or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple readying April unveiling of new Apple TV, may partner with Time Warner
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple readying April unveiling of new Apple TV, may partner with Time Warner

post #1 of 118
Thread Starter 
Users clamoring for an update to Apple's set-top streamer could have their wish granted within the next two months, as the company is reportedly preparing a springtime introduction for the fourth-generation device that would come with a substantial media tie-in but would not launch until this fall.

Apple TV


Cupertino, Calif.-based Apple could introduce the new platform in April and have it on shelves by Christmas, according to Bloomberg. That release date could change, the publication says, depending on the outcome of negotiations with content providers.

One of those potential partners is said to be Time Warner Cable, one of the largest cable television providers in the U.S. Whispers of an Apple-Time Warner deal first surfaced last spring, with reports that Time Warner was looking to deliver live and on-demand programming through the box.

Such an agreement would mark a departure from previous rumors that had Apple negotiating directly with networks like ESPN and HBO in a bid to bypass cable companies.
A content deal with Time Warner would be the first such partnership for Apple
On the hardware front, the report says the upcoming refresh will likely include a faster processor than its predecessors. The current-generation Apple TV runs on a modified version of Apple's iPhone- and iPad-powering A-series chips.

Alongside new hardware, the Apple TV's interface will reportedly be revamped to make it easier for users to navigate and discover content. No mention is made of a third-party App Store for the device, a feature many expect Apple to include in the box's next iteration that would enable a game console-like experience.

A months-long wait between the unveiling of a new Apple TV in April and a launch in time for the 2014 holiday season may sound suspect, but Apple had a five-month lead time between the announcement of the first iPhone and its launch in June of 2007. The wait time between the unveiling and launch of the first iPad, which runs a scaled-up version of the iPhone operating system, was considerably shorter, at just over two months.

If Apple were to have a similar wait time between the unveiling of a new Apple TV and its launch date, that would place its launch around September, which happens to be around the same time of year Apple has chosen to debut its new iPhone models for the past three years. Apple was thought to have been ready to introduce the next-generation Apple TV last fall alongside the iPhone 5s, though that turned out not to be the case.

The Apple TV's hardware was last updated in the spring of 2012. That update brought support for 1080p video content and 802.11n networking, and the next generation could see similar bumps with support for ultra-high resolution 4K video and speedy 802.11ac Wi-Fi.
post #2 of 118
Would be great if true. Recently bought a Roku 3 because they have the TWC app. It's nice but it's no Apple TV.
post #3 of 118
Time Warner may be large but I think they are only in a little over half the states. Here Comcast and Cox are the only ones offered in the state. But that is an interesting development and presumably would allow partnerships with all cable companies in the future. The only hinderance I see from completely replacing boxes is the lack of DVR functionality. If Apple could include DVR as an option with perhaps a separate accessory that includes a hard drive or by some other method then I can see cable companies get on board since those HD DVR boxes cost them a lot of money.

 

Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. 

Reply

 

Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. 

Reply
post #4 of 118
Christmas? Nuts.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #5 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonester View Post

Would be great if true. Recently bought a Roku 3 because they have the TWC app. It's nice but it's no Apple TV.

TWC app? The Weather Channel? Like The Weather Channel on AppleTV?
post #6 of 118
Is the gap time so developers can make apps?
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #7 of 118

Apple is not going to introduce a new AppleTV in April and ship it in, what, late November? No way. Not a chance.

 

Much more likely the new version ships in April, with certain content rolling out by year's end. I can't imagine them doing something so stupid as showing off a new generation of a current product so far in advance. There is ZERO purpose to it.

 

The Mac Pro was an exception for extremely obvious reasons.

post #8 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

Is the gap time so developers can make apps?

That makes the most sense.  There's no need to pre-announce a product that supposedly isn't shipping until Christmas time "unless" it requires the support of 3rd party software developers. 

 

Pretty much a tacit confirmation of App store support. 

