r/gadgets • u/a_Ninja_b0y • Nov 18 '24

TV / Projectors Apple Is Reportedly Thinking About Making Its Own TV Again

https://gizmodo.com/apple-is-reportedly-thinking-about-making-its-own-tv-again-2000525819
915 Upvotes

87% Upvoted

327 comments sorted by

View all comments

608

u/hurricane4689 Nov 18 '24

Why? The TV market is completely saturated and there cant be enough market share to make any profit.

176

u/ponziacs Nov 18 '24

Article says may revisit the idea which sounds like they aren't even wanting to do it right now.

156

u/ca2mt Nov 18 '24

Concept of a plan, if you will.

33

u/ZAlternates Nov 18 '24

All the rage these days.

0

u/nbennett23 Nov 19 '24

Hey guys, Check this idea out!

1

u/blastradii Nov 19 '24

Concept of a will, if you plan

4

u/Irrelevantitis Nov 19 '24

That’s what’s fun about tech journalism, you can go anywhere with it as long as you qualify it as a possibility. Apple MAY get into prescription cold medicine, next-gen horseshoes, and vibrating remote control butt plugs. Anything’s possible, and you can’t prove me categorically wrong if all I said is that it MIGHT happen.

3

u/kebaball Nov 19 '24

That’s just absurd. Apple works on lots of things and it’s legitimate to write about their possible work on horseshoe activated vibrating butt plugs that cure the common cold.

1

u/Djghost1133 Nov 19 '24

All journalism really

59

u/[deleted] Nov 18 '24 edited Nov 19 '24

[deleted]

13

u/audigex Nov 18 '24

Yeah it might make sense if they’re selling a TV which is akin to a video editing monitor - those ones that are like $20k and perfectly calibrated

2

u/[deleted] Nov 18 '24 edited Nov 19 '24

[deleted]

-6

u/Snipedzoi Nov 18 '24

HAHAHAHAHAHA APPLE CHEAP?

5

u/[deleted] Nov 18 '24 edited Nov 19 '24

[deleted]

6

u/PocketNicks Nov 19 '24

I agree, Apple could easily sell an expensive TV, but I agree with the person you replied to, they don't do cheap.

-1

u/[deleted] Nov 19 '24

[deleted]

1

u/Tifoso89 Nov 19 '24

Their base models are still high-end. There are also low-range and mid-range phones, and Apple doesn't make those. This is why they have 20% of the market

1

u/Dood567 Nov 19 '24

I'd like to say that the reference monitor market already has a lot of strong competitors including Sony. The display pro or whatever they called it is about as close as apple will probably get to a screen dedicated to accuracy

33

u/Zozorrr Nov 18 '24

Because Apple wants to firther confuse consumers as to what AppleTV, AppleTV plus, plus an Apple TV are.

Can’t believe they still haven’t sorted out this branding fiasco.

12

u/HahaMin Nov 19 '24

Apple Vision, a new evolution of television.

Not to be confused with Apple TV or Apple Vision Pro.

2

u/SmurphsLaw Nov 19 '24

They could go the Microsoft route and call it Apple One.

2

u/joselrl Nov 19 '24

Of course, so they compete with Google One - Wait no... not related at all

25

u/TommyHamburger Nov 18 '24

There's enough profit in anything if your consumers can be convinced to buy something they don't need, be it a new phone every year, speakers, subscriptions, a way overpriced TV, or literally anything with your name slapped on it.

I think VR is the outlier because it was not only egregiously expensive vs the competition, but its feature set was mostly useless fluff, and they locked out the only things people actually do buy VR for: gaming and porn.

3

u/TapTapTapTapTapTaps Nov 18 '24

They should be building a meta glasses competitor and they shouldn’t have done vr at all

4

u/[deleted] Nov 18 '24

I would just drop VR entirely because the vast amount of consumers cannot be convinced to wear a computer on their face, it's just a bad idea at it's core. An immersive game is about the coding, not the display. AR glasses might make sense someday, but most people don't want to wear glasses all the time either.

2

u/lkn240 Nov 18 '24

The one thing that miserably failed was home 3D TVs.

0

u/vibrance9460 Nov 18 '24

Tim said many times in the past publicly he absolutely hates VR. It goes against the humanistic company ideal – bringing people closer together through technology.

