LIVEdigitally

Tag Archives: rumors

So when might Apple announce a television?

Posted on by

Seems like Apple has news coming later this month.  Regardless of your feelings about Apple, it’s safe to say they have mastered the art of the product launch like none other.  Even when virtually every detail of a new product gets leaked due to it being stolen lost at a bar, they still master the news cycle and generally enchant and entertain.  Some might argue they simply do things whenever they want, others would surmise they do it entirely calculated on a spreadsheet based on maximizing sales.  My guess is they do it “when they can” – the moment they are done with the first production line and have the shipments queued up, the media invites go out, a few semi-leaks pop up here and there, then off to the races.

This works great when you can fit a few hundred phones into every crate and airdrop ’em over the US at the same day/time with ease.  Sure it’s costly, but in the grand scheme of things, no big deal.  The boat’s left the harbor at the same time, and within 3 weeks the full distribution cycle is up and running.

But now we’re not talking about a gadget that fits in your pocket, it’s an Apple Television (right? right?).  And despite what self-aggrandizing promoters some analysts say, it’d be my guess that they ship them in more sizes than just 32″ and 37″ (seriously, how did anyone actually believe that?).  Unless they’re about to pour forth with statements about how those are actually the ideal sizes for a display, I don’t think they’re about to exist in a market where size really does matter and play on the small front.  I’d guess we see one at ~32″, ~40″, ~50″, and ~60″ – those are the main categories of TVs sold today.

Yeah, I'm on a truck. Life's just that good. I have a keg back here too.

And now is where we face our hurdle: these TVs are big.  The box for my Samsung 63″ plasma barely fit into a pickup truck!  You can’t exactly airdrop hundreds of each model to Apple stores.  In fact, every aspect of the logistics to pull off Apple’s typical surprise & delight maneuvers is quite tricky here.  So that’s problem number one – in my guess they solve this via the “and you’ll all be able to receive your units 30 days from today” type of solution.  But there’s no way you’ll hear “and you can go get them in Apple stores nationwide this afternoon.”

Second, unlike phones and iPads, and even computers, TV buying has a lot more seasonality to it.  And other than a core set of fanatics (nope, I’m not at that level yet), most people aren’t about to pick up new expensive living room gear for any given reason.  This is actually one of the trickiest nuances of the TV world (on the hardware front) – it’s really hard to get someone out of their buying cycles.  Sure, if someone was already planning to get a new set next holiday season they’ll consider getting one in June or August or whenever.  But if not, (question mark).

So, they can’t announce too soon.  Or too late.  They can’t announce in the first half of the year.  But if they wait til too late, they’ll impact supply chain in a painful way and potentially affect sales.

My money’s on a late Spring announcement, shipping in the Summer.  Even though it’s traditionally a terrible time to introduce a TV set to the market, it’ll give them more time to get the logistic down, the stores reformatted, and everything else into full swing in advance of the Q4 buying season.

But then again, it’s Apple, so “the rules” just don’t apply.

What Would Jobs Do?

Posted on by

If you follow gadgets or new tech and you are not aware that Apple is introducing “something” next Wednesday, you are either (1) my wife or mother or (2) awaking from a long long sleep. Now along with virtually anything Apple does, or contemplates doing, or doesn’t contemplate doing but others contemplate on their behalf, the rumor mill on this “iPad” is just out of control.  Not a day has gone by this week, and probably the week prior, where numerous stories on TechMeme centered on the speculated device.  My turn.

I’ve tried to think about this entirely with the following perspective:

  1. Tablets, as we think of them today, suck (unless you are in a very specific niche, or perhaps a crazed fanboy).
  2. Steve Jobs does not like to ship suck-y products.
  3. Apple does not focus on niche markets.
  4. Some of the rumors we’ve seen are likely correct (a million monkeys on a million keyboards…).
  5. Apple will still likely do one or more things nobody’s even hazarded a guess at.

So with that in mind, what is Apple up to?

Some more assumptions:

  • It’ll have 3G services built-in.  I’d hope for Verizon, but that limits Apple to its international possibilities.  And there’s no way they’d waste the money on two different 3G chips.
  • It’ll have a “built-for iPad” program at launch.  Still nothing from Droid on this front, but you can bet that Griffin, Case Logic, Kensington, and all the other players will have cases and other accessories coming to market extremely soon.
  • It’ll have the iPod connector, USB, DisplayPort and an SD card slot.  A webcam is highly probably, and I wouldn’t be surprised with an IR interface as well.
  • It might have some clever method of charging (magnetic induction).

Here are some thoughts on the product itself, in no particular order:

  • Sub $300 e-reader + tablet: How about if Apple directly takes on the Kindle, and throws in a great version of Safari, and a Verizon 3G connection?  They sell it at cost, give it a beautiful touch-screen, make it all iPhone-y, but keep it as a simple device.  At this price point it does compete with the iPod Touch, technically, but not in reality, as they are such vastly different products.  We know from the Kindle’s success that there’s a market for the category, and we know that the Nooks and Sonys of the world won’t stand a chance versus Apple and Amazon as the category leaders.  In the “what seems kinda possible and stands a chance at selling in the millions” way of thinking, this is definitely a contender.  Not as sexy as some other options, but possible.
  • Detachable MacBook screen: I’ve come back to this one a few times, as it seems to fit “the world we know” fairly well. What if instead of it being a whole new device, Apple upgrades all MacBooks to have touchscreens that are detachable.  In other words, the keyboard part of the laptop comes off.  It would require some fairly sophisticated engineering to pull off, as the bulk of the computer itself is in the keyboard area, but if anyone’s going to do it.  I think it’s a bit farfetched, but only because I can’t conjure up the physical realities that would be required for it to work.
  • Mac “Accessory”: Had an interesting chat about this concept the other day – basically it’s the idea that the tablet is a remote desktop viewing device that lets a user log in to another Mac elsewhere on the Internet.  It would probably have an internal Web browser as well, and some simple other features, but effectively it’s a “dumb terminal” for a more powerful computer.  And in a coup de grace Applesque way to do things, it would probably let you log into a Windows 7 computer as well (assuming you got the right drivers installed, of course).  I don’t think this is a strong possibility, as it doesn’t seem mass-market enough, but it would become a really interesting competitor to a netbook in regards to being a “disposable computer”.
  • Media Slate: So picture a device that’s sleek and sexy, can play back movies, TV shows (including live TV), Internet radio (lala), show pictures/slideshows, play simple games (app store), and be otherwise completely entertaining.  It connects from anywhere, has enough internal storage to last a nationwide flight, and is all about fun.  Further, it comes with numerous context access options, including free services, a la carte purchasing/rentals, and subscription options.  It probably also has a Webcam and native iChat support. I’m fairly bullish on this concept, as it seems to fit in with the Apple iLifestyle very well, and makes for a useful product.

Those are all good, and nice safe bets.  I don’t think I’ve hazarded guesses that others haven’t.  But now I’ll (try to) get more interesting.

  • What if the entire device were touch-sensitive? Front AND back.  Fully gesture enabled, not just multi-touch but multi-hand.  Remember, one of the things that makes tablets suck is figuring out how to hold it right – so let’s assume they “magic mouse” the whole thing, and made it smart enough to figure out the difference between the “holding hand” and the rest of it.
  • What if it’s a flexible display instead? Okay, this is probably stuck in the in my dreams category, but it would be crazy impressive if they skip the whole concept of a tablet and move the industry up a notch with a flex display.
  • What if there’s a built-in pico projector? Going on the “media slate” theory, but kicking into gear the concept of “fun for the whole family”.  Also doubles-up as a productivity device for showing presentations.

And lastly…

What if there’s no tablet?

Seriously, it’s a real possibility.  What if instead of showing us a tablet, they show a 4G iPhone and impressive updates to other devices (or not)?  What if they announce media streaming services instead?  We all know Apple plays their own game, and if they haven’t figured out how to make this thing magical, I don’t think they’d want to ship it.  It would be a bit of an odd strategy, as there seem to be a few too many pseudo-confirmed rumors, but then again, Apple doesn’t deal with terrorists rumors.  It’s a possibility…

Stop Trusting the Internet!

Posted on by

I’m going to summarize this entire blog post in 12 seconds for the attention-span-deprived members of my audience:

The Internet is full of tubes, not facts on 12seconds.tv

As is too-often repeated but still ever so appropriate, “with great power comes great responsibility” (it comes from Spiderman). The Internet, but more specifically user-generated content such as blogs, tweets, and vlogs, allows anyone to become a content source. The more one has followers/readers/viewers, the more ‘power’ one has. When I blogged a few months ago that Macbooks would take a 50% share of all laptops, I had a variety of comments show up here (most of which completely missed the point I was trying to make, but that’s a different story). I have a handful of readers, so this didn’t really go anywhere – but had an a-list blogger written the same story, who knows where it’d end up.

Example #1: an earthquake occurred in Los Angeles today. The news spread quickly by both “official channels” and individuals using blogs and twitter. A story went up over at VentureBeat which included a reference to a video posted on 12seconds.tv entitled “5.8 LA Earthquake Recreation 36th Floor.” I added the bolded “recreation” myself for emphasis here because many people took the video as fact. Despite it not looking very “earthquake-ish” and despite it posting 30 minutes after the quake was over. Now the VB article’s been updated, but it has since spawned a post decrying the video as “fake”.

I’m pointing this out because not only did the VB author miss the title of the video (which is understandable), but the follow-up blogger did as well, despite the fact that he was clearly trying to determine whether or not it’s a fake. The power of the original article was so strong that even the title of the video wasn’t enough to make someone researching the topic realize it was baloney.

Example #2: Urban legends. How on earth do these still circulate??? My wife is on a mailing list with thousands of mothers in the Bay Area, they recently got sent an email talking about McDonald’s play pens and hypodermic needles. A simple google search for “McDonald’s Ball Pit” reveals link after link decrying the story as fake. Yet it continues to circulate to and from intelligent people all over the place. Need a better example? How about one tweet to instantly convince 50,000 people that Jared Fogle (Subway Jared) is dead (he’s not). One word here: snopes.

Example #3: Today I saw the following headline on FriendFeed: “20% of Primetime Television Now Watched Online” with a link to this article. Now I don’t read SearchEngineWatch, so I have no idea why they’re covering such a topic, but that’s not quite the topic du jour. The person sharing the article has now propagated the story, and his followers (and the followers of whomever then reshares it) will all be wandering around on- and off-line sharing the fact that 20% of TV is being watched online. Only one problem: it’s not. I did one more google search for the firm quoted in the article (Integrated Media Measurement Inc.) and one click later found this finding: “IMMI finds more than 20 percent of panel members watch some prime time programming online” (again, emphasis for effect). While this is still an important statistics, it is a far cry different from the headline being shared (one which is, in my opinion, quite hard to believe anyway, but that’s another matter). Updated: it’s sad to say, but Reuters now has the “20%” story, and yes, they have it wrong.

I know it’s a lot of fun to be on the cutting edge of information. It’s also fun to learn a new fact and rapidly share it along to your friends and family. But whatever happened to double-checking a source? Let’s face it, the news is more about entertainment and ad revenue than it is about reporting facts and accuracy. Just because it happened online doesn’t make it real. As they say, entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.