back to article Rumour: Next Apple iThing to feature 65-inch screen. Four-limb multitouch, anyone?

Apple is rumoured to have ordered some 65-inch LED panels, which some say might be used to build a huge new iTelly. According to voluble Korean analysts, an unnamed firm is working with Cupertino to produce the epically large screens. “The company is making 65-inch organic light-emitting diode sample panels for Apple’s iTV in …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. TRT Silver badge


    Put them in some Apple Stores and run advertising or demonstrations?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Ermm...

      Exactly my thought, internal use for digital signage or demo suites. I doubt they would take on Sammy in the TV arena.

      1. Lusty

        Re: Ermm...

        Or even Microsoft, who actually sell screens of this size with multitouch for I think 20 points. They have a demo unit at TVP in Reading and it's pretty cool

        1. Bullseyed

          Re: Ermm...

          This. MS was demoing CRM on an 80 inch touchscreen at Convergence this year.

    2. DougS Silver badge

      Re: Ermm...

      Well, wouldn't they buy monitors then, instead of just the screens? They don't have enough stores to make it worth it to buy screens and contract out the manufacturing of monitors for their stores, even if they had 100 65" panels per store.

  2. Longrod_von_Hugendong
    Paris Hilton

    Apple iTV...

    is ITV still a channel in the uk? We have STV here so I don't know about down in Englandshire anymore. I can see a sueshitstorm occurring if so. Mind you, would be better to do a VAX type deal, but when lawyers and solicitors get involved, nothing is sensible.

    1. jai

      Re: Apple iTV...

      Apple stopped calling it an iTV years ago, before they actually released the AppleTV. I doubt they'd have gone back to using iTV.

    2. Bullseyed

      Re: Apple iTV...

      When has Apple let prior art stop them before?

    3. jonathanb Silver badge

      Re: Apple iTV...

      Yes, the English and Welsh channel 3 is ITV. ITV's other channels, ITV 2, 3 & 4 and CITV are available throughout the UK, and ITV London is available in Scotland on Freesat, Sky and Virgin. ITV London actually has more viewers in Scotland than STV.

      Apple are well aware they can't call their TV products iTVs, it is just that some journalists outside the UK have't heard of the British TV channel and assume that is what it will be called.

  3. Big_Ted

    Nah your wrong....

    They want to import them and cut them up to make the iWatch.

    Its just their way of fooling the tech press etc.

    Oh and if I was to spend the sort of money one of these would cost I would rather get a top of the line 3D projector and a recliner seat for comfort. The real price would be high enough without the "Apple" tax added.

    1. ThomH Silver badge

      Re: Nah your wrong....

      Maybe they've seen which way the wind blew with mobile screens, taken a moment of self reflection to realise how quickly they keep pace, and decided just to launch the watch with a 65" screen?

  4. Pete 2

    watching them watching you

    > iWindow, to block out all the nastiness of the real world and replace it with shiny happy vistas

    Hmmm, and then have little webcams in them so your windows can watch you.

    1. phuzz Silver badge

      Re: watching them watching you

      Vista might have been shiny, but it never made anyone happy.

  5. Ralph B

    What would I like to see Apple do with its huge screen?

    Put one face-upwards on the ground, then place four more, facing inwards, around each side of the first. Start the Farmville app on each and then lower your Apple customer into his own personal walled garden.

  6. This post has been deleted by its author

    1. FartingHippo

      Re: It's just a 4k screen

      iZombies, like normal zombies, are in serious need of some brains.

    2. Ian Michael Gumby Silver badge

      Re: It's just a 4k screen

      If Apple can corner the market on 4K or 8K screens, they will have a leg up.

      Its not just resolution but the material behind the pixel (LED vs OLED)

  7. Nick Ryan Silver badge

    I'd highly doubt that an iTV (hmm, possibly name issue there) Apple TV would be touch based. It's just not a remotely sensible way to interact with a large screen unless you are either (a) a small child who watches TV from 2" away or (b) Microsoft and insist on using a touch interface where it's not useful.

