Apple and Google already missed the bus on this game. Microsoft setup global alliances with all the providers, which is Microsoft’s sweet spot for business.

Apple’s and Google business models are all about themselves, and they don’t traditionally partner as a part of their core business. TV requires a large food chain of partners, and this is where Microsoft has excelled.

Good luck to the contenders, I hope Apple and Google do come out with hot technologies, because Microsoft needs to be kept on its toes in this game.

iCloud = Microsoft Azure services from Microsoft. Sorry but this is a FACT.

How about an article focusing on the new chips (A6, A6′, whatever ) would be used in Apple TV?

Well, good luck with that. Because Silicon Valley still doesn’t apparently understand why people watch television, and no magic set top box or any other gadget matters one tenth as much as the content. So, Eddie should probably rethink its strategy here, because unless he has content sewed up, nothin’s gonna happen.

Joe

The only advantage Apple releasing a TV as part of the solution is actually the typical ideology going back to the original iMac—3 steps, take out of box, plug into wall, no step 3.

But most people have already gotten used to the idea,–as confusing as it still can be–of an external device.

The XBox problem is branding. Gamers will get a TV. But non-gamers don’t want a game machine. Giving MS the benefit of the doubt and assuming the 58 mill mentioned earlier is one per household, that is still less than 50% household penetration. The other households either don’t want an MS game machine or don;t want a game machine to begin with, much less one to use for a TV.

The killer TV device is going to have to be for TV from the get go, probably without any indication of what is internet or network TV, just TV shows and movies. Ultimately the consumer doesn’t care if it is from a network, cable company, or internet. They just want their show.

Joe