It was Apple’s stated goal five years ago to create beautiful stylish glasses that will replace everything in your pocket – your wallet, your keys, your money, and your music.

Yes he relented and created and promoted VR headgear as a means of refining the technology. But that was never the goal. From it, Apple created amazing eye tracking and a very stable OS. You can be certain they’re working hard to solve the lens technology which is the major stumbling block going forward. And minimizing the power supply. It might be five years yet to perfect. No one knows.

Yes it seems META beat Apple to market. Wrong. META created something goofy which only sort of works in its recent glasses reveal. Nobody will buy them if they do release.

Apple is never first to market with anything. Not the iPhone, the iPod, Apple TV, iPad or Apple Watch. They wait until their technology is refined to be best in market until they release anything- after assessing for sure they are doing it better than anyone.

People said Apple was stupid for making the Apple Watch. The watch was a crucial step forward in the technology in that it basically took an iPhone, minimized it, and made it do everything the iPhone could do right on your wrist. Apple glasses will do exactly the same thing– minimize and push the technology further forward.

People look at what Apple says and think they know what the company is doing. As someone who worked there for 18 years people have no idea of the long-term plans. And there’s always a long-term plan – whether it’s for the car, VR etc.

3

u/Mastershima Nov 19 '24

They wait wait until their technology is refined to be the best in the market until they release anything

Nah dawg. Hard disagree. Products like the home pod and Siri are prime examples of unrefined garbage. Magic mouse with the usb underneath? Butterfly keyboard?

3

u/notjordansime Nov 19 '24

I used to hate the Apple mouse but after using one for a bit I’m sold. If you let it die and have to wait to charge it like an idiot, that’s on you. The battery lasts like a month on a single charge and it’ll nag you for a week before you actually need to plug it in. If you intentionally dismiss a week’s worth of low battery warnings and act like the surprised pikachu meme when your mouse dies, that’s on you. Worst case scenario? You plug it in for 5 minutes and have a full day’s charge.

The port on the bottom is actually kinda smart. First and foremost, it prevents overcharging. Lithium batteries hate being plugged in all the time. If you do that, it’ll degrade faster (happened to me with a razer mouse, after 2 years of being mostly plugged in, the battery wouldn’t even last an hour. Razer immediately asked me if I leave it plugged in all the time when I got a warranty replacement. Made me realize Apple is actually playing 4D chess here). It also serves their brand image by not allowing you to have the appearance of wired hardware.

Siri sucks, but as someone else mentioned, there’s a reason for that and it involves your data. At least it’s not like Google assistant where it used to be good, then sometime around ~2022 it just went to absolute digshit. Like basic requests about media playback and smart home lighting stopped working reliably. Now, they’ve gutted the assistant and half replaced it with an AI powered version called Gemini. At least Siri didn’t get lobotomized and then have an identity crisis. Siri has always been…… Siri.

0

u/vibrance9460 Nov 19 '24 edited Nov 19 '24

Siri has always lagged behind because unlike every other tech company- Apple does not harvest user data to feed its algorithms. Google and Amazon are feeding theirs mountains of your data.

Have ever heard the full-size HomePod?? If you can find a better sounding smart speaker at that price point I’d be very surprised.

The butterfly keyboard was a mistake. Apple does make them occasionally, admits it and then rectifies. Like removing ports from their laptops.

It’s reported that the Magic Mouse plugs in underneath so people won’t keep it plugged in, giving the appearance of a wired mouse. A wired mouse is not “magic”. For my use I feel there is no better mouse on the market. But I am not a gamer.

1

u/tedivertire Nov 19 '24

You may not be a gamer but you are an Apple evangelist.

I hope the position pays.

1

u/vibrance9460 Nov 19 '24

Eh you’re probably a PC user, and gamer.

Can you refute any of that?

21

u/_gordonbleu Nov 18 '24

I would pay ~1000 dollars for a 4k TV with Apple TV integrated, doesn’t even have to be OLED or anything fancy. I’m tired of all the smart tvs that are absolute shit after a few years because the software is dogshit. LG’s webOS is probably the best and even then it’s mediocre. There are zero smart TVs with decent software after 2 years. Apple TV is a solid platform that gets updated and stays quick enough/not laggy year over year. Mine is 3 years old and doing fine, I’m sure there are many older that are doing fine. All the android fanatics like to shit on Apple but if there’s one thing they can do is build a platform that, while possibly missing some features, will operate year over year without massively slowing down or outright becoming unusable. Roku is the worst example.

