Could Apple Make a TV?

One of the bigger questions about Apple right now is "could Apple make a TV?"

My answer: Yes and no.

"Huh?"

Allow me to explain.

Yes because what they could make would be called a TV, because it would have that kind of functionality built in, much in the same way that an iPhone is called a phone because it has phone functionality built in.

No because, just like the iPhone, a TV made by Apple wouldn't be a TV as we know it so much as it would be a computer that happens to have specialized functionality.

Apple being Apple, any new integrated device they introduce, such as a TV, would run some version of iOS. Not the iOS of the iPhone, iPad, and iPod, but the iOS of the current AppleTV with some modifications for use as a full television instead of an addition to a television.

"How would that work?"

It would be similar to how Apple put the phone functionality of the iPhone in an app, the TV functionality of an Apple-branded TV would be delegated to an app.

How do you fit an app like that into the current AppleTV interface? As I see it, you can just add another column in the main interface, labelled "Apps", with "TV" being one of the built-in apps. I'll get back to the app's function later in the post.

However, people don't want to pay for ever single show they watch. Especially not couch potatoes.

Therefore it would probably be in Apple's best interest to set up some content deals with Hollywood to get access to all of the best networks' TV shows and movies. They already have deals to sell and rent video content but not to stream it all at a fixed monthly cost, à-la Netflix. Not yet, so far that we know, anyway.

For sports, Apple's already shown the direction it's planning to go in with its latest MLB and NBA deals.

As for TV show, if Season Passes were made to be cheaper, since customers would only be renting or streaming the shows instead of buying them, customers would be more than willing to pay by the TV show for new content. $9.99 for a season of House, being able to watch the episode as it airs, or any time after? Sold.

As for older content, Apple could work out the same kind of deal as Netflix and get cheap access to the older content. Either that or they can simply continue to give access to Netflix's ever-expanding library. Anything that's not available on Netflix, or an Apple version of a Netflix-like service, Apple could just offer as a $0.99 rental on the iTunes side of things.

News, weather, and other types of live broadcasts? You have iOS devices for that. If you really need them on your TV, though, there will likely be apps for that.

That takes care of most of the software and content.

"What about hardware?"

In the consumer world, choice is bad. Choice leads to bad decisions, and frustrated customers. That means that, much like with its current lineup, Apple's going to be making most of the decisions for its customers, starting with screen size.

Apple's handheld devices currently have 2 sizes: 3.5" and 10". Portables come in at 11", 13", 15", and 17". Desktops at 21" and 27".

TVs currently exist at just about every size between 10" and 100", which means Apple will have to choose a handful from the over-abundance of current options.

I won't try to guess which sizes Apple will choose but I'll go so far as to say that if/when they come out with their handful of screen sizes, those sizes will be what Apple considers to be the best sizes.

If I did have to guess, however, I'd say that Apple would chose 40", 50", and 60". 3 sizes, each 10" apart. Simple enough.

In terms of looks, I have a strong feeling it would look like a giant Apple LED display: a big, glass-covered screen and a 1" black border on the glass around the screen. No matte option.

"What about ports?"

Simple.

Look at the AppleTV: HDMI, ethernet, optical audio out, and power. There's also WiFi, to help save from having another cable. I'd be willing to bet there'd be something similar on an Apple-branded TV: A single HDMI input, an audio out port, and power. HDMI can do ethernet now, so I think Apple might try to push that capability to be able to have less ports on its TV.

Except there won't be ports on the TV.

"What?"

Well, at least not anything other than the single port for power. Just like with Apple's displays, there will only be only one port, one cable that you can hook up to a small set of ports and plugs at the other end of the cable.

"How do you get multiple inputs?"

You don't.

Not physical inputs, anyway. If you want to load external content on to the TV, use AirPlay. Using external speakers? AirPlay.

"What about all my old home videos? and my DVD collection? and my game console? and X, Y, Z?"

Well, there's two options: Convert them into a format that can play on Apple's TV, or use the single HDMI input.

Most people wouldn't be ready to make a complete switch to an Apple-branded TV right away, similar to how people weren't ready to ditch SCSI, or the floppy disk, or optical media. But that's the direction Apple's headed, and it won't stop just so you can feel nostalgic.

Want to use that old VCR to play you bootleg copy of that Van Halen concert your friend went to while the audio plays through your kick-ass speaker system? You can still do that. With adapters. Most HiFi receivers include at least one RCA audio/video in/out and at least 1 HDMI in/out, so almost any recent HiFi system could serve as your temporary adapter until you digitize your collection for use on Apple's TV.

Apple doesn't do legacy support. It doesn't support computers more than a few years old. It doesn't support handhelds more than a couple of years old. It definitely won't support your legacy TV appliances.

"But the market's already saturated, the margins are razor slim, blah blah blah."

That's nice. That's the old TV market, before Apple entered the game. There was a computer market before Apple, but then Apple defined the personal computer market. There was a music player market long before the iPod, but Apple redefined that market, too. There was a phone market for decades before the iPhone, but then Apple reinvented the phone. There were tablets long before the iPad came along, but then Apple created something magical.

