Steve Jobs was 'excited' about an Apple HDTV, but content deals are needed - Page 2

That's just one sport, a nice start, but not enough to get America to cancel their cable and satellite subscriptions.

For Apple (or anyone else) to make a dent in online sports content distribution, they really need to cover the major professional sports (NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, NASCAR, PGA/LPGA, ATP/WTA, etc.), major collegiate sports (football, basketball), and the larger events (Olympics, World Cup).

I bet it involves Siri

I suspect that if Apple were to bid and win the upcoming broadcast spectrum auction(s) -- that it might level the playing field and allow Apple to negotiate form position of strength -- to provide access to, and deliver of, content.

They in effect could be because they would be for iTunes in general.

Wu is right about the cable companies, networks etc being hesitant about this, because of the head in the sand clinging to the Nielsens and considering online the same as OTA so Syndie deals cut off access on iTunes, hulu, netflix etc.

But he is also a tad wrong about the whole music thing. They didn't turn to iTunes because of piracy. They were terrified of iTunes for that reason. They thought that the iTunes store would make it easier for folks to pirate. Especially with Apple wanted to yank DRM.

The networks and studios are likely feeling the same way and sure as heck are worried about an all you can eat buffet at a price like even $50 a month. Especially if Apple wants them to also put up everything without delays (HBO, Showtime etc included). So don't. Get the titles yes but not the buffet. Many folks would be happy with just knocking $1.00 off all the purchasing prices for shows. They would also be happy with a 1080p file that was half the bit rate of a blu-ray and 2.1 sound. Toss in the features from the disk sets on a little companion pack or as 'season pass only' add ons (preferably both).

For movies, give us a EXTRAS that works on appletv, computer, iPad etc with one buy. Create an API that will recognize if we already bought the movie for those iOS apps and then give us the video clips in a features pack or something for the computer. Give us that same 1080p/2.1 HD from the TV shows with perhaps a SuperHD that is true blu-ray quality and sound for those nuts enough to buy it.

And add visual audio tracks with the CC. Even if it has to be added later and we are allowed to redownload.

and go global. Separate online and OTA and just allow all shows and video out at the same time. or on tv within a week or two. If folks know that the global file is going out in a week those that pirate due to delayed access won't be as inclined.

And the number one way that iTunes etc can counter pirating. MAKE IT COUNT. If folks know that their purchase or their view is being counted along side the ratings they are more inclined to get their fav shows though legal means because what they do can keep or kill a show. That only 25k folks are counted in the ratings means for millions "doesn't matter what I do so why not just torrent it and save the cable money"


Spectrum has nothing to do with access to content. That is all in the hands of the studios and networks that own the shows/movies

Apparently, nobody gets the NBA \

I realize that!

But the content owners are interested in selling their content!

Who can they sell their content to?

Why, to companies that deliver that content to consumers (and aggregators)!

Currently, that includes OTA Broadcast, Cable, and some Internet.

If Apple had a BBB (Big Bag of Bandwidth), I suspect that the content owners would be willing to discuss "selling access" to their content with Apple.

In the US, we call it "whiner"...

Well, I guess it was inevitable.

"WAAAAAH! My predictions about the iPhone nano didn't come true! Better start raping some other baseless rumor!"

"WAAAAAH! My predictions about the xMac didn't come true! Better start raping some other baseless rumor!"

"WAAAAAH! My predictions about the redesigned iPhone didn't come true! Better start raping some other baseless rumor!"

Frigging analysts.

We may be thinking of this wrong. One of the game-changing things about the iPhone was when the phone function became just another app. Apple may have plans for a 55" screen in the living room, but I bet it will not be another TV.

My guess is it will be "iWall", with modular borderless screens that can be combined into one "desktop". TV will just be one of many windows.

Contracts and potential lose of customers. They aren't that stupid. Sure they will cut that $10 a month or whatever "multi-item" discount you are getting but you are still $40 a head.



Nope. First, not sure that legally they could. Second, Apple and their iTunes system is designed to kill the need for cable. So this would be the cable companies killing themselves. Won't happen.

the folks to go to are the content creators. So the record labels, not the radio stations. The networks/studios not the cable companies


And they would still have to make content deals. So why not just make deals for what they have in place already. Especially when the deals with the current networks would block any deals with this new Apple network if it was a TV one. The best they could get it 4 months later on a syndie deal. No thanks.

As for becoming an ISP, perhaps Apple might do it. But getting the license to operate in various areas could be tricky. I used to be on Comcast here in LA but then TimeWarner managed to knock them and Adelphia out taking over both customer sets. I called Comcast to try to not get moved and was told that legally they could no longer service me because TWC has the rights to my area. I could go to ATT or Fios but that's it. I would love an Apple ISP but I don't expect it to happen



Actually no. That's the way to make sure that things don't change.

One of the things that served Apple with the music folks is that they could point to millions of downloads. If you want to change the TV biz, legally buy your stuff from Apple and help them be able to go to folks like AMC and say "Hey look, in the first day the newest ep of the Walking Dead had 1 million downloads. With your cut, that's $700k of money to earn back the budget cost. And you're still getting downloads on that ep and the first two from the season. Not 'sample' viewers but real ones. Imagine if you opened this up for the world to download. You might make back the cost of each episode in first day downloads." THAT is what will get them to open up their eyes.





Right now on my Apple TV I can watch NBA, NHL, and MLB. All live, many out of market that aren't airing on my TV anyway. And if the other boys make an iOS app and offer such a service then you can bet that Apple will jump to make the deals to put it on the Apple TV as well.

Typical justification for being an asshole. Sorry, it didn't work.

Besides content deals, I would like to see Apple buy a carrier/ISP like Cogent to provide cheap fiber to business and homes. We are paying too much for low speeds.