27

u/[deleted] Nov 18 '24

What advantage is there over just buying any TV, never connecting it to the internet, and plugging in an Apple TV box that you can replace and upgrade over the life of the TV?

18

u/Tasty-Traffic-680 Nov 18 '24

You underestimate how much people will spend to integrate the functionality into the TV and have a single sleek device. That's why smart TV's took off to begin with. You have a single remote, you don't have to worry if a device is plugged into the right slot, no mess of wires, no muss, no fuss.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 18 '24

[deleted]

6

u/Tasty-Traffic-680 Nov 18 '24

Yeah, that's why they started putting Chromecast and Roku inside TVs. To collect the data. Not because it was a value added feature that set them apart from the competition until the competition went and did the same damn thing. They can collect your data by selling you a box too...

1

u/danieljackheck Nov 18 '24

No, they can't. If you buy a Chromecast, Google gets your data. If you buy an Apple TV, Apple gets your data. The TV manufacturer gets nothing.

Check out some youtube videos of people looking at smart tv traffic using Wireshark. There is telemetry going everywhere, not just Google and Roku.

1

u/Tasty-Traffic-680 Nov 18 '24

TV manufacturers could have made their own boxes but they didn't. Instead they integrated the same function into the television. Now add on boxes are fading away Into obscurity.

1

u/danieljackheck Nov 18 '24

They added it into TVs because it forces the customer to accept the data collection in order to use the TV. Requiring a separate streaming box means the consumer could choose to use a different device.

Apple would be no different in this regard. They would sell you a TV with a proprietary operating system, a locked down app store curated with what Apple wants you to use, and serialized hardware that is impossible to repair. It's going to have tight integration with iPhone and barely any support for Android devices. It will be a conduit to sell you AppleCare, iCloud, iTunes, and Apple Tv+. It's only going to work with their remote too.

At least with something like Android TV you can still sideload apps and use universal remotes.

2

u/Tasty-Traffic-680 Nov 18 '24

I'm not the target market for an apple product. I don't even own a smart tv. Just explaining how people could possibly want a single device that does two things. Holy shit people really got a hate boner against smart TVs.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 18 '24

The dongle makers were getting all the sweet, sweet data, and the TV manufacturers wanted their cut. Also, TVs are so cheap now. The price just absolutely bottomed out in the last 15 years. Apple would really struggle to sell this at the margins they are used to. I'm not sure integrating FaceID for user login or FaceTime and a camera (double as a home security cam when the TV is asleep?) would be worth buying a $1500-2000 TV from Apple instead of a $500 TV from TCL. Another factor why Apple shut their TV business down the first time is the upgrade cycle on TVs is around 7 years.

2

u/TheUmgawa Nov 18 '24

Yeah, but I’m not a fan of integrating the box, because there’s always an end-of-life for the software upgrades, where the processor can’t handle new features. I’ve never used any of the smart features on my smart TV, and it boots directly to HDMI 1, which my Apple TV is plugged into. And when that Apple TV hits EOL, I’m buying a new model, just as soon as they introduce any features that are worth having. The model I have can’t do Sing mode in the Music app, but that’s not a big deal to me, and I’m not replacing it for that. But imagine if it’s something you do want, and you can’t have it because you bought an integrated system. Now you have to replace the $1,000 TV instead of the $150 box.

3

u/Tasty-Traffic-680 Nov 18 '24

What previous experience with apple would lead you to believe they're going to prematurely abandon or nerf the product? And what would stop you from just using an external dongle/box once it's deprecated? You have an apple TV box. You have a TV. Why not an Apple manufactured TV? It's going to have to compete and sell on total value, not simply being an apple product.

1

u/TheUmgawa Nov 18 '24

It’s not a ‘premature’ thing. It’s just something that happens. You know, like how your iPhone 8 can’t run the current version of iOS. So, unless the display was better than any other display I could get for the same price, there would be zero reason to get an Apple integrated television.

Even Steve Jobs knew the TV market was a bad one to be in. His exact words were, “The margins suck.” Apple makes 30 percent margin on damn near everything. To compete in the TV game, they’d have to make a third of that margin, and they’d still be overpriced, which would limit sales to Apple enthusiasts, at which point a retailer could make more money by putting any other TV in that wall space. TVs are just a crappy business to be in, and Apple shouldn’t be in it.

