or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Report: DVR could turn Apple TV into multi-billion dollar business
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Report: DVR could turn Apple TV into multi-billion dollar business - Page 3

post #81 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8CoreWhore View Post

For those of you that are a little savvy and just can't wait, why not just build your own DVR/BD entertainment box? You can spec it out any way you like and the software is free.

I'm not aware of any BD video player software for OS X. You mention free software, if it's a reference to Linux-based systems, I don't think Blu-Ray's BD+ has been cracked yet.
post #82 of 158
Again...How does Apple make the BILLIONS the analyst predicted by adding DVR capabilities to the ATV? Are they now going to now sell billions of dollars worth of the (currently weak-selling) set-top box, it effectively replacing satellite, cable and telco solutions?
post #83 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

I don't think DVR in itself will do much to help ATV. It may have been different when DVR was rare But today cable companies dominate the DVR market that I'd unlikely to change.

What would help ATV more is to open up to other video download services. Such as Netflix, Hulu, and Joost.

I agree 100%.

This is the reason why Apple never bothered implementing DVR functionality. Cable companies now own this market. The integration and convenience offered by the cable company boxes is hard to compete against.
post #84 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post

I agree 100%.

This is the reason why Apple never bothered implementing DVR functionality. Cable companies now own this market. The integration and convenience offered by the cable company boxes is hard to compete against.

What if Apple make deals with the cable companies to supply the ATV to them?

I think if Apple move into this area, they'll work with the cable companies. Like they are doing with the iPhone.
post #85 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

See the full article at: http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/36359/118/


What most people realize is that Apple could be so much more with another CEO and that the current CEO has accomplished his mandate to develop Mac OS X for Apple and standardize Macs on the Intel platform.

Apple should be much more price and feature competitive with the computers it builds in China. Mac OS X is a great operating system. But why does Apple stagnate at a 2.9% market share in the PC market?

The quick answer is Steve Jobs and his "vision". Microsoft has had problems with Vista. Apple developped a revolutionary interface for its intelligent iPhone. But there are competitors out there and Apple's lead will soon vanish.

And what will Apple have to show for wasting (again!) the opportunity to recover and capture a 25% or 30% market share?

The quick answer is Steve Jobs and his "vision".

I've been around the Mac platform for 20 years and I am about to give up on a company which doesn't get its act together. Apple is a company that has been in recovery for the last 20 years, no less! Success and a vindication of the Mac platform are just around the corner. Such has been Apple's mantra for the last 20 years. And Steve Jobs is really excited by the great products Apple has in the pipeline. Twenty years later, where does Apple stand in the market?

Apple is really great at making excuses, and blaming Microsoft conspiracies, but in the end, must we blame Steve Jobs and his "vision" of a 2.9% market share for Apple's failures and shortcomings?



Since you're the one with university education, why don't you get up and go and run Apple and increase their marketshare dramatically, the internet has now given nobodies the avenue to come and spew rubbish, i don't blame you.
post #86 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

You may not remember. But their was no iTunes when the iPod was first introduced. Steve Jobs said Apple estimated 60% of the music on iPods are ripped from CD's.

And others estimate that the majority of music on iPods is illegal...

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

The important part of what I was saying that you missed was "legal". There is also convenience. Ripping CD's is legal and convenient. Ripping DVD's and circumventing copy protection is illegal and not convenient.

Th iPod has a number legal and easily accessible sources of content other than iTunes. Apple TV does not.

And how many people have filled their iPods legally? Lots of people argued and still argue that Apple should open the Fairplay to other vendors so that other purchase, DRM'd music will work with the iPod. Hasn't happened yet and Apple appears to be doing quite well with the iPods.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

There is next to nothing identical about the mp3 market from 2001 and the current DVR market.

Other than being an immature, fragmented market, filled with mediocre offerings and an obvious need for someone to step up and improve the situtation, you are right, nothing similar at all...

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #87 of 158
If you want that DVR add-on for ATV, plan on paying for the privilege.

I can see Apple buying Tivo and dropping Tivo's hardware in favor of an ATV-only approach.

That way, if you want the best user interface you have to buy an ATV, and pay a regular fee, otherwise you're stuck with the cable company's clunky DVR.
post #88 of 158
I can't imagine why Apple would charge a monthly fee for recording TV. Then again, I don't get why existing companies charge monthly fees for their DVRs either.
post #89 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

I can't imagine why Apple would charge a monthly fee for recording TV. Then again, I don't get why existing companies charge monthly fees for their DVRs either.

