Digg founder says Apple iTV launch in September will 'change everything'

2456713

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 258
    brlawyerbrlawyer Posts: 828member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Good question. I truly hope there will be backwards compatibility.



    I would love to consign my (1st gen, 40GB, and worth every penny I paid for it) @TV to the basement.



    Excelent question; but I would assume that at least the app part is easily upgradable via software...the current AppleTV is already capable of 720p, so HD is non-issue for us current owners.
  • Reply 22 of 258
    Kevin Rose is a smart guy but apparently not well-versed in the media marketplace. There's a reason cable and satellite companies offer tiers of service with different packages of channels -- because consumers refuse to pay much more to buy those same channels "a la carte."



    Apple's iAds may in fact be a breakthrough for monetizing individual shows and movies, but it's nowhere near as lucrative for producers and networks as selling viewers by the thousand to national advertisers.



    These topics and many more will be explored at the 2011 CES in the Media Money Makers track of the new Entertainment Matters conference. Hope to see many of you there.
  • Reply 23 of 258
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    1) I can’t quite wrap my head around this $99 AppleTV. Even with only a couple GB for the OS and apps and a potential size of that of an iPod Nano with the relative performance of the iPad, the best I can see is $149, even if they are trying to get a shoe in the home entertainment market.



    2) I can’t see this being the only TV they would offer. I can see a larger, hub-like media extender for the main widescreen HDTV that does 1080p, has plenty of local storage, apps, etc. (maybe built into the new Mac Mini case) for a several hundred dollars, with a much simpler TV for the many other TVs in a home that I’d assume would be common to those who tend to buy Apple’s products.



    3) We have to watch out for cable companies being delegated to ISPs. They have contracts with the networks. If, for example, they lose half their revenue of paid cable they may still have to pay the full contract amount to these networks along with the support costs. That means to maintain their margins they’d have to double their prices for those sticking with cable TV (which is unlikely), or bump the cost of your internet per GB and potentially adding data caps so that heavy users pay more (very likely).
  • Reply 24 of 258
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,946member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Cinemagic View Post


    Steve Jobs still doesn't get it.



    How do you know that he doesn't get it vs. gets it but simply can't get it because of contracts with the content owners? You have to realize that the video content owners exert a considerable amount of leverage on distributors. I doubt they'll let Apple sell their premium content if Apple offers a way to recording the networks' free OTA content. Most of the OTA networks have subsidiaries with cable channels or are owned by parent companies with cable channels.



    Media Center doesn't have the drag of having to make a deal to sell content like Apple has in their iTunes deals.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    Believe it.



    When the rumor comes from Kevin Rose? Knowing his track record, I'd much rather wait and see.
  • Reply 25 of 258
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,946member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Arthur Greenwald View Post


    Kevin Rose is a smart guy but apparently not well-versed in the media marketplace. There's a reason cable and satellite companies offer tiers of service with different packages of channels -- because consumers refuse to pay much more to buy those same channels "a la carte."



    I don't know about that last part though. That excuse for the bundling didn't really connect well when a la carte wasn't and still isn't so terribly priced on a big dish.
  • Reply 26 of 258
    Say good bye to the monthly cable bill and say hello to tiered internet pricing from the telecom and cable companies. They are going to take your money any which way they can just like the wireless providers do with their tiered data pricing.
  • Reply 27 of 258
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by msuberly View Post


    Goodbye monthly cable bill. You have just been replaced by an equally expensive monthly Internet bill.



    Exactly.

    The really high bandwidth needed for HDTV can only come from fiber optics or cable. If Apple takes over the content portion of the consumer's needs, and as long as the cable companies still have the same cost structure, it can only be a plus for them. Same fee with only being responsible for the pipe. Cable still has a monopoly. There is usually only one choice of providers in each neighborhood.
  • Reply 28 of 258
    str1f3str1f3 Posts: 573member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Arthur Greenwald View Post


    Kevin Rose is a smart guy but apparently not well-versed in the media marketplace. There's a reason cable and satellite companies offer tiers of service with different packages of channels -- because consumers refuse to pay much more to buy those same channels "a la carte."