    Instead I'd expect to be able to use an iPad, or possibly an iPhone to control the device. Possibly to play content back on one or more of these devices as well. Even just supporting audio would be a dream in many houses where viewers can listen to the tv at their own volume without disturbing anybody else.

    Apple would doubtless be tempted to put in proprietary speaker links, to fair quality, but somewhat overpriced speakers.

    A more visionary Apple would turn the device into an entertainment hub, pretty much iTunes on a TV with wireless link to local devices. Such an iTunes in essence ought to require little more than a reasonable processor, local (cache) storage and a display and this kind of spec is getting there with many "smart" TVs and set top boxes.

    1. Irongut

      Most of what you describe sounds like a TV with a Chromecast dongle plugged into it.

      1. dogged

        Or any old telly with an XBone and Kinect, if you wanted to dump the iPhone/iPad requirement.

        But that's silly - what self-respecting buyer of an iTelly wouldn't already own an iPhone and iPad?

      2. Frankee Llonnygog

        sounds like a TV with a Chromecast dongle plugged into it.

        Or even an Apple TV

    2. James Micallef Silver badge

      "...touch based. It's just not a remotely sensible way to interact with a large screen ..."

      not to mention the fingerprints

    3. Bullseyed

      "It's just not a remotely sensible way to interact with a large screen unless you are either (a) a small child who watches TV from 2" away or (b) Microsoft and insist on using a touch interface where it's not useful."

      If you've done PPTs in the corporate world, you'd understand how nice using a touch interface on a screen that big is.

      1. Nick Ryan Silver badge

        If you've done PPTs in the corporate world, you'd understand how nice using a touch interface on a screen that big is.

        You mean stock whiteboard / projector systems? They're not often physical touch, even less often multi-touch with the enhanced control that can bring. This is aside from decent size "displays" where touching them isn't feasible unless you are 8' tall with arms that match. It may be marginally incorrect, but a sub 5' sales woman repeatedly jumping to reach parts of a whiteboard system is something that is hard not to find amusing and wipe from your mind...

        Mirror the display onto a tablet, touch that without having to lean across a larger screen covering it. This also means that the presenter can remain facing the audience. iPads already have have this functionality. Not that interactive white boards don't have a use, but on many corporate occasions this would be better.

  8. Tromos

    Next Apple iThing to feature 65-inch screen.

    Some would consider that excessive for a phone.

    1. ItsNotMe

      Re: Next Apple iThing to feature 65-inch screen.

      Not a new's the next big new iThingy in wearables.

  9. Semtex451 Silver badge

    "Maybe an iMirror to make all you ugly fanbois a little prettier"

    I have a feeling that even 65 inches won't make me look any better.

    1. Frankee Llonnygog

      Re: 65 inches won't make me look any better

      It might - to a she-whale

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    On a wall?

    Hmm. I use 2 or 3 screens, depending on where I am. I would have use for a large screen where I can actually keep everything on one single screen, this would just give me screen real estate above the space I need normally.

    Having said that, buying 2 extra standard 27" screens is a LOT cheaper than this new monster, so I'll pass. I buy standard 27" PC screens with the dual DVI adaptor - much cheaper and works just the same (that I like OSX is no excuse to slavishly buy *all* kit from Apple)..

  11. bpfh Silver badge

    I'm fairly sure...

    That iTV is already a registered trademark, at least for the UK and especially linked to tellies....

  12. LordHighFixer

    what use?

    65" screen, 4 limb multi touch? 3d HD interactive porn of course....

    1. Christoph Silver badge

      Re: what use?

      5 limb for male users?

      1. Bullseyed

        Re: what use?

        The fingerprint scanner did work on knobs and nipples. Apple may have just been practicing for the future.

    2. SumDood

      Re: what use?