I think TiVo charges so they can sell the device at a subsidized price. At least at one time, you could pay a flat fee and it's a "lifetime" device.
post #90 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

I can't imagine why Apple would charge a monthly fee for recording TV. Then again, I don't get why existing companies charge monthly fees for their DVRs either.

The monthly fee is primarily for the guide listings services. Obviously, with a large profit margin is build into the monthly fee, but that helps keep the price of the hardware down.

Apple wouldn't have to charge a monthly fee, but it would make sense, given their preferred business model lately.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #91 of 158
Abster2core, thanks for pointing out that ouragan is just a troll. It's clear now that he is just a frustrated business school graduate with a degree that has gotten him nowhere. I guess it would be pretty irritating to see a mere high school graduate create and run one of (if not THE) most admired and profitable companies on planet earth. At least you have that piece of paper on your wall though ouragan. Probably in a real nice frame too.
post #92 of 158
Quote:
And others estimate that the majority of music on iPods is illegal...

There is no evidence that the majority of iPods are mostly filled with illegal music. Though I'm sure more of the content is from a combination of ripped from CD's and illegal file sharing than from iTunes.

Quote:
And how many people have filled their iPods legally? Lots of people argued and still argue that Apple should open the Fairplay to other vendors so that other purchase, DRM'd music will work with the iPod. Hasn't happened yet and Apple appears to be doing quite well with the iPods.

Illegal file sharing of music is easy to use. Unlike illegal file sharing of video.

I'm not sure of your point about Fairplay. This is my whole point. You can freely and legally use an iPod without ever using iTunes or Fairplay.


Quote:
Other than being an immature, fragmented market, filled with mediocre offerings and an obvious need for someone to step up and improve the situtation, you are right, nothing similar at all...

At this point the DVR market is not all that new anymore. Its not really fragmented in the sense that its up for grabs by anyone. DVR is not that complicated of a service to deliver. DVR is quickly becoming a commodity to be packaged with other services.

The cable box is the major pipeline of content into the television. Its easier and more convenient to just pay the cable provider the extra $10 to add the DVR service. Than it is to add another box and set up a separate service dedicated to DVR.

If the cable cards freed the television from the box. Then there would be more room for everyone to compete for services.
post #93 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akac View Post

Tivo used to be the best experience. I still love them, but here are a few things that make it not the best anymore:

1) No PIP while in the channel guide or other places.
2) Tivo HD/S3 is very slow in many areas.
3) Tivo HD/S3 does not work with SDV. This means I can't even use it here in Austin.
4) Constant bugs in HD/S3 software make it like a 2 year beta project.

I love Tivo, but HD/S3 has seriously made me unhappy with them.

Agreed. I have TiVo Series 3. Every DVR I have ever used has shown the current channel playing in the corner of the screen while navigating the listings grid or menus and they also show a red dot next to the program title in the listings grid to indicate a scheduled recording. The TiVo is extremely primitive. It overlays the listings grid in the middle which cover 90% of the channel playing and if you want to see what's scheduled to record you must go through the menu which shuts off both the video and audio of the channel currently playing completely. It also takes a good 3 to 5 seconds to change a channel. Why? It should be nearly instantaneous. Pressing "5-7-Enter" for example results in a "searching for signal on Cable in" message while it tunes the channel. Like I said, very primitive. The hardware is great but they have a long, long way to go.

With the industry moving towards the Tru2way platform (formerly OCAP/OpenCable/CableCARD 2.0) they have some serious competition. Even the cable company boxes using Tru2way have significantly better interfaces. They are very much like AppleTV in appearance. Very impressive. TiVo is a licensee of Tru2way along with all the major electronic manufacturers. MyTVGuide interface for Tru2way

     197619842014  

     Where were you when the hammer flew?  

 

MacBook Pro Retina, 13", 2.5 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD

iPhone 5s • iPad mini Retina • Chromebook Pixel • Nexus 7

Reply

     197619842014  

     Where were you when the hammer flew?  

 

MacBook Pro Retina, 13", 2.5 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD

iPhone 5s • iPad mini Retina • Chromebook Pixel • Nexus 7

Reply
post #94 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booga View Post

So what DVR is better? It's sure not the ones supplied by the cable or FiOS companies.

The ones supplied by the cable companies are better in some significant ways. See above.

     197619842014  

     Where were you when the hammer flew?  

