Samsung isn't worried about an Apple iTV, even though they probably should be

At a recent trade show, Samsung product manager Chris Moseley commented on the recent rumours swirling about an Apple-made TV.

"We've not seen what they've done but what we can say is that they don't have 10,000 people in R&D in the vision category. They don't have the best scaling engine in the world and they don't have world renowned picture quality that has been awarded more than anyone else. TVs are ultimately about picture quality. Ultimately. How smart they are...great, but let's face it that's a secondary consideration. The ultimate is about picture quality and there is no way that anyone, new or old, can come along this year or next year and beat us on picture quality. So, from that perspective, it's not a great concern but it remains to be seen what they're going to come out with, if anything."

If you are fully submerged in the Samsung culture, I could understand that line of thinking, but in the grand scheme of things, it's hard to put Apple past setting a new bar for any electronics industry, regardless of how well-established it is in any particular field. Steve Jobs had admitted openly on quarterly conference calls that the Apple TV was little more than a hobby project, but what's going to happen when Apple takes TVs seriously? Are they just going to make another little puck, only have it not suck for a change? Or are they going to go all-out, producing an entire TV set?

While I certainly agree with Moseley that Apple isn't likely to oust Samsung's top spot in TV in the next two years, I would be really surprised if Apple didn't at least introduce some considerable competition in that timeframe. Competitors are offering some really smart connected home solutions, but if Apple doesn't have a real presence in the world of TVs, the Mac, iPhone, and iPad will have comparatively limited reach. I'm eager to see how Apple patches that gap in their strategy, but what about you guys? Would you pay a premium for an Apple-made TV? 50-inch Retina Display, anyone?

Source: Pocket-Lint

Have something to say about this story? Share your comments below! Need help with something else? Submit your question!

Simon Sage

Editor-at-very-large at Mobile Nations, gamer, giant.

More Posts

 

-
loading...
-
loading...
-
loading...
-
loading...

← Previously

Weight Watchers Mobile review: Best diet plan app for iPhone

Next up →

The agony and the ecstasy of Cydia, the jailbreak app store

Reader comments

Samsung isn't worried about an Apple iTV, even though they probably should be

55 Comments

How would that get him fired? As a product manager, his job isn't to discuss what the competition might be doing...but WHY his product is great. All he did in his comments, was talk about why Samsung televisions are at the top of the pack, and how Samsung is not worried about Apple beating them on picture quality.

It's true, though. When it comes to TV's, it's about image quality. Pay a visit to the AVS forums, and it is all about image quality.

I agree. He is 100% right. It isn't about "smart/connected" and it isn't about gimmicks (3D). It is about picture quality. I have a 50" Samsung Plasma, and it is a great picture. And when it got the Red Snow bug/issue, the firmware update was cake.
I still have my reservations about Apple entering the TV market. That market is all about the price, and not a product people plan on replacing often. But can't wait to see what they do. I have been buying Apple products for as long as I can remember (Apple ][c is the first item I can prove and had @itools.com email ;) ) but will hold my decision until I see it.

If Apple designs their TVs as a rectangular flat screen with a black, glossy frame around it Samsung should sue them.
/ZOMG TEH TABLETZ LOOK TEH SAME

so why would apple start copying the copy cat . . .. they have never copied anyone before so why start now . . . . if they were to come out with a tv it would be the best and would make heads turn . .. im just saying

Puh-lease, from the original GUI lifted from Xerox PARC to the Notification center lifted from Android, Apple has always been about copying. They refine what they copy, to the point where they succeed commercially where earlier attempts failed, but they have always taken what others have done first.

Ideas can be copied. And Xeros, the mouse etc was the concept, but the actual GUI and mouse did not resemble unlike the samsung that has product copied down to the packaging.

"Ideas can be copied"
Tell that to Apple, who is suing for the idea of swiping to unlock, or the idea of using a rotating sensor to determine orientation.
I miss the days where Apple just admitted, like Picasso, they were shameless about stealing others ideas, and were (relatively) good citizens with the rest of the tech community.

Its true that ideas can be copied, but design, implementation, etc can't and that is the biggest part of apples suit. Design is a big part of Apple's product. For example pink panther insulation copyrighted their pink color because it identified the brand (and it was upheld in court). Design is a big part of Apple's ID.

Well, when someone designed to do something as equally foolish as Apple like making a mobile device encased in glass, then they can sue them. Unless they used Gorilla glass for the whole casing, that stuff is impressively strong.

And just in case you don't know: Apple actually copied the "swipe to unlock" feature from an old Nokia phone called Nokia N900. In another words, it is just ridiculous and shameful that Apple is suing someone for something they did not create. Ridiculous and shameful.

