting into the TV _set_
business, when they could just continue to ship the stand-alone box. [1]

But the longer they go, being able to deliver eye-popping margins while
simultaneously being untouchable on price-performance with competing tablets
and PMP devices, the more it makes sense.

The AppleTV as-is, is price-bound by willingness to pay for add-on set-top
boxes. There's not much room for Apple-style profit there. [2] But consumer
willingness to spend on _TVs themselves_ is much higher.

If Apple brings their supply chain magic direct to displays, there's far more
profit to be had. And given the longer upgrade cycle on living-room gadgets,
the larger up-front margin is almost _necessary_ to make it worth Apple's time
in the long run. [3]

It just falls into place when you think about it in terms of Apple doing to
the TV market, what it did to mobile devices: they define a new set of
expectations at the mid-to-high price points that their competitors just can't
compete with. Their competitors still dominate the lower price-points with
notably lesser offerings, but there's not much profit there, so Apple just
won't care.

In short: it wouldn't be able Apple selling $1000 sets to compete with
Samsung's $400 sets. It'll be about Apple redefining the $1000 segment with
quality, integration and services that Samsung and Sony will be unable to
match for $1000, even on thinner margins.

[1] People don't upgrade their TVs like they do mobile devices or other
gadgets. It was possible they might upgrade a set-top box that way though.

[2] You can make Apple-level money selling $100 MP3 players with a 30% margin
because they get lost/damaged/upgraded/given as gifts/etc. But $100 set-top
boxes? Normal people (Apple's target market) barely buy them. And if they _do_
get one and it _works_ , they go out of their way to not change things to
avoid angering the vengeful spirits of living room electronics.

[3] The opportunity cost for Apple to pursue any middling business would be
massive. And at this point I'm sure they have plenty of evidence on whether
people buy and upgrade set-top boxes. If the early adopters aren't really
doing it, there's no hope the normals would.

------
mbreese
If the Foxconn chief said it, then that can only mean one thing - it will now
be built by Quanta.

------
necubi
TVs with integrated computers have never made much sense to me. How would this
ever be preferable to a set-top box, which, incidentally Apple already sells?
Good TVs are very expensive and people tend not to upgrade them very
frequently (10+ years seems commonplace). Whereas the computer components are
pretty cheap (~$100) and tend to get upgraded frequently. But few will buy a
$1200 TV every two years.

If you were Apple, would you rather sell a high margin, inexpensive product or
one that is low margin and very expensive?

As a counterpoint, the iMac suffers from these same issues to a lesser extent
and sells very well.

~~~
zach
A really great integrated TV experience could have, among other things:

\- WirelessHD with CoverFlow input selection (no rat's nest of wires, physical
input slots or keep-pressing-the-button input select)

\- an integrated AirPort (no cable-company modem/router)

\- Fully modular, wireless, THX sound that always works (even with Bluetooth
headphones)

\- Built-in Blu-Ray and program guide that don't suck

\- Siri, of course

\- Always-on AirPlay (regardless of input or power being off)

\- TV programming packages and customer service provided by Apple

And most importantly:

\- One remote, or an iPod touch, or an iPhone, or an iPad, and oh yes, the
iPad can watch ESPN while your TV is tuned to Dancing With The Stars.

~~~
rbanffy
All of it can be achieved with a set-top-box and a TV as long as you ignore
half of its electronics and use it as a dumb monitor.

~~~
zach
Yeah, and I think for most of here, there will be a "what's the big deal"
factor when it comes out.

Those of us who have no problem containing our video setup inside our head,
who have a Harmony remote, who have a mental picture of what goes where --
we're not really going to care that much. I think we'll appreciate a fully
integrated TV experience, but I don't think we're the people who will get
excited about it.

But let's put it this way, if you're staying at someone's house (i.e.
babysitting or housesitting), the one thing you must hold a debriefing session
on is how the TV, boxes and remote(s) work. That's kind of messed up. That's
where the big advantage is for an Apple TV set.

~~~
rbanffy
That's the point - a TV remote should have 2 buttons at most - input select
and on/off. And that's if selecting an input doesn't turn it on and selecting
"off" from the input list doesn't turn it off. Or none, if it turns on or off
according to the presence or absence of signals in its selected input.

