The long-rumored Apple “iTV” is back, and this time the info is coming from someone other than market analyst Gene Munster. According to CultofMac, a “well-placed” source, who chose to remain anonymous, says that he or she has seen the Apple-made television, and that it includes both the Siri virtual assistant currently found exclusively in the iPhone 4S, as well as FaceTime video chat functionality.
In addition, the source says that the Apple television will look similar to Apple’s LED backlight Cinema Display monitors, but is “much larger” in size. The source claims that Apple “used Siri to make a FaceTime call.”
The source also said that Apple is preparing to unleash its HDTV to the public, though some analysts believe the mythical television won’t land in stores until next year.
Siri integration, of course, comes as no surprise. In Walter Isaacson’s recent biography of the late Apple co-founder and CEO, Steve Jobs is quoted as saying that he finally “cracked” the problem of how to offer an industry-changing television, and many assume that Siri — or some version of voice-controlled navigation — was the answer. CultofMac’s source says that the device he or she saw was exactly the same device Jobs was referring to in that quote.
Obviously, we have no way of knowing the authenticity of CultofMac’s source. But so what? If Apple really is planning to release a full-blown television — and industry consensus says it will — then Siri and FaceTime integration really aren’t that surprising. Nor is the fact that it could look like an Apple Cinema Display monitor. (Of course that’s what it would look like!) At this point, we just wish Apple would release the dang thing, so we can stop speculating about it.
I’d be interested if it came with a long, L O N G warranty: http://www.tomsguide.com/us/lcd-hdtv-repair-defect-warranty,news-15057.html#xtor=RSS-993
“Obviously, we have no way of knowing the authenticity of CultofMac’s source. But so what?”
You should be embarrassed to write that. You just told your readership that you’ve tossed your journalistic integrity right out the window.
“we just wish Apple would release the dang thing, so we can stop speculating about it.”
You can do the latter easily without the former needing to happen. Grow a set.
Shawn, obviously you do not frequent too many tech sites. Anything related to Apple is considered rumor and no authentic sources come forward using their real names anyways. Even Reuters and WSJ talk about secret sources.
“Shawn, obviously you do not frequent too many tech sites.”
LOL It’s funny that you don’t know how wrong you are. :)
“Anything related to Apple is considered rumor”
Not true.
“no authentic sources come forward using their real names anyways.”
Also not true.
“Even Reuters and WSJ talk about secret sources.”
Yes, they do. They also stand behind their sources, allowing their readership to have a modicum of faith in the nature of the information included. They also double and triple check their information – something neither Digital Trends or Cult of Mac is going to do because that would require…you know…journalism…
I actually completely agree with you, though just a couple things: First, I wrote those two “embarrassing” sentences you reference above fully understanding that they are, journalistically speaking, ridiculous. Why did I do that? Because the entire Apple rumor mill itself is absurd. Why try to hide it?
That said, the fact remains that people like to fantasize about what Apple could release next, so it is part of my job as a modern technology journalist to keep interested DT readers up on what people are talking about. Like it or not, that’s just how these things work nowadays. Perhaps Apple rumors aren’t for you, but a lot of people enjoy them even if they have little to no journalistic value. (Which, most of the time, they don’t.) Regardless, I completely understand why this rumor culture might disgust you.
My point of saying “so what?” was not that the authenticity of the source doesn’t matter — though, because Apple would never confirm an unannounced product anyway, making the verification of the information impossible, I would argue that it doesn’t — it’s that the source’s claims that the mythical Apple HDTV will have Siri and FaceTime are not particularly remarkable, true or not. In other words: I don’t believe anyone should be surprised if an Apple-made TV has Siri and FaceTime built in.
Second, in terms of other publications, like Reuters and WSJ, reporting information from anonymous sources: They may stand behind their sources, but that doesn’t mean the information is correct. The WSJ and Bloomberg were responsible for a bulk of the misinformation spread about the so-called “iPhone 5.” In my mind, a report from WSJ that is based on info from anonymous sources is no more believable than this one above from CultofMac. That is to say, there is no way to know whether or not to believe the information.