@Nicolas True the n900 had swipe to unlock. It also came out in '09 two years after the iPhone. Good try though.

Ok, my mistake, for some reason when I tried to remember which phone Apple copied the name Nokia N900 came in mind. But I looked on Google and remembered the name of the right phone. Apple copied the phone called Neonode N1m.
About the notification, I didn't see Google suing anyone because of it, only Apple likes to show how much afraid of competition they are.

IMO, the best tv Apple could make is being announced in a few weeks. The iPad 3. If they want to improve their reach into the living room, then get busy with an apple tv3 already. I've never understood the hobby nonsense.

If I were Samsung I would definitely be looking out for this. Even though I encourage competition, believe that it is good for economical reasons and people should have options. Not only have one option to choose from. As an Apple fan I think when this much anticipated TV comes out it is definitely going to revolutionize the TV industry and the way people use their TV's.

These companies will sue each other for what ever reasons they can possible think of. It is just one more battle they play with each other to see how can take the most. Apple has more leverage money wise, however they don't want to be in court every month. It is all part of the business.

I sincerely hope that Apple sticks with a cheap STB. In fact, they'll have to to stick with an STB if they really want their iOS on TV to go mainstream -- after all, it's not like everyone has $1000+ sitting around for a new TV. Most households in the U.S. already have at least one flatscreen HDTV, so why on earth would everyone suddenly run out for an entirely new TV? Especially one that is more expensive than any of the competition?!
Seriously, the only thing Apple should do is finally make the ATV a worthwhile fullHD device (high bitrate 1080p with HD audio damnit!), and then they need to encourage developers to put some real effort into the ATV app store options.
An actual "iTV"? That's just iStupid...

Agree. And besides, who's really anticipating a tv set from Apple? That thread in the forums was about dead. It's like the bloggers are trying to hype this into something it isn't.
The ATV though is a different story. Anyone i've shown airplay to has been amazed. A tv screen by Apple (supplied from a competitor..lol) would make no difference here.

Retina display TVs make no sense, since broadcast is at 1080i at best, and bluray is at 1080p. There is just no content at that resolution, nor bandwidth for it.
Furthermore a "retina" 50 inch TV would need a resolution of 13074x7353, much higher that 4K or 8K which are just coming on the horizon right now. Let's remember for a second that Apple does not make displays, they buy them from Sharp, LG, Toshiba or Samsung, so one of them would have to be making these displays.
Samsung has a good point actually, and not to be dismissed lightly, that is why Apple does not makes hard drives, screens etc. because it has no expertise in these areas. I remain very sceptical about an Apple TV set, which, I think, makes no sense at all. Anything that Apple wants to do on a TV can be done with a upgrade of the current Apple TV format.

could be wrong, but I figure they are not in the hard drive business because the profit margin has been eroded to such a degree that they would not be interested. Buying makes better business sense.

If Apple balked at the profit margin of hard drives, they will run screaming from TVs, which have razor thin margins except at the every high end (65"+).
Obviously, Apple could establish a larger profit margin if they truly develop something of unique value so that they could charge more than competitors, but that would be a difficult sell to customers. It seems unlikely they could persuade many people unless they managed to control the entire environment from end-to-end, which implies either an unprecedented deal with the Comcasts of the world of a setup that completely bypasses them. I hope they try, because they could flame out horribly, or shake up an industry. Either would be fun to watch, and discuss.

Well...he does have a point though.
People aren't buying TVs because of the smart capabilities (take a look at the percentage of Smart TVs being bought right now).
They're buying TVs that have great image quality and are affordable.
These are two things that Apple does not do. They dont make screens and they don't really do "affordable".
I will say this...if they do come out, they'll probably do what they do in every market. Not have the top marketshare, but they'll have top profit share because of the margins. The premium market will eat it up of course.
So Samsung is right and wrong. This "iTV" won't be putting anyone out of business any time soon or later.

I'm reading the comments and blog post about this and I'm afraid...I'm afraid that people will be dissapointed. Why? Because the more speculation the more expectation for something big and then we get.........."the new iPhone 4s,,,,"uhhh that kinda looks like the older iPhone...dang it do much for iPhone 5 and big scree and all that stuff...". You get what I mean. So many people pist in te beginning when Apple showed off iPhone 4s all people could be positive about was Siri,...but there was more posts about how their wasn't an "iPhone 5" with big screen and everything, than Siri and her usability. I'm afraid that's what's gonna happen when we get an Apple TV that doesn't do Siri, or anything special and make people go, "Really?...that's it....oh, hi Samsung, Sony, etc."... Just sayin... :D

One thing..who says the Apple TV sucks? I love my ATV2! Even before I jailbroke it it been one of the best purchases I made for that price ever. For $99 you get a Netflix streaming box, Youtube, Apple rentals/purchases and your entire Itunes Library of movies and music ready to stream.
Jailbreaking it only sweetened the deal as there is a TON of stuff I can do now that I couldn't before but even stock out of the box the ATV2 is awesome.