He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #9 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

Time Warner may be large but I think they are only in a little over half the states. Here Comcast and Cox are the only ones offered in the state. But that is an interesting development and presumably would allow partnerships with all cable companies in the future. The only hinderance I see from completely replacing boxes is the lack of DVR functionality. If Apple could include DVR as an option with perhaps a separate accessory that includes a hard drive or by some other method then I can see cable companies get on board since those HD DVR boxes cost them a lot of money.

actually it would not matter where Time Warner is located, in theory they can stream their content to you as long as you has internet access on any provider, no different than netflix or hulu. If they do this deal, you could turn off you video service from your local provider and only maintain internet access and pay as you use form Apple TV and Time Warner. I would also suspect they will offer network DVR functionality which is the current trend, they are moving away from you having content in your home on you DVR.

post #10 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

Time Warner may be large but I think they are only in a little over half the states. Here Comcast and Cox are the only ones offered in the state. But that is an interesting development and presumably would allow partnerships with all cable companies in the future. The only hinderance I see from completely replacing boxes is the lack of DVR functionality. If Apple could include DVR as an option with perhaps a separate accessory that includes a hard drive or by some other method then I can see cable companies get on board since those HD DVR boxes cost them a lot of money.
they could use cloud storage
post #11 of 118
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post
Christmas? Nuts.

 

A six month gap wouldn’t be, though.

 

Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post
That makes the most sense.

 

Does it? I’d say more to showcase how Time Warner was smart and hopped onto the future before they were bankrupted by sticking with the old model and giving the other content providers a chance to not get stuck with cable and satellite when they’re obsoleted. Publicly announce one licensing partner and the others will trip over each other to associate themselves with Apple before it’s too late.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #12 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post
 

actually it would not matter where Time Warner is located, in theory they can stream their content to you as long as you has internet access on any provider, no different than netflix or hulu. If they do this deal, you could turn off you video service from your local provider and only maintain internet access and pay as you use form Apple TV and Time Warner. I would also suspect they will offer network DVR functionality which is the current trend, they are moving away from you having content in your home on you DVR.

That would be nice I just didn't think that was possible. I assumed it would only be for Time Warner customers as a replacement for their set top box. I use DirecTV for TV and Cox Cable  for my internet. If The new Apple TV offered me all the same channels I watch now on DirecTV for a similar or hopefully cheaper price it would certainly appeal to me. 

 

Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. 

Reply

 

Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. 

Reply
post #13 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

actually it would not matter where Time Warner is located, in theory they can stream their content to you as long as you has internet access on any provider, no different than netflix or hulu. If they do this deal, you could turn off you video service from your local provider and only maintain internet access and pay as you use form Apple TV and Time Warner. I would also suspect they will offer network DVR functionality which is the current trend, they are moving away from you having content in your home on you DVR.
TWC need to modify with content owners if the territory changes
post #14 of 118
I would prefer instead of a new hardware platform (I don't think there is overly a big need for different hardware specs as the current ones are more than enough for its intended purpose) but I would like to see a software platform developed.

Much of the content available on my Apple TV is kind of moot because it won't work properly in New Zealand because of the limitations of the content producers.

But what if Apple opened up a software platform that allowed say TVNZ and TV3 to develop their own app for the Apple TV like they have for the iPad/iPhone? Then I can simply use the Apple TV to watch the TV I do watch without having to have Flash on my MBP or view with the iPad propped up while in bed with a headphone splitter to get the best sound.

I don't really care so much about games on the Apple TV that's what the iPad is for but TV content on the Apple TV would be great. The aforementioned TVNZ and TV3 apps won't allow us to send the video from our iPad to our AppleTV claiming some crap about licenses.
post #15 of 118
"Apple is not going to introduce a new AppleTV in April and ship it in, what, late November? No way. Not a chance.

Much more likely the new version ships in April, with certain content rolling out by year's end. I can't imagine them doing something so stupid as showing off a new generation of a current product so far in advance. There is ZERO purpose to it. . . . " <\Quote>

Not November. The article is referring to the Christmas selling season and that can be as early as September or October for consumer-tech items. Fall is a big deal in consumer retail and you leave money on the table if you don't have consumer-tech products out by October.
post #16 of 118
A five month wait from announcement to shipping might be plausible if this were the first Apple TV, but it's not. Such a delay following announcement would dry up sales of the current 3rd generation Apple TV, which would make no sense. It's called the Osborne Effect.