The set-top-box remote, OTOH, could be no more complex than an Apple remote -
menu/back, play/select/pause, directions.

One day I'll try tearing out every button off my TV remote and leave just the
power and input buttons. Should be an interesting experiment.

------
andybak
Someone has to take this market. It's a mess. I've got a Boxee, XMBC, previous
has Windows Media Center and various other Windows based MCE's. I've looked at
Wii, XBox, PS3, XStreamer and a dozen other products and found them wanting.
I've followed YouView, Google TV and Apple TV with interest and mounting
disappointment over the lack of progress. My wallet is out for the first
product that does a good job at this.

I think it's the content producers that are mainly to blame for killing this
sector.

My Boxee has BBC iPlayer, my Wii has Netflix and I'd need to buy something
else if I wanted LoveFilm. Many video sites have stopped working on Boxee as
they require a version of Flash that isn't available for the Linux version
that Boxee uses and they don't have any alternative delivery mechanism.
LoveFilm switched to Silverlight to get the DRM strong enough to win over some
of their content suppliers.

It's crazy that I can't switch on a device that allows me to pay to stream any
film produced in the last 20 years, view the free-to-air programmes that I can
already watch on my TV set and play my local media collection with a half-
decent 10-foot interface.

~~~
mmodahl
Roku + Amazon for rentals + Hulu Plus for TV

 __edit: and then I realize you are British so you swap the BBC Player for
Hulu Plus and you are done.

~~~
andybak
Last time I looked Roku didn't do local media. Has that changed?

~~~
mmodahl
There are a few addons that are available. I've used Roksbox successfully for
a year or so.

~~~
andybak
Is this some official appstore add-on mechanism or does it require hackery?

------
IsaacL
From: t.cook@apple.com

To: gou.t@foxconn.com.cn

Subject: Re: leak

No worries. I understand how sneaky the press can be. Why, just now I
accidentally let slip to a WSJ journalist about what really happened to your
Chengdu workers. But no-one in China reads the American press, so no problem,
right?

===

From: t.cook@apple.com

To: leekh@samsung.kr

Subject: Re: Masterplan

It's all going well. As we suspected, Foxconn can't be trusted; it looks
you're our only _true_ Asian manufacturing partner. Good thing we only gave
them the plans for the fake prototypes -- can't believe the fools think a
better TV is our next revolutionary advance.

PS: Love the latest prototypes you sent us. Not sure about the name though.
iBrain? Also we'll have to go back to using monkeys as test subjects -- only
thing I'll miss about our Chinese ex-partners is their supply of expendable
humans. And lemme know when the new chips are done; Johnny's itching to
finally test his iTelepathy app.

------
beedogs
I really don't see how they're going to differentiate themselves in a market
that's already so well established. I probably said this about the iPhone,
too, but... this time it makes even less sense.

~~~
ben1040
I can think of a few ways:

1) Siri integration.

"Let's watch the Cardinals game." "What movies are on HBO tonight?" "Facetime
with my mother."

2) Convergence with other iOS devices/tools. iMessage/FaceTime on your TV.
AirPlay mirroring. Play your stuff off iTunes. Remote control from your
existing iOS device.

3) Well known, deep catalog of music/video content for purchase or rent.

If it works well, it'd be huge.

------
9999
Carson? Doesn't he mean Sullivan?

------
Someone
Let's assume this is correct: will that TV do 3D?

If so: how? I do not see Apple requiring goggles.

If not: will it be the reason the product fails or, if it succeeds, what does
that mean for the future of 3D?

------
commieneko
Apple invents "The Telescreen: for the rest of us."

(I've already got a laptop with microphone and camera in my living room ... )

------
ahlemk
Sweet! competition is on with Google TV

~~~
lbotos
Google isn't making displays at this point, are they? I think this is talking
about an actual TV display not a set-top box.

~~~
CrazedGeek
Strictly speaking no, but LG's going to release TVs with integrated Google TV
systems in a couple weeks. ( [http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/07/net-
us-google-lg-i...](http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/07/net-us-google-lg-
idUSBRE84602Y20120507) )

(And [like jsight said] Sony released a couple also, although they're
apparently focusing on set-top boxes now:
[http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/09/sonys-second-try-at-
googl...](http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/09/sonys-second-try-at-google-tv-
brings-blu-ray-player-streaming/) )

