Is There An iTV In Our Future?

I've been on vacation for the past few days, but a quick link to a new piece in Slate, on the whole question of an Apple home AV device, which voices a few complaints about the sorry state of home AV that will be familiar to readers of this blog:

There's one big problem here: An iTV would need to play well with others. Most people aren't just going to chuck their entire system to buy Apple's home theater alternative. Look at me: I'm obviously a believer in Apple's ability to fix this problem. Still, I'd much prefer not to sell my new LCD TV on Craigslist, and Time Warner is forcing me to use their cable box for HD DVR features. So for me, the ideal Apple home AV product is one that somehow makes my existing system work but without forcing me to start over from scratch.The beauty of the iPod was that it was a supplement to your existing music gear, not a replacement. Part of the reason that it quickly became a mass success is that it didn't have the "switching costs" that were traditionally involved in moving from Windows to the Mac. If Apple's going to introduce a supplementary product without prohibitive switching costs—something closer to a universal remote than an all-in-one system—it's going to have to deal with dumb components out there that not only lack Wi-Fi or Bluetooth, but can't even agree on the infrared signal for "play." Steve Jobs is famously a perfectionist when it comes to interface design. Could he live with a device that can't reliably turn on a television?

Comments

[mark]

Steve,

Interesting article. Any chance of the iPod ever being able to use wireless streaming? By the way, check out http://www.australianidol.com.au

[Sukh]

Hi,

Read your article on Slate, regarding apple's tv product. However, there is already a great product out there that addresses exactly your concerns, its called Harmony (Owned by Logitech). Every home theatre should have one, even if its just a basic set up. Check it out online, I've been using it for months now, and its great.

[Michael]

Read your article. The thing you are missing is the incentives of the various players and whether you would like apple to have a monopoly. The reason apple works smoothly is because it is a closed system and apple is very strict about connecting itunes to anything but apple devices. Apple also charges an arm and a leg (in terms of royalties) to anyone who wants to hook up with an Ipod (docking station etc.) So, if you are willing to live with a system that is 2x the cost (that is what a MAC costs compared to a PC) and components that are also more expensive (monopolies tend to have higher prices) then Apple might be for you. Unfortunately, I'd guess that most people when faced with a REALISTIC tradeoff instead of a choice of something that can't economically / practically exist, they would go for the home theater system they can afford.

[George]

Steve,

Apple has already done what you requested. I have a Mac Book Pro and 30 in HD monitor plugged into surround sounded speakers. The latest version of the Mac OS comes with front row and a remote (http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/frontrow.html). I use my computer to do work and when I want to watch TV I download it from the itunes music store, which has more than an ample selection and is growing every day. With the ***6 button*** front row remote I can watch all of my television shows, play all of my music and control my DVDs. I don't have cable... I live in New York... so I don't even have internet, no monthly bills, confusing remotes, or conflicting systems. It’s completely and smoothly integrated.

[Mark Larson]

Interesting. It seems like a fundamental problem is that none of the individual unites of the home system are smart enough yet--it's that one-way control you pointed out. It's a failure to communicate. We'll need some industry standards beyond wires and cable fittings. Although I doubt it will happen willingly until some company can offer a sufficiently comprehensive solution that can't be ignored.

[Darren Johnson]

Steven,

First of all, I loved your book "Everything Bad is Good for You". I use it as the basis for a lot of debate with people about the effect of modern media on today's culture (especially children). I think you're spot on in your book.

Anyway, this is a great post that we've forwarded around the office here. I work at Control4, a company who's mission is to solve the problems you discuss. I won't bore you with pitching the company here, but I encourage you to check out our website and email me at djohnson@control4.com if you have any questions. I am a user of our products and I can honestly say that we are the closest thing out there to a fully-integrated digital home (movies, music, lights, temperature, security, etc.). There I go pitching again...I can't help it...hope to hear from you.

Thanks,

Darren Johnson

[Ben]

Steve - You should try to find out if your separate home components have DISCRETE codes (these must be input not by using a learning-remote, but by computer configuration). Having the remote "memorize" the state of your components, as you have seen, is absolutely ridiculous, as there is no feedback from your TV TO your logitech remote.

That way, an off-button will only issue "OFF" and not "ON/OFF..."

This was the key to setting up my home theater (and yeah, it is a pain heh)

[Wayne Folta]

Where did Sukh get his "Macs cost twice what PCs cost" idea? Several websites have recently compared Dell and iMac prices and basically for the same configuration it's a wash. You then factor in whether MacOS X is better than Windows (which it is) and buy based on that... And also on styling, which is an important factor in probably every purchase we make (car, house, appliances, clothing, etc).

Perhaps the comparison is a self-assembled whitebox versus a Mac? Even then I don't believe the 2x number.

[PowerBook user]

In my opinion, the biggest issue with TV/computer convergence is actually the pipe coming into the house, not the interfaces on the electronics gear. Yes, Apple makes the most intuitive and best designed electronics. But let's look at why the MediaPC is a dismal failure: no content. Cable companies have successfully established regional monopolies and have leveraged this power to charge exhorbitant prices on bundled media content that many people really don't want. As soon as Apple offers a device that replaces the cable companies'set-top boxes and their atrocious subscription and "on-demand" fees, then the home theater experience will be a whole lot more affordable. The success of the iTunes store proves that most of us prefer to pay for only what we use -- not for the filler that greedy entertainment companies foist on us. Sure, it will take a while for the iTunes store to offer a large variety of video in true HD quality. Still, it'll be a terrific step in the right directions and I can't wait to cancel the cable subscription.

Oh, and disregard Sukh's comments, which are obviously not based on objective analysis. That said, even if Apple does decide to charge $300 for an iTV device that simply connects the iTunes Store to my television -- it's worth the investment just to eliminate the monthly subscription. You do the math!