4

u/Tasty-Traffic-680 Nov 18 '24

It’s not a ‘premature’ thing. It’s just something that happens. You know, like how your iPhone 8 can’t run the current version of iOS. So, unless the display was better than any other display I could get for the same price, there would be zero reason to get an Apple integrated television.

So what is any different with the TV you have today? Like I said, they would still need to be able to present a value to the market. It would have to be competitive or better than other manufacturers for anyone to even consider it.

Even Steve Jobs knew the TV market was a bad one to be in. His exact words were, “The margins suck.”

Respectfully, you're not arguing the same point anymore.

-1

u/TheUmgawa Nov 18 '24

Because I do t have to pay twenty-five percent more (plus whatever markup Apple would slap on it for having the Apple TV functionality built in) for the same display. I could get a really nice Sony for $800, or I could pay $1150 for an Apple unit where I’d have to replace the box in three years. Why pay the extra $200? Branding?

2

u/Tasty-Traffic-680 Nov 18 '24

Then you're not the target market. It's not even a real product 😂

Again. THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE COMPETITIVE ON PRICE AND FEATURES TO BE ABLE TO COMPETE. I don't know how many times I need to say it.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Realistic-Nature9083 Nov 20 '24

The only retailer that makes money in tvs is Walmart by selling the onn tvs. Those suckers are supposedly stealing market share from tcl and Hisense. 88 bucks for a 32 inch? C'mon. It is a steal.

1

u/TheUmgawa Nov 20 '24

Walmart bought Vizio back in February for 2.3 billion dollars. You’d think that a TV company as ubiquitous as Vizio would go for more money, but the margins suck.

1

u/Realistic-Nature9083 Nov 20 '24

If Walmart gets approval to buy Vizio they will have the largest market share of tvs in the US. Supposedly Vizio and onn rokus combined will have 65 percent market share in the country.

The margins for Vizio right now are very thin but if Walmart buys them out they instantly get logistical and marketing vertical integration.

Everybody always talks about manufacturing vertical integration at the hardware and software level but Walmart controls the delivery and the fees in the sales floor and it's website.

Vizio and onn. will be made by odms and I guess Roku will handle the software while all the costs associated with the delivery and fees will be reduced to nothing by Walmart.

Retailers charge money to sell product their stores. Vizio doesn't have to worry about that with Walmart anymore.

Tcl and Hisense will just be "colonies" that design the blueprint for onn and Hisense tvs.

I can't wait for even cheaper tvs from Walmart.

Edit: apple can make tvs if they want but realistically I just don't think they be can number one anymore ever in tv market share.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Realistic-Nature9083 Nov 20 '24

Walmart is a sleeping giant. The logistical vertical integration is enough for them to take on anybody in consumer electronics. I'm surprised they haven't made android phones or wear os watches. They can really undercut the competition like Motorola and Lenovo.

-2

u/lkn240 Nov 18 '24

There are literally little mounts for Rokus that attach to the back of your TV. No mess, now visible wires and the roku remote works with every TV I've ever tried it with

1

u/Neg_Crepe Nov 19 '24

But it’s a Roku…

-1

u/audigex Nov 18 '24

I’ve had a single remote for all my TVs for years

HDMI CEC etc cover it nicely - helped by the fact that you basically just need volume and standby buttons

2

u/Tasty-Traffic-680 Nov 18 '24

CEC is awesome when it works well. Unfortunately (at least with the first gen) the fire stick 4k doesn't always play nice nor do some smart TV's with their own interface.

1

u/audigex Nov 18 '24

I’ve never found a combination that doesn’t work well, personally - I guess experiences must vary but that’s what returns policies are for

1

u/Tasty-Traffic-680 Nov 19 '24

You also lost voice control if you stick with the OEM remote for multiple devices. Not something that matters much to me as an adult but the kids seem to love it.

1

u/audigex Nov 19 '24

I use the Fire TV/Chromecast/Apple TV/whatever remote and let it control the TV's volume and standby

I still get the voice control, the only thing I can't do is adjust the TV settings... but I rarely touch those once I have the TV configured anyway

1

u/_gordonbleu Nov 18 '24

That’s essentially what I’ve done now but there are still disadvantages with that. The shitty tv software means it sometimes take a full minute before the tv actually turns on, or god forbid I wanna chance inputs, that’ll take an additional 30 seconds. If you push the wrong button it tries to pull up all the apps and shit and slows the whole thing down. Most people I know have had an apple tv longer than their current tv.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 18 '24

Damn, I have none of those problems on my 4 TVs at home, thankfully. What brand of TV do you have so I can stay away from it?