There are two things to look at. Cost, are you willing to pay a high price for an Apple TV, no matter the features? How soon will Apple stop supporting the model, and you have to buy another one?

Re: "Competitors are offering some really smart connected home solutions..."
But none of them are dominant. Samsung, Sony, LG, ad nauseam, have all rolled out connected TVs. They all have their own little feature tweaks, they run apps, and they're all 100% predictable. They are the inevitable result of looking just a few months forward and many years backward.
Apple won't enter the big-screen space until they're sure they can make a huge impression. They're like Porsche at Le Mans in the '70s and '80s. They didn't even bother to enter the race unless they knew they could win it.
Apple has likely already done the groundwork for their entry into the TV world. They can leverage iOS, Apple TV hardware, Siri, their North Carolina data center, and iCloud. And we can't forget iAd. We're convinced that iAd was intended for HDTV from day 1.
Oh, and Samsung probably is deathly afraid of Apple entering the TV space. They're just trying to put a spin on all the Apple rumors. Sharp and Apple are working hard on IGZO displays, with better picture quality and lower cost. And they're also investigating next-generation OLED processes for higher yield and better picture quality. And they've patented those processes. Good luck Samsung. You'll need it.

I hear you on what Apple can bring to the tv such as icloud, iOS, etc. Thing is, i don't WANT that crap built into my tv. All i care about is screen quality. Just like i don't care about speakers. I use a sound system on the main one. The others, I don't care how they sound so long as you can hear it.
If i want to bring apple and its ecosystem to my tv, then i'll use an ATV. This is where the market is. And i'd be happy to buy something from Apple to replace my Harmony One remotes...hint hint.

I guess this guy is thinking that Apple will do what Bose did - source a screen from Samsung and build something around it (with Bose it was audio).
Thinking that Apple would behave similarly would be a mistake. While Bose would be satisfied to affix a $5K price tag to a TV and sell into a niche market Apple will certainly not do that. They'll find a way to leverage their whole set of offerings into it and make it pay handsomely over the lifetime of the product. Plus, Apple has an awful lot of cash sitting in their bank accounts. They could subsidize the cost of the hardware with some sort of time-based subscription on the back end that can be used on any iOS product.
Andy Grove said that only the paranoid survive. I don't think that Samsung would be ready for any sudden shift in business model given their talk.

Until the next jump to OLED or IGZO the playing field has leveled off. My understanding of the market sales shows that 3D has not mattered to consumers and the only differentiation, other than the "budget buys", is quickly becoming the "smart" end of the TV. Therefore, other than large spec jumps (OLED etc) the field is level much like it was when iphone arrived.
This can be done, and done right, and if so will be bought-big. Will they? I don't know. But there is a market position available, and Apple has the tools to exploit it.
ios, siri, dvr, itunes environment, icloud, iad, on-line viewing (apple, hulu, netflix, now amazon), home controls from ipads, etc. They need to lock up this gap in the ecosystem somehow.

You are all missing the boat. It's about the content not the actual tv. Apple TV's intent is to compete with Comcast not Samsung. TV margins are too thin. They want to make money selling you tv shows, movies, etc rather than the tv itself.

True, but the advantage of the TVs despite thin margins is the ecosystem. Just like phones have pushed computer sales, so too would TVs push pads and phones. Its a buy in, and a serious one at that.

"We've learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone. PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They're not going to just walk in." - Ed Colligan 2006
"We’ve not seen what they’ve done but what we can say is that they don’t have 10,000 people in R&D in the vision category. They don’t have the best scaling engine in the world and they don’t have world renowned picture quality that has been awarded more than anyone else." - Chris Moseley 2012
Be careful there, Mr. Moseley. Anything is possible. Don't assume you've won simply because you're winning. Same goes for all companies (Apple included).

Of course, companies like Palm come to mind, or other phone manufacturers.
That said, I really don't think Apple entering the TV business is that great of an idea. I'd rather see them stick with making things like Apple TV (a separate box) more powerful.
For example, when I bought my last LCD (my first one, which I still have) a number of years ago, I picked the size, screen quality, and what I could afford. It isn't even a TV, just a LCD display. I do everything externally. I know that isn't the norm these days, but what I want isn't features (I'll get those externally) but the screen specs I want at a price I want. Unless Apple is going to also compete on cost, I don't see this as a huge market for them.
Now, on the other hand, make a killer Apple TV type product that does things like record, and makes it all simple, etc. That would be a killer product. Tons of people would buy it. Add the screen, and the market severely drops off.