      "65" screen, 4 limb multi touch? 3d HD interactive porn of course...."

      Only wa***rs would buy such iThings.

      Brand consistency?

  13. Feet-R-up

    Obviously they're going for "iTwister"

    Ya just lay the thing flat on the floor and have a go.. .. .. . (Clothing optional perhaps?)

  14. SumDood

    "What would you like to see Apple do with its huge screen?"

    Stick it up its corporate jacksie, I think.

    Can't avoid making connections with iSh.., iCr.., etc.

  15. Andy Tunnah

    Eegads imagine the price!

    This will be a tough sell for apple because OLED screens are absolutely amazing...all of they couldn't differentiate on picture quality. TVs all kinda look the same nowadays, very minimalist so can't go there either.

    All that leaves is the probably going to end up with a fondleslab-sized remote to justify the no-doubt heart-attack inducing price premium.

    The other thing is Apple are so used to bringing devices out "first", being a pioneer...OLED TVs are already coming out so Apple will be playing catch up...although I'm sure that won't stop them claiming copyright infringement somehow

    1. Bullseyed

      Re: Eegads imagine the price!

      I can't think of a single thing Apple did first. Except maybe those horrible bright colored iMacs back in the day.

      1. ThomH Silver badge

        Re: Eegads imagine the price! (@Bullseyed)

        That's what the posters inverted commas around 'first' were meant to indicate, I think.

        Apple's modus operandi has always been to spot a nascent market (e.g. home computers, GUIs, MP3 players, web-enabled phones) and leap in with the first second generation product to become the early market leader. If unable to keep commanding control of the entire market (i.e. in everything except MP3 players) then the retreat is into the high end niche.

        I cannot imagine that Apple could succeed in televisions.

        1. Bullseyed

          Re: Eegads imagine the price! (@Bullseyed)

          Wasn't sure. He seemed to be back and forth on sarcasm levels.

          I'm not entirely convinced that they'd be unsuccessful. They could be running some kind of negotiations to incorporate the "cable box" into the TV that would give them a jump. That is basically what they did with the iTunes market back in the day. Everyone seems to be taking that approach to streaming, but not to cable. Cable providers are heading more toward "on demand" and "apps" on smart TVs and other streaming boxes, so it isn't much of a stretch. However, time is short before the market delivers that sort of functionality on its own.

        2. jonathanb Silver badge

          Re: Eegads imagine the price! (@Bullseyed)

          They can succeed by having a decent UI, something which all current TVs lack, and a way to do everything with just one remote and no need to switch between different devices all with different UIs.

          1. DougS Silver badge

            Re: Eegads imagine the price! (@Bullseyed)

            Do you really care about the UI on your TV though? I mean, how often do you actually have to engage the TV's menu? I do it once every few months, not counting input selection (and that would be fixed by having a remote with buttons for HDMI1 / HDMI2 / HDMI3) Sure, the remote can be improved, but for the most part you aren't interacting with the TV, but with something connected to your TV.

            It would be nice to not have to switch between devices with different UIs, but the only way around that is to convince everyone else to give up their own UI (which includes advertising, which they make money from) and let Apple take over the UI. That's not going to happen. So you'll still have the DVD player UI, the Tivo UI, the Comcast UI, the Directv UI, the Roku UI and so on.

            Microsoft tried to "fix" this by overlaying their own UI on top of the device's UI, which is like covering up shit with vomit. I don't see how Apple gets around that unless they pay off the others to take over for their UI. They certainly can afford it, but do they have the will?

            1. jonathanb Silver badge

              Re: Eegads imagine the price! (@Bullseyed)

              If you watch Freeview channels using the on-board tuner, you interact directly with the TV. Also some TVs have in-built Apps for subscription streaming channels such as Eurosport Player.

              Otherwise the process goes something like

              I want to watch Sky Sports on Now TV. That App is on my Roku, which is plugged into HDMI 2.

