or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Time Warner working to deliver live & on-demand shows to Apple TV
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Time Warner working to deliver live & on-demand shows to Apple TV - Page 2

post #41 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

wouldn't watchESPN give you access to played games?

No.  WatchESPN doesn't have any games- just clips for the most part.  ESPN3 app has the occasional spare college game.  But the major networks own all the broadcast and reproduction rights.  So even if ESPN wanted to re-air the broadcast, they'd only be able to do anything ABC owns.  Otherwise, what benefit would Fox, CBS, NBC to hand it over to them?

 

Sports fans get screwed and can't ever cut the cord.  They have us by the balls.  If I could just watch all the Cowboys and Rangers games- and the occasional Mavericks game, I'd be fine with just buying the handful of shows I watch on iTunes (Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Walking Dead, Game of Thrones).  But, alas, I can't.

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #42 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

I am confused why Apple gets in trouble for anti-competitive behaviour when Cable companies are allowed to preserve their monopoly by forcing Apple to adopt to their wishes. Ala Carte programming is what I want.

Apple offers ala carte programming of single episodes and seasons. The best form of ala carte. Furthermore, many programs offer a free pilot to invite viewers to watch new programming.
post #43 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Mark View Post

The long rumored TiVo killer from Apple may soon appear.

TiVo died years ago.
post #44 of 84
Cable industry says a la carte will drive low demand channels out. Everyone will want only buy the top popular ones. They say only bundling can support diversity of content. If that is true, I suggest they require subscribers to buy a certain minimum number of small channels as a part of a custom basket that each customer designs.
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #45 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by neckra View Post

This is awesome! Just a matter of time before Apple TV has apps for local TV based on area - and boom good bye cable cord! Very exciting news!

 

Isn't that cable cord your internet connection, which is how the Apple TV gets the content?

post #46 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

 

Isn't that cable cord your internet connection, which is how the Apple TV gets the content?

 

It's all the same cord, but when people say "cut the cord" they usually mean stopping paying for Cable TV.

post #47 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

Cable industry says a la carte will drive low demand channels out. Everyone will want only buy the top popular ones. They say only bundling can support diversity of content. If that is true, I suggest they require subscribers to buy a certain minimum number of small channels as a part of a custom basket that each customer designs.

 

A la cart sounds great, but we already have that with iTunes. The cost would likely be the similar (i.e. more than what people think).

 

In my view, if Apple can get it so that you can subscribe directly to TimeWarner WITHOUT having a TW cable running to your house (i.e. you bring-your-own-internet via Comcast, etc.), this will be what really changes things. If that ever happens (where you can just subscribe to TW like you do Netflix or Hulu+), you know all the other cable companies will want to be on there too (lest TW steal business from Comcast, for instance).

 

This would mean actual competition by removing the regional infrastructure monopolies. Prices would go down in all likelihood. 

post #48 of 84
Has anyone ever estimated the bandwidth required on the internet providers trunk lines (the lines leaving the cable office to go to your home) if a significant portion of TV watching became on demand streaming? With cable TV a single "stream" of NBC's programming can be split amongst multiple neighborhoods and then further split to individual homes. That single steam on the trunk line might be delivering content to 1000s of homes (which can then record on their DVRs to watch whenever convenient).

Now switch to the model where a big portion of viewers are streaming their own content, each getting their own stream on the trunk line. It would require massive upgrades to the trunk lines. Translated: your TV bill may go down but your ISP bill is going to skyrocket.
post #49 of 84

1) Amazing to see how this "hobby" has grown and evolved from its first 'over-sized' iteration.

 

2) Don't have an Apple TV, but they are making it more and more desirable for me to buy one and think I need to make the leap.

 

3) Don't have Time Warner, hopefully AT&T U-verse will do the same soon.

 

4) Congrats, Mr. Jobs, for another successful and revolutionary and intriguing product.

 

5) Samsung sucks!!! To compete they'll probably make their newly purchased Roku line (can they make/innovate anything on their own?) and make it so if you bump your Samsung Roku with your neighbors you can share movies.

post #50 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by mesomorphicman View Post

1) Amazing to see how this "hobby" has grown and evolved from its first 'over-sized' iteration.