Apple could do the same thing with TV.

They can make the hardware, they've already got the software, and they've more than likely already got the deals with content providers. They've got an end-to-end solution, just like every other market they're in. It's just a matter of putting on the final touches and shipping the finished product, which I would guess isn't too far away.

Some time in September, along with updated versions of other iOS devices, sounds like as good a time as any to bring an Apple-style revolution to the living room.

Reality is Subjective

I've been meaning to make this post for a while now, but it's a bit of a tough subject to talk about. Not that it's controversial, it's just a bit much for some people, myself included at times.

Before we get started, I wanted to clarify the direction I'll be taking this blog in. And by that I mean what I'll be writing about on this blog. For the most part it'll try to make it technology-oriented, but I'll also be making the occasional post about things like today's post (and I don't mean that as in meta-posts), about people, about social interactions, about life.

After reading the post title you're probably wondering what I mean by reality being subjective. Well, not what I mean, but how I mean to explain it. That's where things get interesting (or complicated, depending how you look at it).

To understand what I mean one must understand the many-worlds theory, which is the idea that there are an infinite number of universes. One must also understand the concept of predeterminism, which is the idea that every event has been determined not only by the previous event but every event before that all the way back to the beginning of the universe. One must also be able to understand the idea that time is multi-dimensional.

To better understand these ideas (except predeterminism) it's helpful to watch the following video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkxieS-6WuA

(Don't forget to watch part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySBaYMESb8o)

This is where things become weird: All those realities, all those infinities, all are yours. And they're all mine. In this universe, where I consider myself conscious, where I'm writing this post while listening to some music and casually chatting with some friends online, this is my universe. But, this universe, with all of it's events, is only happening to me. Everyone has their own universe, each one different, each one with its own set of unique events, each one "belonging" to a single consciousness. Every moment, every decision, every event from a keystroke to the spin of a sub-atomic particle, each one creating a different universe, but none of those belonging to what I, as an individual, perceive as my universe, what I perceive as reality, as my reality.

However, this view conflicts with the idea of predeterminism, which I also believe to be true. With predeterminism, all of the events in my universe have been determined right from the big bang all the way to the end of the universe. But, time being limited to the universe itself, and understanding that a line in time viewed from a higher dimension (or even from outside the universe) can simply be viewed as a single event. Taking that idea to the extreme, the entire universe, with every predetermined event within it, can be viewed as a single event from beginning to end. But it makes sense, because there's a universe for every possible eventuality, so it's only logical that each of those universes was branched off from some sort of "seed" universe, at the beginning of "time", each branch being created when there's more than once possible outcome to a certain event (the spin of a subatomic particle, for example).

But there's a big problem with all this. A problem with all of these events. A problem with this sequence of events leading up to the universe you call your reality:

Death.

What happens to my universe when I die? What happens to your universe when you die? It's not like it can be handed off to someone else. It also can't just suddenly end because you die, the laws of the universe as we know them (at least in this universe, my universe) don't really allow for the entirety of reality to just vanish.

So then what happens? What happens is this:

We don't die in our own reality. We can't. Of course, others can die in our reality. We can die in others' realities (or at least the version of us that appears in others' realities can). But not in ours.

Now, this may sound like wishful thinking (oh, not to worry, you won't ever die, you'll live forever!), but as far as I can tell the logic behind it is solid.

There's already an infinite number of universes, with every possible beginning, every possible end, and every possible event from every possible beginning to every possible end. Every single one of them has already been determined from the moment they began. Not only that, but they all exist, simultaneously.

But they've already happened.

What I mean by that is that none of what you do, none of what I do, is going to change the way your reality, my reality, is. You can't change what's already happened, and given that all events are predetermined, that means every single one of them has already happened.

In a way, it's like a film: The movie, in its entirety, already exists from beginning to end. You can't change the movie. Whether you want the main character to take a left turn or a right turn, he turns right. Whether or not you want her to open the door for the killer, she'll open it (out of sheer stupidity, no less). All of it, from beginning to end, already exists. Every last part of it. But there's different cuts of the movie. There might also be remakes of it. There's different movies altogether where none of the story is the same.

It's the same thing with this universe, with every universe. They've already been made. They've already happened. And you can't change them.

So where does that leave us?

In a sense, we observe. What do we observe? How do we observe? Why do we observe from a human body? If everything is predetermined, then what is consciousness? How is it that we're observing things in what we perceive to be our lives if our lives aren't actually "life" in the traditional sense of the word because of predeterminism?

I have one possible answer: We are not humans. There is no such thing as being human. Humans are not individuals. Humans are part of each universe (or at least the ones where humans exist which, statistically speaking, are vastly outnumbered by the ones where humans DON'T exist).

But then, if we're not human, what are we?

We are the universe. Our own universe, anyway. And we've decided to press "play" on one of the humans in our universe.

There's more like this I can get into, but I think I'll leave it at that for now.