Yeah, disruption's a bitch. Cable monopolies like Comcast will fight this tooth and nail. Comcast doesn't even want people using TiVo's with CableCards if they could find a way to make you "choose" their DVR services bundle for the extra recurring fee. And they do by making CableCards as much hassle as possible. And they'd reset your TCP data streams to competing services if they could get away with it (they can--they have the equipment to do it--but don't seem to at the moment). The sooner we can cut the cord, the better.

Jobs' comments in the biography were extremely vague, so assumptions at this point are risky. What he meant is totally open to interpretation.

A little off topic but, due to this article, current, nonetheless....

Is it just because of revelations being brought to light with the release of the book or does anyone else feel that the Apple's veil of secrecy may be slowly lifting?

Thinking different than all the posts and the article, what if the Apple HDTV was a tv that got rid of all the boxes on you entertainment center. A device that would replace the DVR, the cablebox, the surround sound system (but had speaker connections) plus it would have a great picture and a network connection, did all of the things that the current Apple TV does also. Allowing immediate use by anyone with any cable/satellite provider, plus had the internet also. The content delivery piece would then follow afterwards as the popularity of it increased the pressure on the content makers. Then there wouldn't need to be any deals with Comcast or the others, the TV would just work straight out of the box, it would be beautiful, it would be classy, it would be easy. And the back deals could take their time getting in place.

Go work for Microsoft.

Isn't everything?

The only reason the little black box gets away with its relatively meager popularity is because of its price. The same would not be true for a $999 iTV with no TV subscription..

They either get the shows that people want at a monthly fee or they don't sell a TV. I think it's literally that simple. They don't need 'every show', but they do need the vast majority of them, but more importantly they absolutely need a monthly deal. Otherwise they can't make it a revolution.

Witness hydrogen powered cars. Incidentally, I disagree w/your sig. Add a microphone to the Apple Remote so you don't have to fight w/ however many people (or screaming kids) you have in your living room, and voice control for the television is easily handled.

Give the remote a MIC and SiRi you're still fighting for a remote. A remote with a 2 day bettery life. Besides, talking to your TV remote seems like the yuckiest, most un-Apple thing I've ever heard.

iTV will have a physical remote, and the UI will be an iTV iOS variant with the UI on the TV. The remote better be Bluetooth though, because as much as I like the shape and design of the Apple aluminium remote, IR sucks donkey dick.

This is exactly what I said 2 days ago when the story first broke and all y'all calmed me a troll. Haha- He who has the last laugh last best.
Remember : Content is King. Doesn't matter if the digital hub is there 'cause without those TV shows and movies it ain't worth squat.

I don't think he was attempting to justify anything, merely providing anecdotal evidence of how content providers are driven by money at the expense of user experience.

Are you hiring?

Either BT or WiFi; the Remote app works nice right now.

And what about a supplementary mic? The remote's mic would just augment the TV's mic.

I said this 5 years ago.

No, but your ideas will go far at Microsoft.

I agree, but I need to fiddle with my iPhone, find the app etc. It's not ideal.


No MIC. Period.

If at some stage they add iTV control technology to Siri that's one thing, though I have my doubts, but that's a separate product. The TV product will have its own functionality and UI, and none of that will use cameras, Siri or anything else. It will have a "simple" remote. It just how Apple operates. It better fucking not be IR, though.

That is an awfully steep hill to climb - rights to the "vast majority" of TV content. Good luck with that. Never gonna happen IMHO. If that is the criteria, that Apple must negotiate a deal with dozens of major content providers (including all major sports haha), you are right, they will never sell a TV. However, I don't think you are right.

Any one of the major cable providers ALREADY has all those rights. And the pipe. And the customer base. And cable companies are cheap right now. Comcast for example has ~22M customers and market cap is $66B. Revenues of $38B. And $8B of profit last year, which is a lot better return than Apple is getting on its cash right now.

Steve's magic bullet?

The thirty dollar a month is more then reasonable. Currently, I have ditched cable. I use AT&T DSL for broadband. I pay $26 a month. I pay Netflix $16.99 a month (I will lower that to the $7.99 plan), and Hulu Plus $2.77 a month.

I'd pay $30 to get rid of Netflix and Hulu plus. The content holders really make no sense. I can get most current movies free at the library. I can get relatively new to DVD movies for a dollar a day.

The content holders would make more if they lowered the cost of content. They want you to pay for content you are not consuming. The content holders also view Apple's hold over the music industry as bad, when it reality it saved them.

Apple might be smart to partner with a company like Netflix who already is paying for content. Apple could contribute to the funds paid for content in return for Netflix to power an Apple branded TV with added content specifically for Apple subscribers.

Partner? Why not just BUY Netflix? Then they'd be able to get all the deals for video without frigging ads in the content.

Only to watch Steve Ballmer kill it

I don't know about you, but I get shows in my langage. It sucks, hard. I live in a country with a langage, was born in another and I'd like to have to press a button and get the original version, like DVD allows. iTunes prevents me from that, and since I currently use a MBA, I resent it. I don't want an Apple TV. I don't trust Apple to give me Heroes in English, and believe me, dubbed versions are painful. Really.

I can't believe this is the 'I've cracked it' that Steve was talking about. I could have thought this plan up. And many others have. This just seems too simple. I'm hoping for something better.

So does that make you an old troll?

And who's gonna make the screens- SAMSUNG?

Talk about a game-changer...

Watch this via Gruber:

AirPlay Mirroring on iPad 2 As Of iOS 5 Beta 6

How did I miss this?

Even more open to interpretation?

I think that "whinger" refers to someone who does this more consistently and repetitively than your garden variety "whiner".