    Apple's iAds may in fact be a breakthrough for monetizing individual shows and movies, but it's nowhere near as lucrative for producers and networks as selling viewers by the thousand to national advertisers.



    These topics and many more will be explored at the 2011 CES in the Media Money Makers track of the new Entertainment Matters conference. Hope to see many of you there.



    The issue described is of no importance. Major networks will charge according to viewership. If viewership increases so do the price for ad placement. It will be no difference to TV.



    To those who say DVR functionality are missing the point. There will probably be DVR functionality probably as a paid function of the app with live viewing for free for OTA channels and basic cable channels.



    The problem with Rose's theory is that the big networks are now getting paid by cable for the right to display their free OTA channel. Last year Fox threatened to remove their stations off the air if the companies didn't pay a fee. ABC threatened Cablevision that they would remove the Oscars (which they did for 30 min) if they did not receive the higher fees they asked for. The same happened with Cablevision and HGTV.



    If the networks are receiving this kind of revenue what is the incentive to create iTV apps. This is not even including that cable companies have been gobbling up TV networks.
  • Reply 29 of 258
    I hate cable. Really I do. I hate missing shows (I don't have TiVo) and I hate being on the company's schedule. I enjoy Hulu quite a bit but it doesn't provide me with shows from Discovery or History, which are my big channels. Just about the only thing that Hulu does for me is USA (Psych, Burn Notice, Royal Pains) and some other random shows like Chuck. I don't want to pay for Hulu Plus because it would be on top of my cable bill. Kind of redundant. If, however, iTV/ iTunes/ Jony Ives/ whoever managed to strike deals with ALL of the major networks, then yeah, I'd be all in for a cable replacement. My big deal is getting EVERY show I want, when I want it, and not a week or a month late. Call me picky, but as much as I don't like cable, I can't justify giving it up yet..



    Please change that, Apple.
  • Reply 30 of 258
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lepton View Post


    My set of predictions for Apple TV this year have included: Looks like the Apple TV case. Has an HDMI out and an HDNI in. You connect it between your current cable box and the TV - it passes everything through. However, it can overlay its own video on top of the video.



    That video overlay is an excellent idea!! I would love to see that implementation so that while my wife is watching her shows on what appears to be reg TV, I can have a custom ESPN app ticker or on screen app overlay giving my sports fix!



    I hope you have emailed jobs because if Apple TV or errr iTV is just a way to rent tv and movie clips or play music it will suck. I have an AppleTV now and really hope they expand its usefulness !!
  • Reply 31 of 258
    desarcdesarc Posts: 642member
    i'm very excited for what this thing can be, but "the iPad as a remote"?

    who the hell buys a remote that costs 5X as much as the device it's controlling?
  • Reply 32 of 258
    daharderdaharder Posts: 1,580member
    Digg founder says Apple iTV launch in September will 'change everything'... NOT at 720p It Won't (at least not for those of us now accustomed to 1080p content).
  • Reply 33 of 258
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by desarc View Post


    i'm very excited for what this thing can be, but "the iPad as a remote"?

    who the hell buys a remote that costs 5X as much as the device it's controlling?



    Are you suggesting you don't understand the difference between "preferred" and "sole"?
  • Reply 34 of 258
    sheffsheff Posts: 1,407member
    Welcome to Diggnation!



    I hope what he wrote out on his blog come to life. I think he stated that he does not have any sources, just kinda thinks of what it could be. I agree with Kevin's vision for the most part. Can't wait.
  • Reply 35 of 258
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post


    Digg founder says Apple iTV launch in September will 'change everything'... NOT at 720p It Won't (at least not for those of us now accustomed to 1080p content).



    I feel badly for you! The rest of us should be quite happy, I am guessing.



    No doubt, by 2012, where there's enough bandwidth....
  • Reply 36 of 258
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NomadMac View Post


    Maybe you ought to start your own company since you obviously are much more savvy than Steve at creating new markets, industries and products.