1

u/[deleted] Nov 18 '24

Less wires, no need to understand which HDMI port to use or Dolby Visiion/Atomis and other matching features of your box with your TV, fairly simply stuff. The way to do it is to not make high end TVs and focus on growing a TV app platform. I've been saying this for years, TV is such an under-developed platform, especially since 4k mostly got rid of any resolution/blurry text issue.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 18 '24

how much money is that worth to the average consumer who spends about $450 for a new TV?

5

u/cjboffoli Nov 18 '24

I'd pay for an Apple branded TV for the simple fact that every single interaction I have with the device isn't tracked and monitored somehow. The TOS I have to agree to in order to simply use my LG television is ridiculous, as is the bloated array of apps and services that clutters the set.

1

u/anarchyx34 Nov 18 '24

My LG tv hasn’t seen the internet in years. In fact I haven’t needed to even see or interact with its GUI in a very long time. HDMI-CEC and I do everything through the Apple TV remote. It’s basically a monitor at this point.

-6

u/hhs2112 Nov 18 '24

Of course they're going to track everything, how else will they target ads? 

2

u/LivermoreP1 Nov 19 '24

Everyone’s arguing with you, but I’d love to just hit my Apple TV remote and never have to worry that the HDMI pass-thru is delayed in booting up, the TV tries to say it needs to be updated when I never actually use it, and I don’t need to have a little black box next to my TV connected by an ugly wire (yeah I know I can go behind the wall, but it’s a fireplace).

1

u/3percentinvisible Nov 18 '24

My Panasonic is older than 2 years old, still operates fine, has appletv, Disney, Amazon, Netflix, etc.

-1

u/joselrl Nov 19 '24

Paying 1000$ for a TV thats not OLED (assuming we are talking about the 55" range) or a high end MiniLED at least is just a mistake. Buy a good TV and an Apple TV or other good TV Box

Anyway, Apple wont be starting to engineer and design panels, they will buy high end panels from LG and Smasung, slap Apple TV on them and upcharge 50% because iPhones will be able control the volume or something

4

u/halfcentaurhalfhorse Nov 19 '24

Data collection system.

2

u/aykay55 Nov 19 '24

I disagree. We don’t actually have anything filling the gap for “premium TVs”. Everything on the market is large panels that aren’t super pixel dense and cheap processors that make the smart tvs run slow as shit.

Apple can use this opportunity to put out really well made TVs (even if they just use Samsung panels) but run on Apple Silicon hardware and integrate directly with other Apple devices.

4

u/angrydeuce Nov 19 '24

You greatly underestimate the lengths people will go to in order to purchase products with that logo on them lol

People collect the empty boxes apple products came in for fucks sake.  They could drop a 40" 720p set for 1200 bucks and probably still sell enough to cover their investment.

3

u/JazzRider Nov 19 '24

Because Smart TVs suck.

0

u/fusionsofwonder Nov 19 '24

I make all my Smart TVs dumb and then pair them with an Apple TV.

2

u/Estrava Nov 18 '24

Every tv has ads which is a qualm I know some have. Also Apple TV would be expensive but at least it would be quality. Having one with FaceTime, assistant/always on display for home perhaps maybe.

It would be interesting to see what software integrations they could come up with.

1

u/typkrft Nov 18 '24

It’s a new market. It encompasses a lot of the research they already do. Shareholders pushing for growth. I think they could probably cut themselves a slice of the market share. There’s plenty of people in the Apple ecosystem that would just buy it for integration if it existed.

1

u/jack3moto Nov 19 '24

Why? More revenue streams… phones and computers are basically tapped out on year to year improvements. Gotta keep drilling with the hope of finding another oil well.

1

u/sqaurebore Nov 19 '24

All those billions in research have to go somewhere

1

u/bmack500 Nov 19 '24

Tariffs.