There is simply no reason to announce an update before it will be ready to ship. The Mac Pro was an exception because sales of the old model had already dried up and were actually banned in the EU.
Mac user since August 1983.
Reply
Mac user since August 1983.
Reply
post #17 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by water cooler View Post


they could use cloud storage

A lot of cable internet packages limit you to 50GB a month or even lower. Unlimited data for internet used to be the rule but it now seems to be the exception. If I switched entirely to streaming TV over the internet I would pass 50GB in very short order. Just with my normal usage and Netflix I already come close to that. I wonder how they would address that issue. 

 

Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. 

Reply

 

Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. 

Reply
post #18 of 118
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post
I wonder how they would address that issue. 


Open letter to telecoms.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #19 of 118
Only the Mac Pro have they allowed such a lead time. They don't generally do that.. They like to announce and release a week or 2 later if they can... I can see the release in April and ramp up for developer access in November when they are finishing up iOS 8 and release them at same time.

Getting the hardware out with initial release first, bug fix it as needed, then do a formal SDK release in latter half of year makes a lot more sense and is very like Apple.

Plus, releasing in April gives them the much needed product release for the first half of the year.. Releasing all that stuff at Christmas becomes too much.. They needed a product that was not on a year end release cycle.
post #20 of 118

Conspiracy with Time Warner ! Bromwich, torture them right, uh !

There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.

Frank Zappa

Reply

There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.

Frank Zappa

Reply
post #21 of 118
The problem with cable companies is that these are fractionalized into geographic regions for content distribution, so how does Apple 'break' this imposed-model for distribution to a nation-wide population? Can Apple make an agreement with the cable companies to re-distribute for a small fee- the cable content via the iTunes store? Not sure yet how this new Apple TV media model is proposed to work. For the cable companies, partnering with Apple, Amazon and Google is a great way to extend their diminishing share to young viewers and those not currently tied to the monthly cable subscription model and have no desire for such.
post #22 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post


TWC app? The Weather Channel? Like The Weather Channel on AppleTV?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post


TWC app? The Weather Channel? Like The Weather Channel on AppleTV?

 

TWC is not The Weather Channel it's Time Warner Cable.  Did you even read the article?

post #23 of 118

I hope this is more than just a way for me to pay for cable through Apple TV. I cut the cord several years ago and have been living with Roku on one TV, an Apple TV on the other and over-the-air for local networks. It has worked really nicely, with the only exception being things like the Olympics, which NBC spreads out to various cable channels (and requires a cable sub to access Internet streams) and ESPN. I was hoping Apple would break the old cable model, not embrace it. I guess I should wait to see what this will be, but this isn't promising (at least from my vantage point as a consumer who hated paying for 150 useless cable channels to get the four or five I liked).

post #24 of 118
Need 5.1 sound. Even with optical cable and Digutal Audio enabled I am only seeing stereo from ripped DVDs where I specify 5.1 during encoding (yes, I accept I may be doing something wrong, but it should be more straightforward).

iPhone 5 64GB, iPhone 4S 16GB, mid-2011 iMac, Apple TV 2nd Gen, iPod Nano

Reply

iPhone 5 64GB, iPhone 4S 16GB, mid-2011 iMac, Apple TV 2nd Gen, iPod Nano

Reply
post #25 of 118
Well... I live in Wales, UK.

Lots of friends use the current Apple TV, and we can get some BBC stuff on it, as well as films on Netflix (which is great and good value, incidentally). America isn't the only country on the planet and we have some of the best TV in the world over here, not to mention the emerging Scandinavian stuff. I consider that the worst TV in the world is from Italy. I understand that American Commercial TV is not further behind

At present, Apple TV is a friendly little beast.

OK, add time/Warner, but don't damage it's present character as a modest little box full of great things.

Greatrix
post #26 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

actually it would not matter where Time Warner is located, in theory they can stream their content to you as long as you has internet access on any provider, no different than netflix or hulu. If they do this deal, you could turn off you video service from your local provider and only maintain internet access and pay as you use form Apple TV and Time Warner. I would also suspect they will offer network DVR functionality which is the current trend, they are moving away from you having content in your home on you DVR.

