Originally Posted by kotatsu
If anyone in their right mind thinks an Apple TV, integrated into a TV or not, could possibly replace that big stack of stuff in the Piper illustration, they're massively deluded.
Yes it's not just going to replace that pile. It does seem clear that Apple would like to be able to provide most of that content through their own simple AppleTV interface. Buy movies (like buying DVDs), rent movies (like DVD rental stores), subscribe to a "package" of shows (like cable), watch even the latest shows for free if you have ads (like FTA TV).
That takes a lot of agreements, and I think Apple is frustrated that all this hasn't already happened with AppleTV.
Originally Posted by esummers
I think that Apple might diverge from the normal iTunes model with this. If they are having trouble negotiating deals, let others do it for them. If they make an AppStore model, they can make a multi-source system for content.
Yes the appstore model might be a work around (and it'd be good if AppleTV was able to access content, regardless of who supplied it). If this happens, I'd rather see a single interface to all the content than have to open different apps (and a single payment system).
In general, it's time for Apple to work with Netflix etc.
Originally Posted by FredAppleHead
$100/month to your cable company will be small compared to what you'll end up paying for all the internet subscription content. Hulu, Vudu, and even You Tube will all require a monthly expense.
That is a very real danger. People finally get the "a la carte" model they've been screaming for and realise that smorgasbords really are cheaper restaurants.
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
A key component for the Apple television set, Munster believes, will be Apple's soon-to-launch data center in North Carolina. He believes the massive location could serve as a hub for a cloud-based iTunes service that would allow users to stream their catalog of movies and TV shows.
I think Apple wants to offer all the above and their data centre is key to that.
The question is whether they can negotiate the rights - actually get the networks & cable companies to buy in to their vision of the future (and see how they make their cut of course).
I wonder if Apple has 2 devices in the wings - a $99 iTV, and a $399 iTiVo (remember the TiVo rumours?).
- The iTV could stream shows (well, play while downloading?) like today, plus have apps. Integrated heavily with the iPhone etc as a controller.
- The iTiVo could do everything the iTV does, plus record FTA and record cable channels.
Apple isn't going to use the TiVo Premier's flash-based interface - and they'd be likely to add their own store content of course. But TiVo does a good job with its EPG and suggestions etc, it's a great recorder (in fact, an iTiVo wouldn't default to watching live TV - recordings would be a means to get content)
If Apple could find a way to make the recordings start and stop on time, and integrate TV season passes with iTunes purchase/rental offerings, it could get interesting. It's an interim step of course, until the TV companies are ready for the next step.
(Oh... the cheap iTV would have to play content recorded on the iTiVo of course!)
Originally Posted by smartin684
I see no justification to claim that Apple will release a $2000 TV. What does PJ see that Apple doing to justify this claim?
The only argument I can see is that the TVs are encroaching on AppleTV turf ... TVs ARE going to merge with computers as predicted long ago, but the devices they become will be more like iOS devices than Windows 7. So will Apple play in that new market? (and if not, why would people buy a TV with SamsungOS AND a separate iTV STB?)