 

MacBook Pro Retina, 13", 2.5 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD

iPhone 5s • iPad mini Retina • Chromebook Pixel • Nexus 7

Reply

     197619842014  

     Where were you when the hammer flew?  

 

MacBook Pro Retina, 13", 2.5 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD

iPhone 5s • iPad mini Retina • Chromebook Pixel • Nexus 7

Reply
post #95 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasparilla View Post

To the user who said the Tivo HD Series 3 doesn't work with Standard Definition, that is incorrect.

He said it wouldn't work with Switched Digital Video (SDV) which is true. SDV is what most cable companies are migrating to as it allows them to save significantly on bandwidth. There will be a SDV adaptor available for the Tivo later this year that can be plugged into the USB and Cable in ports but it will have to be rented from the cable company.

     197619842014  

     Where were you when the hammer flew?  

 

MacBook Pro Retina, 13", 2.5 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD

iPhone 5s • iPad mini Retina • Chromebook Pixel • Nexus 7

Reply

     197619842014  

     Where were you when the hammer flew?  

 

MacBook Pro Retina, 13", 2.5 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD

iPhone 5s • iPad mini Retina • Chromebook Pixel • Nexus 7

Reply
post #96 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

There is no evidence that the majority of iPods are mostly filled with illegal music. Though I'm sure more of the content is from a combination of ripped from CD's and illegal file sharing than from iTunes.

You are probably right of there being no evidence. Any studies are sure to be biased one way or the other. Anecdotally at least, it would seem that much, and probably most, is from file sharing. Can you honestly say you know even one person that purchased most of the music on their iPods? Or that you know someone with so much free time sitting at home, that they have ripped thousands of songs from CD's themselves? I sure don't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Illegal file sharing of music is easy to use. Unlike illegal file sharing of video.

Not sure what you mean here. From a technical point of view, exactly what is the difference in "ease of use" between 'illegal' files music and movies? Are their bits different somehow? Unles you mean file size, which really has nothing to do with ease of use...

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

I'm not sure of your point about Fairplay. This is my whole point. You can freely and legally use an iPod without ever using iTunes or Fairplay.

When iPod first exploded, what was the free and legal way to get music on there? Again, the novelty of ripping your own CD collections got pretty tired for most people, unless the spent far too much time at home alone. Sure you can buy legal, DRM free music now, but when iPod became ubiquitous, this was not the case.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

At this point the DVR market is not all that new anymore. Its not really fragmented in the sense that its up for grabs by anyone. DVR is not that complicated of a service to deliver. DVR is quickly becoming a commodity to be packaged with other services.

DVR is a hell of a lot more complicated than an MP3 player. Especially if you are going to do it right. And the market is fragmented.Unless eveyone is using TiVo? Or everyone's cable companies are using the same device? Or people in other countries than the US?

DVR is a commodity to be packaged with other services?...Yes, Bingo! Hence the argument would use it as a successful and compelling value-add to Apple TV.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

The cable box is the major pipeline of content into the television. Its easier and more convenient to just pay the cable provider the extra $10 to add the DVR service. Than it is to add another box and set up a separate service dedicated to DVR.

Well, since Apple is counting on people buying ATV, then I guess they might be thinking the same thing but counting on the ATV being the base device you will pay the extra to enhance. I suppose your logic makes sense, from Apple's point of view, if they were counting on ATV not selling any units. Obviously (to some) Apple is sort of counting on the fact that people would have to willing to add 1 more device (i.e. the ATV for those not paying attention) to their setup. Since Apple is counting on people buying Apple TV, then why not be the device that provides DVR functionality?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

If the cable cards freed the television from the box. Then there would be more room for everyone to compete for services.

dead on. Then the Apple TV could be media centre, STB and DVR all in one.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #97 of 158
Quote:
Can you honestly say you know even one person that purchased most of the music on their iPods? Or that you know someone with so much free time sitting at home, that they have ripped thousands of songs from CD's themselves? I sure don't.

Yes in fact I do. Most of my friends own the CD's their music came from. Myself and my friends are in our early to mid-30's. We are more from the CD age and do not regularly use peer to peer file sharing.

Quote:
When iPod first exploded, what was the free and legal way to get music on there?

iTunes.

Quote:
Again, the novelty of ripping your own CD collections got pretty tired for most people, unless the spent far too much time at home alone.

I don't see that. If anything it has only gotten easier and more convenient. Ripping a CD takes 5 minutes, iTunes automatically loads all of the album information and cover art. You barely have to do anything.