Are you sure about that? It would be nice and what needs to happen but I suspect you'd have to verify your HD Cable subscription with whoever you use for it to work just like almost everything else.

On a side note, I know there is a lot of chatter about Netflix feeds slowing since net neutrality law change, but NBC's attempt at streaming the Olympics seems to be a disaster for me. I have FiOS 75 Mps download speed, Netflix is working pretty well, I get the Super HD 99% of the time but I cannot watch the NBC streaming on anything, Mac, iPads etc. without massive delays, buffering every few seconds and resolution of a Mac Plus, if that!

It might have been better for NBC to contract with Netflix for distribution of streaming!

This country's internet system (be that hardware, software or corporate politics) has to significantly improve before we can move to a 100% on demand TV world.
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #27 of 118
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

... Apple could introduce the new platform in April and have it on shelves by Christmas ...

 

That's a long lead time.  If true, it could mean that Apple will use the announcement to "plant the stake," to prove their commitment to the next step in their TV makeover, then attempt to get other content providers to sign contracts over the rest of the year.  The providers who were waiting for someone else to make the first step with Apple.  Interesting.

 

Also, if true, the long lead time means that the next-gen Apple TV will bring something completely new to the table.  And Apple doesn't mind Osborning sales of current models while the new one is being developed.  (Search for "Osborne effect" in Wikipedia.)  But, unlike the Osborne 1, the Apple TV is cheap enough that buyers won't really need to postpone their purchase until the next-gen model comes out.  Consumers might just say "Oh well, it's only $99.  I'll get one now and move it into another room when the new one is released.  It has wi-fi after all."

 

Oh, and just for completeness, Time Warner's market cap is $37.5 billion as I type this.  There's a small chance that Apple and TWC might do a deeper deal than just content distribution rights.


Edited by SockRolid - 2/12/14 at 12:40pm

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #28 of 118
I don't think 6-7 months is needed for the SDK - it's almost there.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #29 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryA View Post

Need 5.1 sound. Even with optical cable and Digutal [sic] Audio enabled I am only seeing stereo from ripped DVDs where I specify 5.1 during encoding (yes, I accept I may be doing something wrong, but it should be more straightforward).

 

Wrong? Probably. Illegal? Probably.

 

Something tells me you're not ripping home movies, which generally don't contain more than two channels of audio. :)

post #30 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryA View Post

Need 5.1 sound. Even with optical cable and Digutal Audio enabled I am only seeing stereo from ripped DVDs where I specify 5.1 during encoding (yes, I accept I may be doing something wrong, but it should be more straightforward).

Not that I have tried it in years, back when I transferred all my own DVDs to disk, but have you tried Handbrake?
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #31 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by zroger73 View Post

Wrong? Probably. Illegal? Probably.

Something tells me you're not ripping home movies, which generally don't contain more than two channels of audio. 1smile.gif

Assume much? First, check the web. There is conflicting information about support for more than 2 channels, and how to get it to work. Second, these are my DVDs that I own. I've digitized my music library and seek to do the same with my movies. In the U.S. I believe this falls under Fair Use.

iPhone 5 64GB, iPhone 4S 16GB, mid-2011 iMac, Apple TV 2nd Gen, iPod Nano

Reply

iPhone 5 64GB, iPhone 4S 16GB, mid-2011 iMac, Apple TV 2nd Gen, iPod Nano

Reply
post #32 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post
 

That makes the most sense.  There's no need to pre-announce a product that supposedly isn't shipping until Christmas time "unless" it requires the support of 3rd party software developers. 

 

Pretty much a tacit confirmation of App store support. 


make senses. 

 

so on the hardware side I wish for a full A7 chip or with no disable cores (so not the rejects of the A7 line) and even a A7X would be better if they want to compete in the game console market.

 

4K support would be nice.

post #33 of 118
Will try. Thanks!

iPhone 5 64GB, iPhone 4S 16GB, mid-2011 iMac, Apple TV 2nd Gen, iPod Nano

Reply

iPhone 5 64GB, iPhone 4S 16GB, mid-2011 iMac, Apple TV 2nd Gen, iPod Nano

Reply
post #34 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macman88 View Post


TWC is not The Weather Channel it's Time Warner Cable.  Did you even read the article?