2) Don't have an Apple TV, but they are making it more and more desirable for me to buy one and think I need to make the leap.

3) Don't have Time Warner, hopefully AT&T U-verse will do the same soon.

4) Congrats, Mr. Jobs, for another successful and revolutionary and intriguing product.

5) Samsung sucks!!! To compete they'll probably make their newly purchased Roku line (can they make/innovate anything on their own?) and make it so if you bump your Samsung Roku with your neighbors you can share movies.

Samsung bought Boxee not Roku, and speaking of Roku, they've had a deal with TWC since March.

http://blog.roku.com/blog/2013/03/05/twc-tv-launches-on-roku/
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #51 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by mesomorphicman View Post

 

5) Samsung sucks!!! To compete they'll probably make their newly purchased Roku line (can they make/innovate anything on their own?) and make it so if you bump your Samsung Roku with your neighbors you can share movies.

 
Dan is right- Samsung bought Boxee.  Also, not only has Roku already had their deal with TWC since March- they have also had a great app store and more flexibility than Apple for quite a long time.  Additionally- Roku introduced their streamer May of 2008, and Apple TV 2 (streamer) was September 2010.
Roku is pretty freakin' awesome to be truthful.  I really like a lot of things that they do, and they absolutely innovate (headphones in the remote is pretty cool).    There are several small things Roku has that I wish my Apple TVs did.

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #52 of 84
The Internet "pipe" just cannot handle the traffic that would ensue with a mass cut the cord transition. Innovation may change this but for now the cut the cord movement is still way in it's infancy.

On another part of this issue - sports blackout rules are extremely counter productive. The number if households that subscribe to sports channels is surprisingly low and Disney/ESPN/Fox include just enough Baseball content in common cable packages to be truly insulting and aggravating if you want to have the freedom to watch every game of a given team. I tried to see if I could cobble together enough sports content channels so that my wife could see every Yankee game if she so chose and every option included the blackout date weasel language asterisk. Therefore we subscribe to no extra sports package at all.
post #53 of 84

Cable companies should fight cable OS like xfinity X1.  One way to do it is go with Apple.  That being said, it would be better if Apple could directly get the cable feed instead of streaming over the net like the ipad app. 

 

I am pretty sure a cable company going with iOS would gain a lot of market share or gain new subscribers. One likely candidates I see is U-verse. They compete in a lot of markets against comcast. 

post #54 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

Cable industry says a la carte will drive low demand channels out. Everyone will want only buy the top popular ones. They say only bundling can support diversity of content. If that is true, I suggest they require subscribers to buy a certain minimum number of small channels as a part of a custom basket that each customer designs.

 

or they could bundle low demand channels has one choice in the line up. The way it works in quebec is you must buy a starter base before you can buy a la carte  channels.  So, they can bundle a few low demand in the base package, then inside a la carte, they can regroup multiple channels that count as one choice.

post #55 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by patpatpat View Post

Doesn't OnDemand HD have a pay per play cost? On My DVR, I record once watch many times at no extra cost.
Oh I see. In which case, once paid, like buying an app, you should be able to watch again ...
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #56 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

FIOS and att uverse already do this on the xbox. you don't need a cable box to watch cable TV

no need for itunes

You need to have a FiOS agreement for HD TV in place to use on any device I've see. Are you saying with XBOX you don't have to sign in with your FiOS account, for example, to watch Verizon's offerings on the XBOX? You can just pay as required directly via Microsoft?
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #57 of 84
Does this mean AppleTV users may soon be able to pick and choose which content provider they wish to subscribe to? Would I be able to drop my local Comcast and subscribe to Time Warner if I felt they offered better content?
post #58 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trekhead View Post

Does this mean AppleTV users may soon be able to pick and choose which content provider they wish to subscribe to? Would I be able to drop my local Comcast and subscribe to Time Warner if I felt they offered better content?

