Will Next-Gen iMac Serve Up Our First Glimpse of iTV Features?

[Michael Essany]

Although industry sources claim that Apple's foray into the connected HDTV market is still a good ten to eighteen months away, Apple fans could get a glimpse at some of the "iTV's" magic through a slate of forthcoming functionalities that could show up on the next generation iMac.

According to a report Wednesday in Forbes, the latest research from Wedge Partners analyst Brian Blair indicates that the roll out of Apple's next iMac could deliver some of the aspects rumored to be attached to the hotly anticipated but still mythical iTV.

If Blair's sources and suspicions are correct, Apple may fuse an assortment of Apple TV and iCloud features into a next-gen iMac, which would be a slim machine with a large screen and sophisticated TV capabilities.

“We think this makes sense because while we typically think about the newest TV’s hanging on the wall in large form factors, Apple could effectively start with what they already have on the manufacturing line and slowly push their offering from 27 inches and scale up from there to 32 inches and then move on to the 42, 50 and 55 inch market,” Blair suggests. “In short, we believe the initial Apple TV is their iMac computer that can function as a TV, over the iCloud platform.”

Industry insiders and supply chain sources believe that the Steve Jobs' molded television set with Siri-powered voice input could turn up before the end of 2012 at the very earliest.

Source: Forbes

[KraXik]

I would be very surprised if its allowed to be called iTV.

There's already an ITV player and large broadcasting company called ITV.

I'm guessing AppleTV will stay.

http://www.itv.com/

[feidhlim1986]

iTV will NOT be used for the name. It's not a case of maybe, it won't!

[bry2k2]

I would be very surprised if its allowed to be called iTV.

There's already an ITV player and large broadcasting company called ITV.

I'm guessing AppleTV will stay.

ITV

Would make sense to leave it Apple TV, although its really sad, it'll be the only you'll have to reload the OS when something goes wrong, or constant security updates because someone keeps tuning your TV to the porn channel from the otherside of the world JK.

There is a limit to where computers/media should not be fused with your TV and this is it.

[stevelucky]

I would be very surprised if its allowed to be called iTV.

There's already an ITV player and large broadcasting company called ITV.

I'm guessing AppleTV will stay.

ITV

Don't be so quick. Let's not forget that they didn't own the trademark for iPhone either but they managed to make that work. The reality is, if they want to call it iTV, they'll call it iTV. A company with BILLIONS in petty cash can do just about anything they want to. Everything has a price.

[qumahlin]

Don't be so quick. Let's not forget that they didn't own the trademark for iPhone either but they managed to make that work. The reality is, if they want to call it iTV, they'll call it iTV. A company with BILLIONS in petty cash can do just about anything they want to. Everything has a price.

Not really and your comparison is invalid as that was a situation where the copyright was not being used or actively enforced. The way it works with copyrights is that its the companies responsibility to police misuse of them and to do it quickly. Had they filed thier claim as soon as Apple started using the term iphone they could very well have one, but the fact that they didn't coupled with inability to show any true product meant they lost their right to it

iTV is not such a case, Apple would lose in court, even if they drug it out for years no company would risk having to rename a product line like that.

[Cer0]

Not really and your comparison is invalid as that was a situation where the copyright was not being used or actively enforced. The way it works with copyrights is that its the companies responsibility to police misuse of them and to do it quickly. Had they filed thier claim as soon as Apple started using the term iphone they could very well have one, but the fact that they didn't coupled with inability to show any true product meant they lost their right to it

iTV is not such a case, Apple would lose in court, even if they drug it out for years no company would risk having to rename a product line like that.

Well they did have an iPhone product. It was created in 1998. They had an actual iPhone product. Infogear made the first one which Cisco bought. Then after grabbing up linksys cisco rebranded linksys VO-IP devices to the iPhone product line.

Which they stopped I think in 2006 so just short of Apple's big announcment in 2007.

[stevelucky]

Not really and your comparison is invalid as that was a situation where the copyright was not being used or actively enforced. The way it works with copyrights is that its the companies responsibility to police misuse of them and to do it quickly. Had they filed thier claim as soon as Apple started using the term iphone they could very well have one, but the fact that they didn't coupled with inability to show any true product meant they lost their right to it

iTV is not such a case, Apple would lose in court, even if they drug it out for years no company would risk having to rename a product line like that.

They might not be exactly the same, but I wouldn't say the comparison is invalid. First of all, we're not talking about a copyright issue, we're talking about a trademark issue. Two very different things. Cisco didn't "lose their right" to the iPhone trademark. Apple and Cisco came to an agreement that would allow both of them to use the name (Linksys iPhone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). While we don't know the specifics of the negotiation, I'll bet anything that there was a payoff by Apple. I'm not suggesting that Apple would attempt some sort of hostile takeover of the iTV name (and I'm definitely not suggesting that they should even try), I'm suggesting that they have a practically limitless supply of money and that with money, all things are possible.