In the end, journalists like myself have a choice: Either we ignore all unreleased Apple product news that comes from anonymous sources — which would essentially mean completely ignoring all unreleased Apple product news that doesn’t come from Apple itself — or we play the rumor game, and report the interesting bits as they come along with the full knowledge and recognition that the information may very well prove to be incorrect. I choose to report on some of these rumors despite their inherent dubiousness because it’s fun to daydream about what might be in the pipeline. Some people agree, some think it’s all rubbish that should never exist in the first place. I’m OK with that.
“Perhaps Apple rumors aren’t for you…”
LOL Again – you have no idea just how funny that is.
“I completely understand why this rumor culture might disgust you.”
It doesn’t disgust me. It’s sad when journalists use specious, poorly sourced rumors as basis for specious, poorly sourced stories.
“The WSJ and Bloomberg were responsible for a bulk of the misinformation spread about the so-called “iPhone 5.”
Demonstrably incorrect. Web sites like Cult of Mac, 9to5Mac, Digitimes et al are responsible for the vast majority of “misinformation” regarding Apple rumors.
“In my mind, a report from WSJ that is based on info from anonymous sources is no more believable than this one above from CultofMac.”
While that may be what’s in your mind, as a journalist, you should know better. Journalism isn’t about what’s in your mind, it’s about facts. I can *guarantee* you that the WSJ has a *much* better track record when it comes Apple rumors than Cult of Mac.
“That is to say, there is no way to know whether or not to believe the information.”
Perhaps but would you agree that some organizations have a better track record and/or better sources so that even if we can’t be 100% sure, we can trust them more than others?
And you are trying to have it both ways – taking the pageviews from a rumor but then doubting its veracity. Whining about the rumors and wishing Apple would release the product just so you can “stop writing about it” – as if you have no choice in the matter. You are reporting on the rumor news while simultaneously thumbing your nose at it. That’s intellectually dishonest.
“In the end, journalists like myself have a choice…”
You have a third choice – find sources of rumors that are reputable. web sites/reporters that aren’t provably wrong on a consistent basis. Sites that don’t simply print everything their “sources” tell them to.
Report rumors that have some basis in logic/fact (hint: Apple HDTV isn’t one of those things). Report on stories that *aren’t* “inherently dubious” – stop chasing stories that can’t/won’t come true.
Shawn, no offense, but you are not coming across very intelligently. You are telling us we are wrong, but you are not providing any proof to back yourself up. Here are some major news outlets that got the iPhone 5 rumor wrong:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903327904576526690675657466.html
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-20114938-94/sprint-commits-to-$20b-order-for-30m-iphones-wsj-says/
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2394047,00.asp
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/10/03/sprint-scores-iphone-5-exclusive-thanks-to-20-billion-deal-with-apple/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/briancaulfield/2011/10/04/latest-wild-rumor-sprint-to-get-iphone-5-exclusive/
Look, if you want us to stop posting Apple rumors and speculations, then it simply won’t happen. All major outlets are producing these with “real journalists” supposedly doing the writing.
Unfortunately you are wrong. But that’s ok. Sometimes its hard to predict what’s really going on when you are looking in from the outside.
“Shawn, no offense, but you are not coming across very intelligently.”
How so? My spelling is pretty good and I think my grammar is passable. I have my facts straight and haven’t made any completely boneheaded statements, have I?
“You are telling us we are wrong, but you are not providing any proof to back yourself up.”
LMAO And Andrew Couts is not providing any “proof” to back up what he writes (“The WSJ and Bloomberg were responsible for a bulk of the misinformation”). But *I’m* the guy who is supposed to do the research the so-called journalist doesn’t do? So – I’ll make you a deal – have Couts back up his statement with proof and I’ll do the same.
Alternately, I’ll send you a contract and you can hire me to do his job for him. My rates are very reasonable.
“Here are some major news outlets that got the iPhone 5 rumor wrong.”
Straw man. No one said the sites you mentioned were right about the iPhone 5 or were perfect in their rumormongering.
“Look, if you want us to stop posting Apple rumors and speculations, then it simply won’t happen.”
Look, if you’re going to continue to make assumptions and create straw man arguments, then there’s not much point in you continuing on this discussion thread, is there? Please re-read what I said. I never said, “Don’t post rumors or speculation”. I said, “find sources of rumors that are reputable….Report on stories that *aren’t* “inherently dubious”. Not the same thing, is it?
“Unfortunately you are wrong.”
Sorry – about what? Not sure what you’re referring to.
“Sometimes its hard to predict what’s really going on when you are looking in from the outside.”