Probably not IMHO. Providers normally negotiate content for specific territories don't they? Sports blackouts would be an example of that.
http://www.publicknowledge.org/blog/cable-companies-love-compete-right
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-07-18/apples-tv-deals-like-the-time-warner-cable-pact-fail-its-ambitions
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #59 of 84
Ugh, this is totally wrong. Apple, go to the channels themselves. Screw the telecoms.
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

take it or leave it

Tens of millions are leaving it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjd813 View Post

The Internet "pipe" just cannot handle the traffic that would ensue with a mass cut the cord transition.

Sure it can.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #60 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Ugh, this is totally wrong. Apple, go to the channels themselves. Screw the telecoms.
Tens of millions are leaving it.
Sure it can.

Tens of millions have not left it.

And why would the telecoms build more bandwidth if the users are looking to screw them when they do?
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #61 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Tens of millions have not left it.

... It's not worth it.
Quote:
And why would the telecoms build more bandwidth if the users are looking to screw them when they do?

ISP ≠ telecom.

Also, uh... are you under the impression that the telecoms who ARE ISPs are... NOT being paid for access to the Internet or something?

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #62 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

... It's not worth it.
ISP ≠ telecom.

Also, uh... are you under the impression that the telecoms who ARE ISPs are... NOT being paid for access to the Internet or something?

Many telecoms are indeed ISPs. Do you really think that the amount they make for internet access will make up for the loss of TV revenue?
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #63 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Many telecoms are indeed ISPs. Do you really think that the amount they make for internet access will make up for the loss of TV revenue?

I really don't think they have a choice if Apple decides to negotiate directly with content creators.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #64 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I really don't think they have a choice if Apple decides to negotiate directly with content creators.

There's always a choice. They could introduce data caps which Comcast already has done and/or increase the rates they charge to make up for the revenue loss. They also have shareholders that they answer to. I would welcome a change on how things are done but change will come gradually instead of all at once. Right now there isn't enough incentive for the content creators to do things Apple's way.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #65 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

They could introduce data caps...

Good luck, because...
Quote:
They also have shareholders that they answer to.

Try explaining away "we're too lazy to do anything about our network".
Quote:
Right now there isn't enough incentive for the content creators to do things Apple's way.

Everyone needs to go out and pirate more TV, then. 1tongue.gif

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #66 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Good luck, because...
Try explaining away "we're too lazy to do anything about our network".
Everyone needs to go out and pirate more TV, then. 1tongue.gif

Good luck because what? Comcast has already done it. They could easily cap internet only customers and provide unlimited data to TV subscribers.

They're all doing something about the network, Verizon with FiOS and AT&T with U-verse, the stockholders are going to want to see a good return on that capital expenditure.
Unfortunately there's no Napster for TV shows.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #67 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

They could easily cap internet only customers and provide unlimited data to TV subscribers.

Easily? Maybe. Legally? No.
Quote:
They're all doing something about the network...

Funny how my available speeds and prices haven't changed in the last decade, huh. 1oyvey.gif
Quote:
...Verizon with FiOS...

Could have sworn they stopped rolling that out.

The only way any of the existing ISPs is going to be forced to lay more fiber is through a government mandate (wrong way to go) or via Google expanding their network and lowering their prices (also wrong, since Google).
Quote:
Unfortunately there's no Napster for TV shows.

There is, however, every single other torrent website out there.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #68 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Easily? Maybe. Legally? No.
Funny how my available speeds and prices haven't changed in the last decade, huh. 1oyvey.gif
Could have sworn they stopped rolling that out.

The only way any of the existing ISPs is going to be forced to lay more fiber is through a government mandate (wrong way to go) or via Google expanding their network and lowering their prices (also wrong, since Google).
There is, however, every single other torrent website out there.

Move out of the boonies. Yes the FiOS rollout has stopped for now, but as the need for faster internet increases I can see it starting back up. The telecoms have always been regulated by the government so a mandate wouldn't be out of the norm.

How safe are those torrent sites? I know that the Napster software was made so it would only access the shared folder of the users.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #69 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

...as the need for faster internet increases I can see it starting back up.

The need has been increasing all the years it has been stopped. There's no suitable explanation for why fiber isn't being laid 24/7.
Quote:
How safe are those torrent sites? I know that the Napster software was made so it would only access the shared folder of the users.

