>Apple is experienced with handhelds (ipod,Iphone)

Wow... imagine an Apple handheld.

*no removable battery,
*will break in about 1 year
*comes out with newer gen every year.
*less feature than most other handheld in the market

*shivers*

Please people, this almost certainly wouldn't be a traditional console. I would expect handheld gaming (or even just a more game-oriented iPhone) and a casual orientation. Nintendo is the company that should be concerned here.

I think Apple can make a real splash in the handheld market, but not the console business. I can see them making a compact gaming handheld with a built in hard drive that does everything the PSP does but better. Games could be DLed through I Tunes, and you're music collection and video collection could go on there also. I can see it working. They would have to buy a lot of support at first though since Apple has no gaming division to my knowledge. A smart start would be to start getting a gaming division up for Macs.

Will Apple be the first console manufacturer to feature entirely digital distribution?

My completely unfounded opinion would be that it isn't so much a brand new console as it is the evolution of Apple TV.

Think about it, A single tv top unit which allows you to purchase, store and play movies, tv and games. This way it doesn't have to make a major console plunge like a gaming console. By being a digital distribution/multi purpose console, it wouldn't need the muscle of a full console entry. It could quickly rack up it's own VC equivalent, and the insured install base would guarantee that most PC games would come out for Mac as well. I'm assuming that they system would play Mac games...

The largest hurdle would be the size of the hard drive. Will they invent the super mega giganto drive? Or will they actually have the games stream as you play, meaning that only save data is actually stored on your box?

Did I mention that this is all my completely unfounded predictions?

Making a console makes perfect sense for Apple. Not because they want to compete in the console video game market (though they obviously would be) but because they want to compete in the content delivery market. They want their own box to sell their own goodies on like MS is doing with Live and Sony is setting up with PSN. All three companies probably see set-top boxes as the future and they each want to create an ultimate all-in-one device.

Sony and MS want you to play their games, sure, but they make a lot more money if you're buying the other content they will/do provide. If you buy movies and TV shows they make a whole lot more money. Especially Sony, since they own a major studio.

And Apple probably wants a peice of that pie. The upside for them is that they get to come from the other direction (they already have the content service down pat, unlike the competition). Plus, they already have a massive asset in the iPod which would, quite obviously, have functionality with the proposed console. Since they already have the iTunes service in place, pairing that with a device that can make it even easier to put music on your iPod is a good advantage the competition can't shake.

While Apple does need to be prepared to sell less than 10 million, perhaps much less, the combination of nearly virgin territory (steamed-content set-top box industry, not consoel gaming) and existing infrastructure to take advantage of that resource make it worth the gamble. The rewards outweight the risks drastically for them right now, and following their MO it's pretty likely that the system will be sold for a profit day one with performance between Wii and 360 and a launch like any of Apple's other recent products (which is to say better than Sony and MS have done this gen).

I don't know how well this could turn out.  And i'm not referencing the Pippin.  Apple is a different company now than they were back then (IIRC Steve didn't even come back to Apple till Pippin was all but dead and his return has been instrumental in Apple's rise the last decade).  Still I have my doubts.  

Concerning the first part above I think it'd be wise for them to look into an Apple gaming PC.  One of the reasons certain people give for not getting Macs is the lack of gaming without using something like Cider.  Of course that shouldn't be a huge concern with Parallels or even better bootcamp but for some people it's just not worth the hassle.  If Apple can somehow start getting more developers behind OS X for gaming it'll really help them gain more marketshare and general acceptance.

However a traditional standalone gaming console doesn't seem like something Apple would excel at.  The higher costs they charge for their hardware won't sit well in gaming communities.  For computers with the Macs you get what you pay for in the respect that there is a certain quality guarantee on the hardware Apple ships.  But even amidst all the RROD stories console buyers aren't basing their decisions off of possible hardware reliability and if Apple tries to put out a product priced higher than they could based off of raw specs the gaming community would trash it.  The PS3 had less than stellar sales and many point to the high price point but that's at least justifiable with the Bluray drive.  I could very easily see Apple price it high without such an incentive just so they don't lose money per console.

Also (and I freely admit this next point is quite suspect ) it seems quite apparent that Steve Jobs hates buttons.  Just google "Steve Jobs hates buttons".  A gamepad without buttons even if it uses a multitouch trackpad or some such technology will be very crippled.  People are already complaining about the Wiimote's lack of buttons.  I can't fathom what Apple would come up with.  I mean the second part up there even mentions using an Ipod as a control option.  I'm assuming they mean the touch/iPhone but even that won't suffice.

Developer support is also an issue.  They don't have the resources MS did with their PC gaming connections to neccessarily get 3rd party support rolling quickly and they don't have the brand name 1st and 2nd party studios Nintendo and Sony have at their disposal.  I suppose just off the Apple brand name people would try to at least give it a shot at first as Apple is amazing at marketing so a decent launch is quite possible.

I dunno in the end Apple's been successful enough that I can't doubt them completely but i'm still skeptical about this.

You know, this thread has reminded me of something: back when the CD became a viable format, CD-based game consoles started popping up from every aspiring company out there. We had the Atari Jaguar, the 3DO Multiplayer, the Pioneer LaserActive, the Phillips CD-i, the Amiga CD32, the Apple Pippin, the FM Towns, the PC-FX, even the Casio Loopy. None of them really made it very far. Still, are we on the verge of another market explosion of would-be contenders?

Apple should team up with Sony. They shouldn't try and enter and be heroes on their own against Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo. That is just suicide as those companies are too powerful in the sense that they control too much of the market and it would be damn near impossible to break that without taking billions of dollars worth of losses in the process.

On first thought i'd say no Sky Render. HD consoles and expensive production costs would scare away would-be contenders from flooding the market.

But the Wii and the shovelware may seem appetizing to certain parties. I could easily see Conspiracy (king of shovelware) make a console. Obviously it's killer app would be the exclusive Ninjabread Man!

Seriously though I doubt it. Developing crap and spitting it out for existing consoles is relatively cheap. Investing enough to establish your own hardware line takes commitment and determination, both in the sense of time and money.

 Sry for the double post.

Why would Apple neccessarily team up with Sony?  Nintendo seems far more compatible with Apple's MO towards simplicity and design.  The only thing Sony and Apple would agree on is their price and hatred of Microsoft!