http://www.engadget.com/2014/07/30/apple-tv-rumor/
It's funny that because of Xbox, Microsoft is kinda narrow minded or limited in their Living room domination options, their ineffective control the TV efforts.
They could have made a TV platform the focus of those plans a while back if it wasn't for their forays into, set-top box, console, digital audio, and mobile as in phones and tablets a software platform for Smart TV might have survive Ultimate TV and Media Center. Nevermind that it will soon just be all purpose 'Windows'.
Yes consoles are that prime example of over effort to the point of impracticality, as in a 399 Xbox is not a set-top-box, it also still now, so many years later is not going to win over people who want a simple cheap smart TV. Even if it can do this that and all of the other things. It has to do them all well otherwise savvy users will continue to have an assortment of options that are designed to do TV, Audio, Games teleconferencing well, even other than people who's answer to everything is a good smartphone.
Ever since I was a tester (mainly again while working for VMC at EA Montreal) it was like Apple should have a 40" TV to succeed the Cinema displays they used to have, but still don't, and they barely really support bluray. That display wouldn't have to be smart, but it could have been. It could easily have been as useful as an iPad, and with 64 bit coming up even those will be capable of claiming console like capabilities. But on a palm sized screen. What about the living room? Will Apple TV get boost, finally to support 4K like all those Chinese STBs?
I wondered if Apple's post bluray mentality (most of their screens far exceed FHD, and so would be prime targets for post bluray resolution, closed to cinema media.. yet no movie deals. No exclusive 4K content.. no 4K TV service through iTunes or Apple TV.
Sure iTunes store is a great source for all that stuff at FHD.. but not really moving forward? I'd still stick with bluray and not have to deal with the added hassle and costs of dealing with Apple compared to a shitty PC and FHD TV. But I've had an eye out for that post FHD Apple TV running Siri and iTunes for a while.
Also there's Xbox One, for the people who don't want PS4. But neither of those is marketed as 4K 60hz ready. So maybe in 5-6 years? But not today
Today the issue is cost. You don't want to buy a 399 console that lacks real momentum for games and doesn't support 4K.. just yet. Sure it probably plays vanilla FHD 7.1 bluray movies just fine.. its not an S bluray player. Or even a mediocre one. They put that HDMI passthrough on Xbox One for a reason. 'We're just not good enough at anything to think of ourselves as an all in one solution', probably.
Which was so true for a while I just plugged Chromecast into it. Obviously you're meant to plug your dedicated TV box through there.. but that's because Xbox One Guide isn't mature enough just yet to BE that STB. And there's no latency issue if you're using it to pass a passive TV signal.
So.. what else does MS have? Something to compete with the mythical Apple post FHD TV.
Surface? Surface TV?
They had a ripe opportunity to merge Xbox and Surface already.. but didn't. Why? because Wii U failed so miserably? You can use Surface with Xbox.. but there's no billion dollar budget forcing that to happen like Kinect. Arguably one makes more sense than the other.. even if Kinect is a 150$ to 200$ separate unit, and Surface is double that.
Surface mini then? Nope.. dead in the water. But that would have been great.
I mean if Kinect, Bing, and Skype, Cortana and OneDrive, and the ex-Surface Mini plus whatever other hardware and services Microsoft can come up with for a post Smart TV econsystem..That TV sized Surface "Computer" with something like Windows as a foundation for it, would be great.
Now.. why? What else could make Surface TV appealing?
If you have a surface, or Windows phone, or Xbox already would you need a 4K Surface TV? It doesn't sound cost effective.
Perhaps not, but IF the thing was aimed at home entertainment and not something to be connected passively to cable box.. not 'just' anyway.. I mean I'd consider a Surface TV for the same reasons an Apple TV sounds appealing, like I would want a Vizio Smart 4K TV before any other shitty passive monitor or TV that's only claim to fame is a large razor thin bezeled pixel dense glass frame.
Like.. even though AMD isn't winning over anyone with their FreeSync.. what if. What if they had a TV that supported FreeSync (or more importantly GSync but that would be weird to license because AMDs solution isn't popular enough and if Xbox couldn't support it via software update). Like could Xbox One be updated to support existing FreeSync or GSync monitors? I hope so, but even if they do, and that later pushes generic Smart TVs to support it.. Microsoft would need to put a foot forward. Sony could have.. but not now.
I've been wondering for years why we're still watching TV shows, (still no smart) Ads, and movies at 24, 50, and 60 frames per second refresh rate. While movies are trying 48, 96 frames per second those aren't popular.. how do you take them hone? If you're stuck with ubiquitous 50-60hz refresh rate and no real standards otherwise.. you have no real freedom of choice and all content even Smart TV content (applications) has to live and die by those refresh raters.
But should they?
As a computer technology company.. even Surface should have some sort of support for monitors that have dynamic timing. One could further argue that if you're looking at web pages or spreadsheets.. you timings can be lower than e-paper. Add motion control and you can have a system that will actively respond to a user being active or passive.
Apple could probably have any number of innovations planned for a TV.. but they don't seem ready to jump into that market yet without content. That's fine for them.
Microsoft (and Google) seem content with running along head first based on innovation and features.
Like honestly.. who really thought Windows Phone and Surface (mobile) was going to be a thing? *slides hands into pockets*