Quote:
Not sure what you mean here. From a technical point of view, exactly what is the difference in "ease of use" between 'illegal' files music and movies? Are their bits different somehow? Unles you mean file size, which really has nothing to do with ease of use...

The file size is the problem. Video files takes a long time to download and multiple numbers of video files take up a lot of hard drive space. There is no easy software infrastructure like iTunes set up to download, manage, and store illegal video files. There currently is no easy to use hardware infrastructure for viewing illegal video files. All of this will change eventually.

Quote:
DVR is a hell of a lot more complicated than an MP3 player.

I doubt that's true. I'm sure Apple's R&D budget for the iPod+ iTunes completely eclipse that of TiVO.

Quote:
And the market is fragmented.Unless eveyone is using TiVo? Or everyone's cable companies are using the same device? Or people in other countries than the US?

For a market to be fragmented does not mean everyone has to be using the same product. It generally implies there are many suppliers who split the needs and requirements of a market instead of creating a homogeneous one. DRM would be an example of a fragmented market.

Quote:
Well, since Apple is counting on people buying ATV, then I guess they might be thinking the same thing but counting on the ATV being the base device you will pay the extra to enhance. I suppose your logic makes sense, from Apple's point of view, if they were counting on ATV not selling any units. Obviously (to some) Apple is sort of counting on the fact that people would have to willing to add 1 more device (i.e. the ATV for those not paying attention) to their setup. Since Apple is counting on people buying Apple TV, then why not be the device that provides DVR functionality?

The primary function of Apple TV is to stream movies, TV, and music from iTunes. Providing the user with the instant gratification of having content without the need to leave home or wait for the mail.

Apple could add a DVR. I'm not saying they shouldn't. I just don't see DVR being a killer feature because for many people it would be redundant.
post #98 of 158
Apple already has a legitimate DVR using EyeTV. I just set up the Time Capsule and it will eventually be the storage hub for all sorts of things - like DVR. With its large storage capacity, ability to add additional shared drives, and connection to the web it will be the repository for all things media that will stream (wirelessly or wired) to computers, AppleTV, iPhone, etc..
post #99 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by hillstones View Post

The article claims $12-$15 to add DVR capability? What exactly do they plan on adding for $15, a pair of rabbit ears? You have three forms of content to support: Over the air, Cable, and Satellite.

I would assume that Shaw Wu has just made an estimate for free-to-air reception, and possibly just one recorder. But that's his general musings.


Quote:
Originally Posted by marzetta7 View Post

Awesome! Throw in a BD-R drive into the AppleTV and there you will have the ultimate entertainment hub IMO...

1) Dowload Music and Movies from iTunes
2) Record Live TV with DVR
3) Burn any wanted TV programs onto BD disc via its BDR drive.

BluRay players are much more expensive than an AppleTV. However, it may be a good time for Apple to release a BluRay player (that happens to also be an AppleTV).

Quote:
Originally Posted by wtbard View Post

Since I don't have an HDTV, Apple TV is of no use to me. Perhaps in a few years I'll get one. When I do, it will require new furniture so it will be an expensive proposition.

That's a good point. If they want to sell more, a version for SD televisions would be useful.
Not to mention that government is about to supply rebates to people with old TVs to help them get a digital set top box... nice if the AppleDVR qualified.
post #100 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasparilla View Post

The Apple TV would need to be seriously re-engineered to be a DVR. While 160GB might be enough to hold what you want to rent for the night or weekend, its way insufficient for true HD DVR functionality. That's only providing ~20ish hrs of HD programming.

Agreed. A HD TV show uses about 7GB of space... a movie uses double. I was thinking AppleTV only plays back 720p (mpeg4).. but it may not be capable of 1080i (since mpeg2 is so much easier to decode). I wonder if Apple could transcode the broadcast into a smaller version?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mbene12 View Post

Who is going to buy South Park episodes when the same interface can just snag it for free using DVR? <snip> I personally think this patent filing is complete hedge.

It could be a hedge. Or Apple could be absolutely ready to release a DVR and already be negotiating with existing providers so that IF they partner with iTunes for South Park (including supplying full episode information, exact start and end time, etc), Apple can make sure people watch the South Park ads (alongside a $1-$2 "upgrade to no-ads" version).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

Competing with cable and satellite TV in the DVR market would be VERY difficult. It's not just that other companies aren't doing it very well...they just aren't doing it.

I agree that competing in the CableCard space would be difficult. It's like breaking into the mobile phone market - there are so many deals between box makers and the cable networks, difficult to get a foot hold.