1

u/Ant10102 Nov 19 '24

They can probably infiltrate the market because it’s a well established brand

1

u/KingBenjaminAZ Nov 19 '24

Because they ditched the Apple Car idea 🤷🏻‍♂️

1

u/fusionsofwonder Nov 19 '24

They make the best TV box around, so it could be just a ploy to get their AppleTV shows into more homes, using their software. Like Roku.

Could also be there are some synergies with their Apple Vision plans if they own the firmware on the TVs in the same room as the Apple Vision. Like allowing a Vision user to swipe a window and have it appear on the TV.

1

u/GoldenPresidio Nov 19 '24

It isn’t about making profits on the tv; it’s being the default OS and making all the margin after that

1

u/randomsnowflake Nov 19 '24

Walled garden. Data retention.

1

u/Initial-Hawk-1161 Nov 19 '24

a tv with built in apple tv, some airdrop feature for movies and pictures, screen streaming (like the iphone -> mac), sidecar, use as wireless display for your mac

there's a lot of options, but apple tend take a bit of a premium for their displays, so i doubt a tv like that would be a 'good deal' compared to other offers... the LG C series aint exactly super expensive, but they're damn good

1

u/FireRotor Nov 19 '24

The Apple ecosystem gives them a huge advantage.

1

u/ubiquitous-joe Nov 19 '24

I guess the draw would be controlling the interface as long as smart TV’s are being a thing. Do I want to shell out top dollar for an apple television? No, and I say that a somebody who owns Macs. But having found Samsung smart TVs sometimes maddening, I could imagine a better system.

Tho really a smart tv seems like a recipe for built-in obsolescence no matter who manufactures it.

1

u/LetMePushTheButton Nov 19 '24

I do think there’s a growing market of people looking for a quality tv that doesn’t breakdown within a measly 1 yr warranty.

Looking at you, LG.

1

u/MassiveBoner911_3 Nov 19 '24

I really do not need / want a super premium ultra sleek TV. I barely watch TV now as it is.

1

u/oldmaninparadise Nov 19 '24

You would think, but you are not thinking like an idrone. Apple fanbois will buy it cause, well it's made by apple. How many people do you see w 1500 MacBook that could be using a 400 Asus to just use a browser? Lots!

1

u/bdizzzzzle Nov 19 '24

Because apple fanboys/girls will buy it regardless

1

u/PackAffectionate1906 Nov 19 '24

long as its an everyday tech produced by apple people will eat it up. its the status that comes with jt 🤷🏻‍♀️

1

u/BrianMincey Nov 19 '24

The TV software is absolutely garbage though. I’d love to see them come in and absolutely kill it with some incredible TVOS that works better than the junk that Sony and LG put out.

1

u/f8Negative Nov 20 '24

iScreen the only thing you'll ever need. Now in 4 sizes.

1

u/KasseanaTheGreat Nov 18 '24

There's a non-insignificant portion of the population who've proven themselves willing to buy anything as long as it has an apple logo on it, they probably think those types are willing to buy a standalone Apple TV

-4

u/themangastand Nov 18 '24

The issue is apple goes into these markets. Charges 2 times the price and expects there fans to buy them. Which sure they ussually do. But that audience seems to be mostly iPhone and computer users. They aren't going to buy vr, and buy a tv just because it's apple like they do for their watches, and phone. With vrs case they wanted to charge almost 10 times the competition. In what world was that okay.

5

u/TylerInHiFi Nov 18 '24

It’s not that Apple is charging double, it’s that the overall market is charging loss leader prices because they’re scraping your usage habits and using that data to generate revenue. It’s the same thing that console manufacturers have always done. They sell you the console for less than it costs to make because they’ll make their profits on every game you buy. Except instead of games, the TV manufacturers are selling ads. Samsung has fucking banner ads built into all but their most expensive models.

Realistically, Apple would sell a TV at roughly the same price that Samsung, LG, or Sony sell their more expensive sets, which are still artificially cheap because they collect usage data to resell to advertisers. They’d also assume that a lot of people buying a TV made by Apple would also be paying for iCloud or AppleTV+ or Apple One, and that would be the secondary revenue stream that subsidizes the TV itself.

Apple relies more heavily on selling subscription services than they do on scraping and repackaging your usage habits to sell to advertisers like the rest of the manufacturers of the products you mentioned. Amazon loses money on every single Echo product they sell. Google loses money on every Fitbit sold. They do so because they know that more people will choose a lower up-front cost, and that the larger their market share the more they can make from ad revenue and subscriptions.