Define safe. 1tongue.gif

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #70 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

The need has been increasing all the years it has been stopped. There's no suitable explanation for why fiber isn't being laid 24/7.
Define safe. 1tongue.gif

Because laying down fiber is expensive and the telcos no longer enjoy a monopoly that would ensure a return on their investment. Safe is virus free and if you're sharing that only your shared folder gets accessed.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #71 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Because laying down fiber is expensive

So are our monthly plans; they're hoarding it somewhere.
Quote:
...and the telcos no longer enjoy a monopoly that would ensure a return on their investment.

... You're sure? Better write a letter to my local telecoms telling them that they don't have a monopoly anymore so they better stop carving up my city and refusing to offer service across a street.
Quote:
Safe is virus free and if you're sharing that only your shared folder gets accessed.

Oh, I'd imagine so. Pirates tend to be all up on security.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #72 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

So are our monthly plans; they're hoarding it somewhere.
... You're sure? Better write a letter to my local telecoms telling them that they don't have a monopoly anymore so they better stop carving up my city and refusing to offer service across a street.
Oh, I'd imagine so. Pirates tend to be all up on security.

Can't you get internet/phone from your local cable company? If yes then there's no monopoly.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #73 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Can't you get internet/phone from your local cable company? If yes then there's no monopoly.

Nope, where I live there is one ISP. On the other side of the city, there is one ISP, not the same.

The two cable companies are the same way.

And the two power companies. In bad storms, only half the city goes dark.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #74 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Nope, where I live there is one ISP. On the other side of the city, there is one ISP, not the same.

The two cable companies are the same way.

And the two power companies. In bad storms, only half the city goes dark.

Wow that's blows. Unfortunately in small cites or rural towns there aren't enough customers to justify building a modern network. It would literally take decades to recover the cost of building it.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #75 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Nope, where I live there is one ISP. On the other side of the city, there is one ISP, not the same.

The two cable companies are the same way.

And the two power companies. In bad storms, only half the city goes dark.

Same where I'm at, and just outside a major metropolitan city. There's on cable company on one side, and another on the other side. Calling the "wrong" on for service, they said they'd transfer me to the "department" that could help me... next thing I'm on the phone with the other cable company.

They're all one big colluding syndicate.
post #76 of 84
I stand by my statement that the pipes that carry this stuff through the neighborhood will not handle the extra bandwidth from large scale TV streaming without some form of technical wizardry. It will probably be a next gen form of compression that will compromise quality still further. The last decade and a half with audio has proven that the consumers quest is for having larger QUANTITIES of product in ever smaller storage devices and for faster streaming with total disregard for quality. Hence $400 headphones for mp3 listening.
post #77 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjd813 View Post

I stand by my statement that the pipes that carry this stuff through the neighborhood will not handle the extra bandwidth from large scale TV streaming without some form of technical wizardry.

I stand by my statement that this isn't how the Internet works and that they'll handle it just fine given that a large portion of the population already streams HD video to their houses every single night.
Quote:
It will probably be a next gen form of compression that will compromise quality still further.

... You'd prefer a 1080p movie to be a terabyte, would you? Quality isn't compromised in the same way as audio.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #78 of 84
Define a large portion of the population.

Also, the point at which degradation becomes unacceptable is totally subjective.
post #79 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Quality isn't compromised in the same way as audio.

 

You don't think so? Take a look at a sunset in any iTunes/Netflix movie. Those bands of color are among the most annoying artefacts ever, audio or video.

 

Compressed video is about a thousand percent better than it was a decade ago, but it ain't "there" yet.

post #80 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjd813 View Post

Define a large portion of the population.

Go look up streaming video stats. Netflix, Hulu, iTunes, and the like.
Quote:
Also, the point at which degradation becomes unacceptable is totally subjective.

The majority is always sane.
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

Compressed video is about a thousand percent better than it was a decade ago, but it ain't "there" yet.

That's why iTunes 12 better darn well have H.265 support. Apple used to be the one spearheading new technologies…

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Time Warner working to deliver live & on-demand shows to Apple TV