However, Apple may instead want to replace cable TV. Free recording of FTA is a start. Perhaps they can offer a cheaper 'subscription model' for existing TV shows on the iTunes store. A HBO 'subscription' could allow this months HBO movies to be downloaded to watch.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

It's interesting that they really don't provide any analysis as to why including a DVR would all of a sudden change AppleTV into big business. Frankly, I don't buy it. It's the kind of thing that internet forum boys would like to see, but I don't see how it would fundamentally change the market for the device.

My guesses
1) People know they have to go digital shortly so they'll be looking. An inbuilt tuner puts Apple "on their map"
2) There are still bandwidth issues. A device that records FTA avoids those.
3) Apple itself has an appeal to people at the moment. This is a product that they could readily start with.
4) People like to buy a product that can do something without extra costs. If they offer season passes for free on all FTA shows, movie rental or buying TV shows (season passes) is an option that can be used later.
5) International - so many places have no deals in place at all. We can't buy or rent movies or TV. Lets start the ball rolling.
post #101 of 158
The ideal peripheral would be the AppleTV we have now + multi-tuner 1080i DVR + Blu-Ray player that can upgrade itself over time.

But...

The biggest problem Apple faces is taming the content providers. Would they be able to court and contain DirecTV, Dish Network, Warner, Comcast, U-Verse, Verizon FIOS, etc? Would they be forced to pick just one, as they did with iPhone, and would this hurt them? Would they be able to negotiate with companies that seem more predeluvian than mobile telephony providers?

I think AppleTV would still need a true "always-wanted" feature like Random Access Voicemail on the iPhone. I have no idea what that would be. A very stable interface with stable playback would be enough for me. I'm about to throw our second DirecTV HD DVR out the window. Perhaps four or more concurrent 1080i streams would be enough. Do one better than Series Three and just dump the pre-HD tuners.
post #102 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post


Quote:
When iPod first exploded, what was the free and legal way to get music on there?

iTunes.

If you mean the iTunes store, that was not available for nearly two years.
post #103 of 158
Yes iTunes before the store. It was the original software with the iPod for ripping CD's.




post #104 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Yes in fact I do. Most of my friends own the CD's their music came from. Myself and my friends are in our early to mid-30's. We are more from the CD age and do not regularly use peer to peer file sharing.



iTunes.



I don't see that. If anything it has only gotten easier and more convenient. Ripping a CD takes 5 minutes, iTunes automatically loads all of the album information and cover art. You barely have to do anything.

I am in my mid-30's as well. I have hundreds on CD's. I have ripped maybe a couple dozen over the years. Easier to just download, legal or otherwise, songs I have.


Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

The file size is the problem. Video files takes a long time to download and multiple numbers of video files take up a lot of hard drive space. There is no easy software infrastructure like iTunes set up to download, manage, and store illegal video files. There currently is no easy to use hardware infrastructure for viewing illegal video files. All of this will change eventually.

Not really sure what you are arguing here. Yes the files are bigger. That doesn't make them harder to manage, just much more bandwidth and time to deliver....obviously.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

I doubt that's true. I'm sure Apple's R&D budget for the iPod+ iTunes completely eclipse that of TiVO.

umm....yes, that is pretty obvously true. Apple probably puts more R&D into every product they make than TiVo's does. How completely irrelevant.

If you look at just the basic functions, DVR vs Music player, believe me, DVR is more complex. Why? because by definition it needs to play and record video, have schedules, manage tuners, etc. By definition, a music player needs to play music. Once you add additional functionality, yes Apple's implementation of iPod is more complex than TiVo's DVR. They would add the same level of effort to a DVR, which of course would mean additional functionality, i.e. what ATV does now, plus DVR, plus whatever else they might add that is unexpected.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

For a market to be fragmented does not mean everyone has to be using the same product. It generally implies there are many suppliers who split the needs and requirements of a market instead of creating a homogeneous one. DRM would be an example of a fragmented market.

fragmented market mean can mean a lot of things. it might mean no defacto standards. It could mean multiple competing, incompatible implementations. The DVR market is very similar to the MP3 player market of the late 90s early 2000's. At that time, if you asked people in their 50s or 60s what a MP3 player was, there was a good chance the would have no idea. Ask them today what an iPod or PMP or Tivo or DVR and which ones do you think they would know?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

The primary function of Apple TV is to stream movies, TV, and music from iTunes. Providing the user with the instant gratification of having content without the need to leave home or wait for the mail.