              Pick up the TV remote and switch to HDMI 2.

              Now pick up the Roku remote, go through the Roku interface to load up Now TV, then the Now TV interface to load up Sky Sports, and maybe you have to pick up your laptop to buy the day pass to watch it.

              OK, great game, now let's check out the news. Pick up the Roku remote to close Now TV, the TV remote to go to HDMI 1, and the FreeSat remote to check out what's on the news channels.

              How about a standard API that works with all live streaming channels, and a single way to pay for subscriptions and day passes, and this same interface also works with Satellite and Terrestial channels, including the pay options available there, and deals with the on-demand services for all those channels much like YouView does for Terrestial channels at the moment. And it would also let you buy stuff from the iTunes Store and watch it.

    2. DougS Silver badge

      Re: Eegads imagine the price!

      Ummmm, you do realize there are exactly ZERO mass market OLED TVs today, right? The ones that exist cost 10x more than LCD/LED TVs, because the yield on TV sized OLEDs is so poor.

      And where do you get the idea Apple are used to bringing out devices "first"? They didn't have the first music player, the first smartphone, or the first tablet. They did have the first SUCCESSFUL one of each of those products, by being the first to market with a specific differentiating factor that was previously too expensive or otherwise impractical. To wit:

      1) iPod - first music player to use a mini hard drive, so it could hold a lot more music than the tiny flash based players of the day

      2) iPhone - first smartphone to have a large (for the day) multitouch screen able to run a full browser

      3) iPad - first tablet that was truly affordable. If you remember, Apple caught everyone off guard with the $500 price, as rumors had the price at $800-$1200 - leaving the early Android competitors like the Xoom trying to sell a vastly inferior product for more ($800 in the case of the Xoom) because they were banking on Apple coming in at $1000 or more.

      They don't need to be first to market with an OLED TV, but if they were first to market with an affordable one (because they could guarantee volumes of millions of panels which no one else can guarantee) it would be successful. Or if it has some other differentiating feature that makes it desirable (i.e. if there's something to Steve Jobs "I finally cracked it!" quote)

  16. 7teven 4ect

    Remember the advert with the televisions?

    Maybe just an update of the 1984 advert, 30 years on...

    1. SumDood

      Re: Remember the advert with the televisions?

      Except that today the hammer-wielder would represent, um, maybe Samsung or some incipient innovator.

      And the mass of drones? Well, if you go into Starbucks you'll probably see rows of identical logo-displaying disciples... fascinating social phenomenon. (Probably all Scientologists, too).

  17. Greg J Preece

    Hang on a sec. So Apple (according to rumour) want to make a 65" OLED, and make it multitouch, and add all their usual Apple proprietary nonsense to it, and their infamous markups?

    I know that Cupertino like to make expensive kit, but...who the fuck would the target audience be? A TV like that is going to cost mega-money, even now. And I don't just mean Apple's usual 50% more expensive than the competition stance, I mean the point at which you could buy a nice car for less.

  18. CmdrX3

    Wow!!! Totes #amazeballs. Did it again, best Apple device ever...#gonnaqueuenow............. is something I will definitely not be putting on Twitter. If only so many more followed my example.

  19. 2014ttv

    Actually company like TablerTV has already provided perfect solution for large-format multitouch screen. Just have bought an 70 inch multitouch frame from TablerTV, it's easy to assemble and goes perfectly with my VIZIO E701i-A3, it's 32+ precise multi points, and the price is quite acceptable. And they also have multi-touch frame from 40"-84", the thing is you have to buy the compatible display by yourself.

    1. Greg J Preece

      Wow, thank you, advertising guy! I had best run out and purchase this groundbreaking innovation immediately! With 32 point precise multitouch recognition, it's bound to be the product that makes my life worth living.

      ....You know, when you only register to make one post, and you do it with that username, and you copypasta advert-speak into the comment, you become a really obvious shill. 0/10, ask EA how it's done.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019