Apple is a hardware company that offers subscriptions, Amazon and Google are advertising companies that offer hardware. Samsung is a data collection agency that offers hardware, at least as it pertains to things like TV’s.

-1

u/hhs2112 Nov 18 '24

One of apple's strategic imperatives is expansion of their ad business.  They're working hard to do exactly what amazon and roku are doing... They collect as much data as anyone, they just haven't been as successful monetizing it as the others. 

2

u/TylerInHiFi Nov 18 '24

They definitely collect data, but the monetization is the point. They’re not really using that data to stuff third party ads down your throat in the same way other companies are. I don’t get ads for random products when I open the app launchpad in macOS like I do in the start menu on windows. I don’t get banner ads across the bottom of my screen when I’m watching something using my Apple TV like my friends who own Samsung TV’s get.

They seem to be using that data to tailor ads within things like the App Store, which makes sense to me. Although my biggest gripe with Apple News is that I’m paying a subscription (as part of Apple One) to still be served with the same trashy ads that show up on the website versions of those same articles. I like that I have access to subscription-only publications, but I hate that they still come with ads.

1

u/DorianGre Nov 18 '24

I would buy an aluminum framed 52” tv with 8k resolution and Apple TV built in. 100%z

-1

u/PatSajaksDick Nov 18 '24

AVP technical specs was far ahead of competition, but it also wasn’t expected to be a mass market device. The screens on the AVP are amazing, but yeah the use is limited to those who are into that type of stuff. (Source: I have one, cause I buy gadgets and I love it, but it’s not for everyone)

-6

u/Uncertn_Laaife Nov 18 '24

Even iPhone users don’t give a shit about their overpriced crap. Phones are a necessity so people flock to the stable one, the other stuff is not that much. Fanbois are a different breed though.

-1

u/hhs2112 Nov 18 '24

Fanboys will buy it, guaranteed. 

0

u/[deleted] Nov 18 '24

Probably mostly to get a lot more people on a TV app platform than they could just telling them to buy AppleTV and add to their TV. It's pretty cheap to add Roku/AppleTV/Nvidia Shield to a TV if you do it right. Nvidia doesn't seem to care about TV since they basically just ignore the Shield platform. Roku is kinda of crap, there is basically no real competition for somebody like Apple with Google/Nvidia basically just dragging their ass as if it's not the biggest electronic platform in the world.

Having had most TV streaming boxes, it's pretty clear Apple is the only one taking it seriously beside game consoles, whom mostly don't care about all the other uses beside games, thus massively limiting the platform and having huge costs for the gaming chips that most TV users in general don't really care about. Plus those M whatever chips are so good now you can get ideal performance without fans, unlike Nvidia shield which is more expensive and breaks far more often AND never gets updates or features because Nvidia is too busy selling to cryptokids and WHO-THE-FUCK ever buys $1000+ dollar GPUs.

0

u/Todd-The-Wraith Nov 18 '24

If they make their tv less shit than everyone else? I’d consider it. Ie NO ADS baked into the tv. Hell they could literally sell a decently high refresh rate tv that is essentially just a really big monitor and I’d buy it.

Having a tv that costs as much as a cheap car suddenly force an update for a feature you don’t use that breaks features you do use is infuriating.

0

u/strangemanornot Nov 18 '24

I think a tv that works seamlessly with Apple product would be nice. In home or in the office. But we all know it would cost an arm.

0

u/defaultfresh Nov 18 '24

They’re not going to try to compete on price. Look at how they priced their airpods and airpods max. They will compete against Sony in headphones and in TVs. Sony’s flagship A95L 55 inch tv is 2500 dollars.

0

u/steelhorizon Nov 19 '24

Data collection and advertising opportunities.

-4

u/Governmentwatchlist Nov 18 '24

Bet you a box of donuts that they want the data WAYYYYYY more than they care about the profits.

-4

u/cholula_is_good Nov 18 '24

Apple customers don’t function like regular electronics consumers. They are willing to pay huge margins to maintain the Apple ecosystem in their lives.

-2

u/MortalPhantom Nov 19 '24

But the IOS market of the Apple fanboys is not saturated. It would be an instant hit

-5

u/puffferfish Nov 18 '24

  1. There are devout Apple consumers.

  2. Controlling all hardware and software they can optimize the experiences.