Apple could add a DVR. I'm not saying they shouldn't. I just don't see DVR being a killer feature because for many people it would be redundant.

And here we agree. I do think DVR, while not the killer feature to get ATV into living rooms, would be a big help. I personally would not buy an ATV until it had DVR functionality. I would gladly get rid of my TiVo. While it may be the best DVR in the market, that is not saying much, given the state of the DVR market.

Although, it it did DVR with CableCard2 (or Tru2way or whatever) then it doesn't become redundant, it becomes the replacement for the STB/DVR.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #105 of 158
I'm baffled why anyone thinks that Apple needs to court or cater to the cable/dish companies, when the real market-breaker is going directly to the show producers and channels. Screw the CableCARD fiasco, screw the insanity of zomg, which hardware works with which hardware.

The next battle isn't Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD, it isn't cable vs. dish... it's online on-demand of a huge catalog of shows from a wide variety of producers, *bypassing* cable, dish, and so on. The first company that can organize that in a simple to use way, wins big. DVR is where the puck is. This is where the puck will be.

The situation with the cable companies and networks is the same RIAA-centric business model, and just as the iTunes Music Store is letting indies bypass the labels, I predict the TV section will start to court producers directly. "The networks didn't like your show? We'll host it."

Give me a fat pipe and a 500GB drive, and I couldn't give a rat's ass about keeping cable. In fact, we're in the process of doing exactly that wiping of the hands. it's amazing how much plasma screen the monthly savings will pay for.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #106 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kickaha View Post

I'm baffled why anyone thinks that Apple needs to court or cater to the cable/dish companies, when the real market-breaker is going directly to the show producers and channels. Screw the CableCARD fiasco, screw the insanity of zomg, which hardware works with which hardware.

The next battle isn't Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD, it isn't cable vs. dish... it's online on-demand of a huge catalog of shows from a wide variety of producers, *bypassing* cable, dish, and so on. The first company that can organize that in a simple to use way, wins big. DVR is where the puck is. This is where the puck will be.

The situation with the cable companies and networks is the same RIAA-centric business model, and just as the iTunes Music Store is letting indies bypass the labels, I predict the TV section will start to court producers directly. "The networks didn't like your show? We'll host it."

Give me a fat pipe and a 500GB drive, and I couldn't give a rat's ass about keeping cable. In fact, we're in the process of doing exactly that wiping of the hands. it's amazing how much plasma screen the monthly savings will pay for.

You my friend get the big picture of what Apple wants to do.
post #107 of 158
Thanks. Of course, I'm still planning on getting an EyeTV and HD OTA antenna... That will take care of probably 50% of our viewing needs. The fact that it's a DVR device is just a time-shifting convenience - still doesn't require anything to do with the cable or dish companies.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #108 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kickaha View Post

I'm baffled why anyone thinks that Apple needs to court or cater to the cable/dish companies, .

Because they have content and Apple doesn't. Well, very little IMO.
post #109 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

Because they have content and Apple doesn't. Well, very little IMO.

Do cable/satellite providers actually own any content or do they subscribe to it as well?

Where I live, Timer Warner killed access to the NFL Network because they said it was too costly.
post #110 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post

Do cable/satellite providers actually own any content or do they subscribe to it as well?

Where I live, Timer Warner killed access to the NFL Network because they said it was too costly.

Not that I'm aware of. But they still have access to more.

It seems like it is easy for the studios to deny content to Apple. I guessing that would be difficult for them to do to the cable providers, NFL network notwithstanding.
post #111 of 158
The shows are made by producers who work for studios who sell them to networks who offer them to providers of cable or dish networks for distribution.

Now, *how* many links in there could Apple step into and divert the shows directly to the consumer?
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #112 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kickaha View Post

The next battle isn't Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD, it isn't cable vs. dish... it's online on-demand of a huge catalog of shows from a wide variety of producers, *bypassing* cable, dish, and so on. The first company that can organize that in a simple to use way, wins big. DVR is where the puck is. This is where the puck will be.

A good point - and this is where AppleTV tried to jump straight to last year. This year with Rental it's closer to a possibility - but it's happening just as the cable companies are thinking about controlling quota. Also, the majority of internet connections are via those same cable companies who may not want to play nicely with Apple.

So your point about Apple's vision for the future is good - as is your comparison to the music industry, since the existing players may not want to change the status quo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kickaha View Post

Of course, I'm still planning on getting an EyeTV and HD OTA antenna... That will take care of probably 50% of our viewing needs. The fact that it's a DVR device is just a time-shifting convenience - still doesn't require anything to do with the cable or dish companies.

