Tim Cook wasn't going to answer any direct questions about making an actual TV set last night at the DX: All Things Digital conference (live-blogged by Eric Savitz). The most he would do was answer the questions with more questions, "Can we control the key technology? Can we make a product that we all want?"
But Walter Mossberg got right to the point:
Mossberg: You don’t have a lot of content.
Cook: I don’t want to get into that.
Cook: We have some, there’s a lot of movies.
Mossberg: I have one, there’s not a lot of movies. What is the core technology in the TV?
Considering all of the businesses that Cook specifically said Apple does not "need to be in" (social networks, content, telecom carrier) his assertion that TV is “an area of intense interest” for Apple means the ball is in play.
Reports yesterday indicate that "Foxconn has received an order to start building an Apple smart TV — a flat-panel television that lets you connect to the Internet and all the cloud services out there." But if Apple is going to do a TV, consumers are going to expect to be able to get… TV on it. Lots of channels, lots of movies, lots of content.
So it may be that the hardware issues are moot. Apple has a ton of cool technology that could transform the television experience. Apple has been quietly developing a Kinect-style tracking system and 3D display since as early as 2005. Steve Jobs told Walter Isaacson that he had "cracked" the interface for an Apple TV set. I have been thinking that perhaps what he cracked was a set of gestures for routine television navigation that could become as universal as the iOS touch gestures have become for web pages and digital publications.
And of course it will have a gorgeous, densely pixeled display and be voice activated via Siri, to boot. But If Apple can't make deals for the content to flow through the set, game over. No point in proceeding. Apple may indeed have been ready to move on a TV on the hardware level for years, but to parphrase Bill Clinton, "It's the content, stupid!"
Help may be on the way for Apple and other digital disruptors, thanks to the FCC. The agency is considering changes to their video programming regulations to open multichannel distribution beyond the cable and satellite companies. The changes are in response to an ongoing case involving a "Christian media company called Sky Angel [that] tried to add [the] Discovery Channel to the lineup of family-friendly channels that it sells over the Internet." The FCC has requested public comments on whether to change the definition of a multichannel distributor to include new online distributors like Hulu, Netflix and… Apple.
At stake is both the meaning of "channel" for the FCC as well as the issue of whether a "multichannel video programming distributor,” (MVPD) needs to actually own the pipe it distributes through. If the aperture opens on the definition it would make room for Apple, and others, to make deals directly with content suppliers without having to negotiate with the intransigent cable and satellite companies who have no interest in allowing Apple into their turf.
Not surprisingly, an association of internet companies called the Open Internet Coalition, which includes Amazon, Facebook, Google and Netflix (but not Apple), have filed comments urging caution for the FCC before making big changes to the rules. This shows how politicized the issue is, and how wary Apple's competitors are, since a 21st century definition of MVPDs could ultimately benefit many of the members of this coalition.
If Apple is indeed ramping up for TV production in China, it may at the "on your marks" stage. If the FCC changes the rules for multichannel distribution of TV content, that would be a rousing "SET!" But until Apple knows it can deliver on content, they will not pull the trigger and shout, "GO!!!"
- – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – -
To keep up with Quantum of Content, please subscribe to my updates on Facebook or follow me on Twitter.
