Apple set-top box to blur line between live, on-demand content - Page 2

Yeah, I know it is their worst nightmare, but I still believe they are headed there whether they like it or not.  I think eventually the competition from content delivery over wireless broadband (not anytime soon, but eventually) will push them there.  There is place for cable in the future, but its not where they are today or where they want to be tomorrow.

They currently sell the content and the conduit.  If Apple finds a way to sell the content without them, they are left with only the conduit.  My guess is that somebody will come along in the next few years with a new, faster, wireless ISP technology and win a majority of that marketshare as well.  

Agreed, but its not only Apple that's going to find a way to sell content without the cable companies.  There will be others - Amazon, Google, and probably some company that right now only exists in the mind of a college student somewhere.

Ugh...this would solve nothing and is the wrong way to go. I'd be surprised to see this develop. As I have mentioned many times before, partner with satellite first.  They are more apt to progressive thinking...especially Dish. See some of my previous posts if you'd like the specificts of how it could work and beneift both parties.

Interestingly, I just saw a survey which may shed some light on this. They were proposing a system which had the following:

- Unlimited access to a wide range ("broader than anything currently available") of music and video for a fixed monthly charge
- Control of your home security needs (using wireless sensors for the doors and windows)
- Remote access via the Internet to control the system
- HD videoconferencing with an HD camera attached to the TV
- Health monitoring - sort of like the Nike shoe devices where they monitor your exercise patterns, heart rate, bp, etc
- Games (the survey specifically mentioned games 'like those on your tablet or smart phone')

Put that all together and it could be a significant feature set. Keep in mind that Apple's current set-top box is only $99, so you don't need to spend a lot to get all that functionality. In fact, the cost is low enough that they could easily do a 'free with a year of service' deal.

I don't think it's implausible at all - and I don't think it necessarily has to replace your current cable box - none of those things actually compete with a cable box.

Really, how do you figure? Want only Internet? Sure, that'll be $70 a month plus it'll be capped, oh you want unlimited data then you're gonna have to order a channel package.

Ummm put up a fiber network like Google is already doing.



https://fiber.google.com/mobile/about/

Trust me, if they lose in the content market, they will most certainly lose in the ISP market as well.  The reason is simple, and it is the same reason that Nest thermostats are so successful, they are competing with "Big, dumb, and slow companies".  And the cable companies are exactly that; "Big, dumb, and slow".

Also, there's really no need for users to upload content to the cloud that Apple can already stream, and I don't see Apple going the Slingbox/locker route to try and circumvent studios that it already does business with.

Sounds great, I'd love to get rid of my cable companies POS set top box.

I was considering buying the current Apple iTV, but adding it to my cable box just made it to complex for others in the house.

If Apple puts it AIO correctly they have me as a customer.

The hysteria over how entertainment content is delivered never ceases to fascinate me.  Here were are, once again busily debating the merits of a new sewer pipe, as though slapping a different logo on it will cause something new and wonderful to flow out of the low end in our living rooms.

 

We've reached the point in our cultural development where wrapping a dog turd in a Tiffany's box really will cause half the populace to wear it to work in the morning.

I agree that content quality is in the gutter these days but the nature of the distribution channel can affect the content quality. Youtube for example is an uncurated mess of lame videos where even low ranked videos don't sink to the bottom but it is extremely useful and popular. Television takes control away from the user - you can ignore content but you still pay for it.

To deal with the problem of poor content, it would take a system where the success or failure of content can be determined by the viewers much more directly. This happens with Apps. If an app is rated low or doesn't look good, you don't buy it and the same would apply to shows.

You wouldn't have to endure hours of filler to get the good shows, those would already be highly rated. To discover new content, they can have a stream made of up random content with Genius recommendations prioritized and then trending content followed by new and then everything else.

I'd personally like to see a system that can take down the stanglehold cinemas have on movie launches. Just have a Premiere feature where a new movie can show to hundreds of millions of people all across the world at once. It becomes the new Box Office.

350 million iOS users with Airplay capability, pay $3 for a Premiere and a new movie can make hundreds of millions in the first 5 minutes without so much as a hint of stale popcorn. Yeah it can be pirated more easily but the money is made as soon as it starts streaming and even assuming piracy happened with it, they couldn't build the same infrastructure to handle a high capacity and with the same ease of access without being quickly shut down.