It could be said that Apple needs a bridge to their vision of the future. Both to help consumers make the step, and to allow for existing systems that will take time to adapt. The 2 ways I'd like to see a bridge done are
1) DVR
2) Support for older TVs
post #113 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Yes iTunes before the store. It was the original software with the iPod for ripping CD's.





Wow... pinstripes and brushed aluminum... it seems so long ago!
post #114 of 158
Here's my prediction. Apple partners with a WiMax provider like Sprint. Integrates WiMax into their laptops or apple tv box. Uses Apple TV DVR type functionality to allow people to download all the tv and movies they want directly to their laptops circumventing the cable companies and watch it when they want (while also skipping commercials). Customers will pay only for the shows they want at $.30 to $.50 a show. Advertisers will love it because the end users can be targeted much more accurately based on their viewing habits, and when they reach the right audience, that audience can just jump over to their website. Viewers will love it because they can watch only the shows they want, they can watch them when they want, and they can pay less for all of it. Viewers should also have to watch less commercials, because let's face it, if i'm a 38 year old male why the heck would i want to watch a tampon commerical and why would some advertiser want to be paying for me to watch it. Via simply demographic capturing, that will be avoided. 10 years from now TV shows will be much more targeted to very specific segments based on this, so my tv viewing will be more rewarding and advertisers will be spending their money more wisely too. Personally i think apple could successfully launch a 42 inch lcd tv that's also a dvr and a computer, but they'll probably just make the Apple TV box an item that works with any other tv and stay out of that low margin business. It's all greenfield opportunity for Apple. I'd short the cable companies the day something like that launches, because it's what people want.
post #115 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregAlexander View Post

It could be said that Apple needs a bridge to their vision of the future. Both to help consumers make the step, and to allow for existing systems that will take time to adapt. The 2 ways I'd like to see a bridge done are
1) DVR
2) Support for older TVs

For the first, I'm partial to an EyeTV and HD antenna - why keep paying for cable as a feed when you don't have to? (Yeah, I know, not everyone can use an HD antenna, but they're getting a *lot* better and cheaper...) The only reason for a DVR is when you have a feed that isn't on-demand, but broadcast. If you ditch cable/dish, you don't have any real need for an integrated DVR... *IF* the on-demand content hits a critical mass, it simply won't be needed, period. The whole catalog is your personal DVR. (But you got that. )

Even as someone with a 1991 Trinitron CRT, and no AppleTV-capable unit in the house, I don't think offering a legacy port is the best approach.

I also don't believe that it would ever be allowed by the studios providing content for rental - note that this closes the analog hole.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #116 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saturdaymorningimsleepingin View Post

Here's my prediction. Apple partners with a WiMax provider like Sprint. Integrates WiMax into their laptops or apple tv box. Uses Apple TV DVR type functionality to allow people to download all the tv and movies they want directly to their laptops circumventing the cable companies and watch it when they want (while also skipping commercials). Customers will pay only for the shows they want at $.30 to $.50 a show. Advertisers will love it because the end users can be targeted much more accurately based on their viewing habits, and when they reach the right audience, that audience can just jump over to their website. Viewers will love it because they can watch only the shows they want, they can watch them when they want, and they can pay less for all of it. Viewers should also have to watch less commercials, because let's face it, if i'm a 38 year old male why the heck would i want to watch a tampon commerical and why would some advertiser want to be paying for me to watch it. Via simply demographic capturing, that will be avoided. 10 years from now TV shows will be much more targeted to very specific segments based on this, so my tv viewing will be more rewarding and advertisers will be spending their money more wisely too. Personally i think apple could successfully launch a 42 inch lcd tv that's also a dvr and a computer, but they'll probably just make the Apple TV box an item that works with any other tv and stay out of that low margin business. It's all greenfield opportunity for Apple. I'd short the cable companies the day something like that launches, because it's what people want.