    First, I do own my own company that is extremely successful. Second, I am also an Apple stockholder (and quite a lot of Apple stock, to boot). I have a vested interest in Apple's success and I hope that I'm wrong about the iTV. But every writer in the field has been saying for quite some time that the Apple TV was more of a hobby for Steve than a profit center for Apple. And they were right. Steve Jobs is a brilliant man and a visionary. But that doesn't make him right all the time. His Newton was a tremendous failure - at the time. Now, it's called the iPod Touch / iPad and it's successful. He had a great idea that was 20 years ahead of its time. I do believe that the future will be Internet TV. But I also believe the time is not now or nor in the next 10 years. Jobs doesn't like Blu-Ray, yet the industry is thriving. He believes DVDs will be dead. He may be right, but when? Where do the vast majority of people get their Internet service? Cable. What does the cable industry supply besides Internet? If the iTV were to become an instant success and people shut off their cable TV, keeping only Internet service, what do you think the cable industry's response to that would be? Apple does not need to dominate the media market to make a profit. And they may sell enough to make a profit. Look at your own television habits and what your TV viewing desires are. I like DVR and time shifting capabilities. I like DVDs and Blu-Ray. I like the greater reliability of HD cable television over Internet HD content. The reliability and throughput of Internet in most areas is not great enough to have every household streaming HD TV - at this time. iTV is a great idea, but the infrastructure necessary in most parts of the country, which is out of Apple's control, is not ready for it to become a replacement for conventional cable or satellite. But time will tell who's right.
  • Reply 37 of 258
    bullheadbullhead Posts: 493member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Arthur Greenwald View Post


    Kevin Rose is a smart guy but apparently not well-versed in the media marketplace. There's a reason cable and satellite companies offer tiers of service with different packages of channels -- because consumers refuse to pay much more to buy those same channels "a la carte."



    Apple's iAds may in fact be a breakthrough for monetizing individual shows and movies, but it's nowhere near as lucrative for producers and networks as selling viewers by the thousand to national advertisers.



    These topics and many more will be explored at the 2011 CES in the Media Money Makers track of the new Entertainment Matters conference. Hope to see many of you there.



    Sounds like you are not well versed. Targeted advertising is worth exponentially more than national carpet bomb advertisements.
  • Reply 38 of 258
    grkinggrking Posts: 533member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NomadMac View Post


    Maybe you ought to start your own company since you obviously are much more savvy than Steve at creating new markets, industries and products.



    What new industry did SJ create?



    Personal computers existed before the Mac

    Flash based music players existed with the iPod

    Cell phones existed before the iPhone

    Tablets existed before the iPad

    App stores existed before iTunes



    So what new industry dud SJ create that did no exist before
  • Reply 39 of 258
    wurm5150wurm5150 Posts: 763member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Cinemagic View Post


    Steve Jobs still doesn't get it. Unless the iTV has a tuner and capable of connection to cable or off the air TV, it's not going to be mainstream. Why pay ABC, NBC or CBS for access through iTV when you can get it for free off the air? Same for the rest of the programming. Cable and satellite do it better and probably cheaper. This is one area where Microsoft is far superior. Their Media Center is where it's at. My Media Center can connect to off the air, cable, satellite, DVD, Blu-Ray or Internet sources. It's got a built in DVR as well for all those sources. iTV is simply an iTunes pay per view (or subscription) box. Even if some programmers utilize advertising as a revenue stream instead of subscription fees, we'll see how long that lasts. I love Apple products and own quite a few. I find Apple OS far superior to Microsoft. But the Apply TV isn't and the upcoming iTV doesn't sound like it's in the league of Microsoft's Media Center.



    How do you know for sure? Wait til it comes out. If it doesn't do what you expect it to then repost your comment.
  • Reply 40 of 258
    lostkiwilostkiwi Posts: 599member
    Maybe this has something to do with the famous Google-Verizon proposal.

    In that deal Google got free rein on the wired Internet (for the GoogleTV) but threw the wireless to the wolves in terms of neutrality.

    I know everyone thinks wireless is where everyone is heading, but if Google can get their hooks into advertising for the TV content people watch they would have a jackpot on their hands.

    Imagine that, theoretically they have all your emails, IM's, texts and wireless searching info from Android AND everything you watch/do on wired TV and home Internet use. That's quite a lot of power there for a company whose business is... well YOUR business.



    For people that say, well Apple is the same, I would reply that Apple is interested in selling you hardware for a profit, not selling your info for a profit.
Sign In or Register to comment.