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."

Wi Fi and Security?

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?

Re:Wi Fi and Security?

Welcome to GoatseTV.

Distended anus, 24/7.

Re:Wi Fi and Security?

Great, another channel with crappy programming.

Re:Wi Fi and Security?

I think you are indeed paranoid. I guess it wouldn't be any different from anything else that's got a wireless connection. Including your laptop.
Unless I'm the one that's not paranoid enough.

This is silly

Furthermore, the very idea of hacking into someone's TV to display images on it is pure Hollywood sci-fi.

Think about it for a moment. Even on a completely open network, even imagining some wacky DAAP overflow exploit existing on this imaginary Apple product that allowed local peers to execute arbitrary code over the WLAN, you're talking many minutes of patiently sitting outside, dutifully screwing around in a shell.

No one's going to hack your TV unless they can just drive by, hit a "HACK" button on their la

Re:

Yeah, hence the 'GoatseTV' quip.

But I'm only commenting to point out how much the thinkgeek advertisement I got when expanding this post bothers me. "MORE FLEXIBLE SCREWING". Yeah, just the mental image I needed on a Saturday morning. Thanks a lot.

if they did away with the need for the computer...

...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

Re:

Yeah wait what?

My windows media center box does that now... with the remote, and the buying and selling, and the bsods. It also does TV, epg, timeshifting, etc. Its also a laptop with a $90 usb dvb-t dongle so I can pick it up and take it on a plane. And apart from installing the crappy korean drivers for the dongle, it all worked out the damn box.

Also full length movies are only like 30c more expensive than the local rental joint (probably less than the fuel cost to get there), and you DRM-Rent them for a

Re:

You're venting on Apple because a random blogger - not Apple mind you - used the term 'internet tv'?

Also, you readily, ever gleefully, admit on Slashdot that you have 'windows media center' as your primary laptop OS.

-1, WTF?

Re:if they did away with the need for the computer

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.

Re:if they did away with the need for the computer

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.

Re:

From the "No-wireless-Less-space-than-a-nomad-Lame" department:

you replace specialized hardware with generalized hardware, not the other way around.

Which explains why the Nomad totally kicked the iPod's ass.

Seriously: technology enthusiasts make choices from different criteria than most of the market. For most, ease of use and aesthetic appeal are much more important than flexibility as long as the device does its primary task well.

Yep

Phillips showed one off back in 2004 [pcworld.com]. A very quick search turns up several [digitrexusa.com] good examples [sharpusa.com] 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.

Re:Yep

That won't stop the Apple fanbois from drooling and going "OMG STEVE'S SUCH A GENIUS!" and acting like Apple invented it, though.

You're missing the point. Not inventing something for the first time, never stopped Apple from dominating the market with their own version.

The key asset here is iTunes. iTunes is the first store of its kind to enjoy simplicity, availability and mass support by content providers and consumers alike.

When other companies add networking, WMV playback and photos slideshows to their TV-s, you have a set of possible uses for that, especially if you're a geek, but you need to figure it out on your own.

When Apple puts iTunes in a TV, you have a complete product your entire family can sit back and use out-of-the-box.

Re:

Plus they could feedback system where viewers can say how good or bad they thought the movie was, and call it iRate.

I'm of two minds here

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).

Re:

"2. Not everybody has a computer, but everybody has a TV"

This is an argument for people buying a TV?

Re:I'm of two minds here

It sounds like... just maybe... you bought the wrong mac. Just a thought.

no thanks

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

Re:no thanks

rumor has it you can play all the mpeg4 content you want (and more) on a mac. the DRM only comes into play if you actually buy content... having the option to legally buy content is nice sometimes you know.

besides MS has shown its willing to please content providers over consumers disallowing recording of certain content.

The Apple cycle...

1. Rumours circulate of Apple developing flying cars (iFly) teleportation (iHopeTheresNoFly) and tabletop cold fusion (damn, MacFusion is taken!)
2. Apple announces press event
3. Mac fanbois approach orgasm. Badly photoshopped images of imagined products appear and are taken seriously.
4. More plausible photos of faster Macs with slightly bigger trackpads and new colour options for iPods appear and are dismissed by tumescent fanbois as badly photoshopped fakes.
5. Apple launches faster Macs with slightly bigger trackpads and new colours of iPods.
6. MacHaters proclaim the failure to deliver imaginary unannounced products as a sign that Apple is doomed. Fanbois are briefly disappointed, but this is dispelled by the comforting ritual of the unboxing ceremony when their new pink iPod arrives.
7. Rumours appear that Apple is developing holographic TV (iStrain), faster-than-light wormhole travel (iHole) and an intelligent pop-up toaster that actually works (iWatchTooMuchRedDwarf). Badly photoshopped pictures of perfectly browned bread products appear on macrumors.com...

News about possible news?

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"...)

Re:Wrong market for Apple to be in

You know, except for Apple the PC market has pretty thin margins :)

Re:Wrong market for Apple to be in

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...

Re:Multitouch?!?!

Yes, because having finger prints all over the TV screen is just what everyone wants to improve their viewing experience.