Whow!! Do you have any idea on the number of toes and vested interests you just stepped on? Remember, it not just the cable and satellite companies that are at steak. It is the full, complete entertainment industry that you are changing.
What goes online stays online. What is online will become public.
Reply
What goes online stays online. What is online will become public.
Reply
post #117 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saturdaymorningimsleepingin View Post

Here's my prediction. Apple partners with a WiMax provider like Sprint. Integrates WiMax into their laptops or apple tv box. Uses Apple TV DVR type functionality to allow people to download all the tv and movies they want directly to their laptops circumventing the cable companies and watch it when they want (while also skipping commercials). Customers will pay only for the shows they want at $.30 to $.50 a show. Advertisers will love it because the end users can be targeted much more accurately based on their viewing habits, and when they reach the right audience, that audience can just jump over to their website. Viewers will love it because they can watch only the shows they want, they can watch them when they want, and they can pay less for all of it. Viewers should also have to watch less commercials, because let's face it, if i'm a 38 year old male why the heck would i want to watch a tampon commerical and why would some advertiser want to be paying for me to watch it. Via simply demographic capturing, that will be avoided. 10 years from now TV shows will be much more targeted to very specific segments based on this, so my tv viewing will be more rewarding and advertisers will be spending their money more wisely too. Personally i think apple could successfully launch a 42 inch lcd tv that's also a dvr and a computer, but they'll probably just make the Apple TV box an item that works with any other tv and stay out of that low margin business. It's all greenfield opportunity for Apple. I'd short the cable companies the day something like that launches, because it's what people want.

Out of curiosity, a lot of the audience likes to channel surf: skip around for up to (according to the latest Nielsens) seven shows in an hour, especially during new seasons/new show kick-offs. (I know I'll skip between at least three shows an hour, especially if sports are on.) So, your $.30 to $.50 could add up to $2.50 to $3.50 an hour. Say you do that for only 2 hours a day. That's $7 plus another few hours of viewing. So an easy $10 a day, possibly, probably more on weekends. In one week, you're piling up quite the bill. If you know exactly what you want, it might be a savings, but if you aren't sure, and tune into a bad movie here, a good game there, some news, a sit-com... it can add up. Also, I know a lot of freelance people who work from home and keep the TV's on in the backgrounds. That could add up for them, as well.
"I used to be disgusted, but now I try to be amused."
Macbook Pro 2.2
Reply
"I used to be disgusted, but now I try to be amused."
Macbook Pro 2.2
Reply
post #118 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kickaha View Post

For the first, I'm partial to an EyeTV and HD antenna - why keep paying for cable as a feed when you don't have to?

Actually I did mean DVR for FTA (ie requires receiver plus HD antenna). I don't think the cable is needed as a stepping stone enough to warrant the issues with cable card etc.

Quote:
Even as someone with a 1991 Trinitron CRT, and no AppleTV-capable unit in the house, I don't think offering a legacy port is the best approach.

I also don't believe that it would ever be allowed by the studios providing content for rental - note that this closes the analog hole.

The studios don't care about the analog hole if it's in Standard Definition, do they? They allow SD rentals on computers... and the old TVs won't have HD anyway (mostly).

Apart from that, can you elaborate on why don't you like the legacy support?

I use FrontRow from my MBP on an old TV now - nowhere NEAR as good looking as AppleTV on a 50" plasma but still useful.
post #119 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregAlexander View Post

The studios don't care about the analog hole if it's in Standard Definition, do they? They allow SD rentals on computers... and the old TVs won't have HD anyway (mostly).

Oh, they care about it, they care very much about it. But they know there isn't much they can do about it so they don't talk about it very much. On they other hand, because of that hole, they are pulling out all the stops to completely lock down digital copying. Just wait for the howls from this pro-DVR crowd when the networks turn on the anti-copying bit that they forced into the digital standards.
What goes online stays online. What is online will become public.
Reply
What goes online stays online. What is online will become public.
Reply
post #120 of 158
I know for a fact certain parties in Apple are now invested enough in the idea of "fixing" television and video that they are dealing with large cable providers. I know that Apple has played around with building support for a "new" standard and software based cable card on motherboard. The idea has been called geoport (by some) as a joke to the days of Apple's software modem.

Apple is torn between keeping it's product "pure" or having to make small sacrifices to improve the overall experience of television. You will first see some ad supported content through appletv style device including the ability to select the shows you like, and get the time-shifted version of the device. The last time I was aware, the "box" i saw didn't actually go onto live tv, but would work to let you pick shows you wanted with a tv-guide, and would download them from storage on servers about hour after they were shown on "live" tv. Since it's too easy to fast forward through commercials, there has to be some sort of compromise.

Current cable standards suck, and block out comcast from things like ondemand, and other services. So either Apple's going to let other people into it's box, or they just will have to cut out regular live tv.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Report: DVR could turn Apple TV into multi-billion dollar business