LMAO Once again, you make assumptions with no evidence and without knowing anything about the person you are talking to or about. You think I’m on the outside looking in. That’s a very amusing assumption – it has the added advantage of being completely wrong.
I think you are my new best friend. I am thoroughly enjoying your comments :)
Well, I’ve been in the technology media for 17 years now – I know how this is done. :)
I’m very glad you’re enjoying my comments. Maybe now you’ll take the time to respond to some of the questions enclosed therein? :)
No, too tired to debate and to be honest its hard to argue a point of view when there is no right or wrong. :) Maybe Andrew will!
No need for a “debate”. SImply answer the questions raised by your statements.
1) You said I wasn’t “coming across very intelligently.” I was confused by the characterization and asked for clarification. No debate needed.
2) You wanted me to provide proof of my statements. I said I was happy to as soon as Couts did the same. Have you arranged for him to do so?
3) You said, “Unfortunately you are wrong.” Again, I asked for clarification. Again – no debate needed.
You’re the one who jumped this comment thread. Looks like when the “debate” gets too much, you just bail on it, leaving many points unanswered. That’s a real shame and does a disservice to not only your web site but also your readers.
Nice. Stay classy Shawn. You are a MEDIA WARRIOR!
“Stay classy Shawn. You are a MEDIA WARRIOR!”
Sorry but that’s a complete non sequitor. I honestly have no idea what you’re talking about.
But it looks like you are doing the classic “Duck and cover” maneuver. You’re more than happy to lob bombs at me but don’t feel any need to back up what you say. And yet, you “demand” I back up my statements. It’s fairly typical of those who know their points hold no water.
It’s a real shame. You had an opportunity to engage and discuss but you’ve decided to throw grenades and run away.
haha you got dissed. Seriously Shawn, its hard to argue with someone like yourself. You come on way too strong. A good debate should be healthy. Try seeing both sides instead of just trying to tear people to shreds.
“haha you got dissed.”
Ummm…how?
“its hard to argue with someone like yourself.”
It’s actually quite easy. I ask a question. You answer. You ask a question, I answer. Simple, really.
“Try seeing both sides instead of just trying to tear people to shreds.”
“Tear people to shreds”? Seriously? This has been a completely civil discussion. There’s been little to no name calling and no one has called anyone a fanboy or a Nazis…yet…
If you think I was “tearing people to shreds”, you need to grow a thicker skin.
it’s basically no different than any other tv on the market…
big deal it’s a television,who cares…
why don’t they just make the apple TV 3 have all these features? Then all you gotta do is buy a small box for your TV? Heck my Xbox already has voice control for Netflix, Hulu and MLB…so they’re really far behind in that sense.
it’s basically no different than any other tv on the market…
How likely do you think it is that such a screen will be multi-touch capable? (My #1 wished for feature ^.^)
I can’t wait for idiots to pay $6,000 for this
Someone remember this prediction. This is what I predict the new Apple TV’s will have for features:
- Same features as their $99 Apple TV. iTunes support, Netflix etc. Identical
- I think Apple has found a way to get rid of the cable box alltogether. This means you will be able to (with subscription fee), watch any show you want, when you want. At at the correct times. Not sure how they will get around the local stations though as I can’t see VOD for local.
- Large screen sizes: 42″+ with LED backlighting
- Control your TV with your iPhone. Built in channel guide, stream movies from your Mac etc.
- HD Facetime thanks to the built-in camera
- Built in Siri control (which will be heavily criticized)
- iTV apps
- 3D. I don’t think it will have glasses-free 3D as that is a couple years off
Expect a $400-&00 premium over non-Apple TVs.
I doubt it’ll have a multi-touch screen (at sizes >32″).. would you want to get up off the sofa and touch your TV .. for ANY reason? That’s why the remote was invented! The fingerprints and smears would be the one simple reason not to offer that as a feature on its own.
Now gestures with your hands I can see – provided they aren’t stepping on any MS Kinect patents, of course.
3D with no glasses. Yeah, that’d be a killer right there.
I agree, not sure that I see the point of a multi-touch television screen. It seems like Siri would be the best answer
Agreed. I don’t think it will have a touch screen. Dumb idea on a TV. Imagine the fingerprints. I can see it having some sort of Kinect built in capabilities though. LG and Samsung both have them.