This did not take over.
The headlines this morning were breathtaking. The Daily Beast's "Apple Preps TV Takeover" aggregated the WSJ article: "Apple Plots Its TV Assault." Having spent the past year temple-deep in the subject of future TV, I was of course intrigued by what Apple had in mind, even while I doubted that all one but one plan could work. (I'll save that for last.)
Tech writing is often about how things that don't yet exist will offer experiences you didn't know you wanted. But that is strangely not the case with the Wall Street Journal article, although the tone suggested it might be. Here are the key elements of Apple's plan:
1) "Apple is also working on its own television that relies on wireless streaming technology to access shows, movies and other content, according to people briefed on the project."
2) "Apple's technology could recognize users across phones, tablets and TVs, people familiar with the talks said."
3) "Apple described future television technology that would respond to users' voices and movements, one of the people said."
4) "The company, for example, has discussed new ways they could stream media companies' content, allowing a user to watch a video on a TV set, then pick up another device, such as a smartphone, and keep watching the video on the move, one of the people familiar said."
5) "The TV device Apple is working on would use a version of Apple's wireless-streaming technology AirPlay to allow users to control it from iPhones and iPads, according to people briefed on the matter."
6) "Such technologies could allow users to watch shows they have saved or purchased on two different devices, like a TV and a computer, without having to buy or record the shows twice."
Let's look at where these ideas already exist: 1) Apple TV for one. And if you want to see a really cool idea, check out Flingo. 2) Doesn't basically every device do this now? It's your device. But, just to be concrete, Microsoft's Metro technology is doing this, and ... 3) I believe this is currently called Kinect for XBox 360. 4) Just tried it on HBOGo with my laptop and tablet: yep, works. Pretty sure HuluPlus and Netflix have mastered this too. 5) I can do this with my Android on DirecTV. 6) Amazon and, yet again, Apple.
The point is none of these technologies has catalyzed an "assault" on television. And there's a simple reason why, skimmed across by the WSJ article with this quote: "What kind of cooperation Apple is seeking from media companies remains unclear."
That cooperation is pretty much the only thing that held television back from being in full revolution this year. Certainly Apple can create some really cool technologies to enhance, and perhaps even invent new forms for, TV watching. But there is no dearth of those innovations. What is needed more than anything is an innovative business model. It's not as sexy as Siri technology, but that's the critical vacuum at present.
If the article had been about how Apple is convincing media companies to release its most-desired content, for on-demand streaming via Apple portals, to a worldwide audience, with the promise that scaled viewership would create value comparable to scarcity, then this morning's headlines would have been justified. Don't hold your breath.