I chose to not assume anything about your intelligence thus the question as Time Warner Cable has no relevance on purchasing a Roku versus an AppleTV. Of course there is an awful app for Time Warner Cable on Roku but that isn't a factor any intelligent person would consider.
post #35 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post


I chose to not assume anything about your intelligence thus the question as Time Warner Cable has no relevance on purchasing a Roku versus an AppleTV.

http://www.timewarnercable.com/en/residential-home/support/faqs/faqs-tv/twctvapp.html

post #36 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post

I chose to not assume anything about your intelligence thus the question as Time Warner Cable has no relevance on purchasing a Roku versus an AppleTV.

I looked into this and the Apple TV is already doing better than Roku. And the Apple TV has potential global reach.


EDIT: here
http://gigaom.com/2013/07/16/apple-tv-roku-sales-stats/

Apples hobby is 50% of the market.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #37 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post
 

actually it would not matter where Time Warner is located, in theory they can stream their content to you as long as you has internet access on any provider, no different than netflix or hulu. If they do this deal, you could turn off you video service from your local provider and only maintain internet access and pay as you use form Apple TV and Time Warner. I would also suspect they will offer network DVR functionality which is the current trend, they are moving away from you having content in your home on you DVR.

 

Its not that easy, I would assume that if youre ISP is also Time Warner, then  all the lived stream will used there normal digital broadcast so it wont consume or slowdown youre internet connection.

 

IF youre ISP is NOT Time Warner, then you will need one hell of an internet connection.  We are talking 100mbits or more and unlimited download, depending on the number of TV's.  I am sure Time Warmer would love to sell a package to someone not on there network, but not a lot of people will want to pay for the required internet package to stream all that data.

 

My Bell Fibe IPTV setup has 100mbits of dedicated potential that is segmented from the internet 25/10 mbits connection. This ensure that TV feeds never slowdown my internet connection.  On the TV side, 100 mbits can support 3 HD feeds and 5 SD feeds. IF I were to used all those feeds (using the PvR for example), I would consume close to 100 mbits, so 45 gigs per hour...  good thing that Bell doesnt charge me for the TV feeds consumption.

 

That being said, if you live alone and only have one TV and dont watch a lot of it, it could be doable to get a Timer Warner package on a different ISP, assuming you get a 500g to 1TB download limit on a 50 mbits + connection. But I dont recommend doing it with anything less than unlimited downloads or you will have to constantly make sure you dont go over youre limit. And you better not fall asleep in front of the TV or it could get expensive fast.


Edited by herbapou - 2/12/14 at 1:25pm
post #38 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post
 

Apple is not going to introduce a new AppleTV in April and ship it in, what, late November? No way. Not a chance.

 

Much more likely the new version ships in April, with certain content rolling out by year's end. I can't imagine them doing something so stupid as showing off a new generation of a current product so far in advance. There is ZERO purpose to it.

 

The Mac Pro was an exception for extremely obvious reasons.

 

There is a purpose to it. The same reason that the Xbox one and PS4 were previewed before their launch.

 

Games take time to code. And we've known for awhile that gaming would be part of the new Apple TV mix.

The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #39 of 118
Actually it does have a significant bearing if you are a TWC subscriber. Apple TV does not let you watch TWC cable channels because there is no TWC app. On the other hand Roku does. Then you can get rid of the POS TWC cable boxes that they charge $12 a month for.
post #40 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post
 


make senses. 

 

so on the hardware side I wish for a full A7 chip or with no disable cores (so not the rejects of the A7 line) and even a A7X would be better if they want to compete in the game console market.

 

4K support would be nice.

I"m guessing a A7 or variant alongside a Broadcom BCM7364 for HEVC support.  I think 4K is a shoe in because if the rumors are true that Apple's investing in more content distribution infrastructure they could leverage an efficient codec like HEVC to not only deliver 4K content but to also shrink their current 1080p content to half its size. 

 

I figure during the handshake processor for streaming a movie the servers notice that HEVC decoding is available and sends the appropriate stream.  So for every 1080p movie that Apple streams now they'll be able to do two movies within the same bandwidth envelope. 

He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple readying April unveiling of new Apple TV, may partner with Time Warner