This would be one of Apples new ventures. I personally, doubt they are going into the television business myself, (much likeI doubted them going into the cell phone business and look how that turned out). One of the things Apple has to their advantages is how much other take them for granted. This serves Apple to their benefit and allows them to work with more secrecy and drive to create a product that turns heads. (remember the MotoRkr) Apple could work on televisions if they wanted too assuming that most of their desktop computers are close in size to what a legit television (20" inches) is. So I wouldn't discredit.
Samsung is getting really cocky towards Apple, which means that they are full on throwing down the competition and I applaud them for the effort. But remember that too much cockiness will get you in the end. And Apple is NOTORIOUS for discrediting and making a fool to whatever company gawks at them.
Lots of Cell phone providers said the same for the iPhone. An ENTIRE INDUSTRY scoffed and wanted to control the digital Music Market. Same thing with the iPad dominance. Now those industries bend over backwards for Apple to give way, or you join them.
Since it seems Apple is shifting towards also becoming a media provider, a Television set would be the ultimate product that will for once, unify the things we airstream and download into our ipods, computers, itunes, iPads. with a device that will really be a one and all unit. Look at the steps Apple has taken and you can see the products they have released that can make this into a sick television set. Apple is known for putting big power in small devices so lets see how this television would be like using previous released tech that the company has released.
HD Retina Display: sure might be pricey but considering top line Televisions are still around 2-5 grand, then this is still a viable option.
AppleTV: Put the function of the device and you finally have no need for that little box anymore and you can get all of the features you would find on NEXFLIX,iTUNES and your photos.
CHANNEL SUBSCRIPTIONS: This is a good one. Look at how apple has worked with magazines to sell you their issues. bring this concept to your television and you now have, finally an ala carte channel option that would allow you to download, let's say an HBO CHANNEL App that will allow you, for a monthly fee to see the programming. we will see others do the same and before you know it you will no longer be paying for that 800 channel price when you only really like to watch 5 or 6 channels. You will now be able to subscribe to your channels and watch them for a low fee. REVOLUTIONARY? maybe. Apple is the one to do it. They already to it in itunes almost.
The power of its ipod Hi-Fi: I own a set of these speakers and holy hell they still rock. Mounting a set in this television would be the sickest sounding STOCK speakers you would need. Perfect for watching movies and listening to your music.
Already with just those specs, you have an impressive and viable television that can shake the legs off of any other company. Size of television is not going to impress us for much longer unless its a drastically huge screen we cant even really fit in our house. But the quality of the television builds are where it's out. So what? I don't care if the motion graphics drive is quad core or dual core? but can I get the best image for what I paid for? we also buy televisions based on its look when its turned off as well. I would NOT buy a television that looks horrid off, but if it was elegant I would be proud to put it in my living room instead of stashing it in my bedroom.
samsung. I would be somewhat scared if not curious.

If apple comes out with a TV with a killer user interface AND content availability that allows one to cut the cord with the cable company's I can see investing in the device.
If I could cut the cord with Uverse in my house and purchase high speed Internet and use Internet provided services only I estimate I could cut my monthly costs by $175.00

But what makes you think Apple is going to save you money on content? Apple isn't in the business of saving you money. They just want to redirect what you're already spending.
This company does nothing without thinking of you as a revenue stream.

I just want an apple TV 3 jailbroken with XBMC on it and of course 1080p output.
Apple, dump the tv, make a great accesory, not a allinone system.

Just give me a dedicated app store on the ATV. the Roku has hundreds of apps and all we get is what? 10 or so. Just upgrade the ATV and most will be happy.

I think what Cook was saying is that they've not reached the mainstream with the ATV like they have with other things like the iphone.
What's he say? Pull a string here, tug at it there. But perhaps that's why. Quit tugging Apple and focus? All the pieces are lying there waiting to be put together. You can do better than the few cheesy apps other than netflix. That button remote is a joke.
But i think we all know it could be better and Apple could easily improve it. Obviously, Apple doesn't want too many options from itunes content at this time. Perhaps they're waiting to string together some kind of itunes subscription. Microsoft for example requires a gold membership for some apps. I'm sure Apple wants something similar.
Selling screens isn't going to lead to iphone like marketshare either.

It's really a cool and useful piece of information. I'm happy that you just shared this helpful information with us. Please stay us up to date like this. Thanks for sharing.

I've read some good stuff here. Definitely value bookmarking for revisiting. I surprise how so much attempt you place to make this type of great informative web site.

Apple should also know that samsung have the most of display patents now so they will sue them by all means because they'll infringe on the patents of samsung and that will be a payback from samsung.