all we need is ISPs nothing else for all services, voice, data, tv, whatever. c'mon, it's 21st century, everything is data these days we don't need a company for phone, we don't need a company for tv and a company which sells us internet connection. we just need one internet access provider, that's it.
I suspect that if Apple were to bid and win the upcoming broadcast spectrum auction(s) -- that it might level the playing field and allow Apple to negotiate form position of strength -- to provide access to, and deliver of, content.
Finally, a sane article in this TV business, but it doesn't go far enough. There are still going to be plenty of people who are perfectly happy with the current HDTV they have (whether they recently bought it or brand loyalty) so I'm wondering why these content deals wouldnt be for the current AppleTV as well, a far more mass market device than a $1000+ TV.
They in effect could be because they would be for iTunes in general.
Wu is right about the cable companies, networks etc being hesitant about this, because of the head in the sand clinging to the Nielsens and considering online the same as OTA so Syndie deals cut off access on iTunes, hulu, netflix etc.
But he is also a tad wrong about the whole music thing. They didn't turn to iTunes because of piracy. They were terrified of iTunes for that reason. They thought that the iTunes store would make it easier for folks to pirate. Especially with Apple wanted to yank DRM.
The networks and studios are likely feeling the same way and sure as heck are worried about an all you can eat buffet at a price like even $50 a month. Especially if Apple wants them to also put up everything without delays (HBO, Showtime etc included). So don't. Get the titles yes but not the buffet. Many folks would be happy with just knocking $1.00 off all the purchasing prices for shows. They would also be happy with a 1080p file that was half the bit rate of a blu-ray and 2.1 sound. Toss in the features from the disk sets on a little companion pack or as 'season pass only' add ons (preferably both).
For movies, give us a EXTRAS that works on appletv, computer, iPad etc with one buy. Create an API that will recognize if we already bought the movie for those iOS apps and then give us the video clips in a features pack or something for the computer. Give us that same 1080p/2.1 HD from the TV shows with perhaps a SuperHD that is true blu-ray quality and sound for those nuts enough to buy it.
And add visual audio tracks with the CC. Even if it has to be added later and we are allowed to redownload.
and go global. Separate online and OTA and just allow all shows and video out at the same time. or on tv within a week or two. If folks know that the global file is going out in a week those that pirate due to delayed access won't be as inclined.
And the number one way that iTunes etc can counter pirating. MAKE IT COUNT. If folks know that their purchase or their view is being counted along side the ratings they are more inclined to get their fav shows though legal means because what they do can keep or kill a show. That only 25k folks are counted in the ratings means for millions "doesn't matter what I do so why not just torrent it and save the cable money"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
I suspect that if Apple were to bid and win the upcoming broadcast spectrum auction(s) -- that it might level the playing field and allow Apple to negotiate form position of strength -- to provide access to, and deliver of, content.
Spectrum has nothing to do with access to content. That is all in the hands of the studios and networks that own the shows/movies
That's just one sport, a nice start, but not enough to get America to cancel their cable and satellite subscriptions.
For Apple (or anyone else) to make a dent in online sports content distribution, they really need to cover the major professional sports (NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, NASCAR, PGA/LPGA, ATP/WTA, etc.), major collegiate sports (football, basketball), and the larger events (Olympics, World Cup).
We may be thinking of this wrong. One of the game-changing things about the iPhone was when the phone function became just another app. Apple may have plans for a 55" screen in the living room, but I bet it will not be another TV.
My guess is it will be "iWall", with modular borderless screens that can be combined into one "desktop". TV will just be one of many windows.
I think the bigger worry to me would be the local cable companies who also control internet service to the home. If I cancel my TV with Comcast, who's to stop them from lowering my monthly bandwidth allowance, only offering a slower speed, and charging more for the "pleasure" of it?
Contracts and potential lose of customers. They aren't that stupid. Sure they will cut that $10 a month or whatever "multi-item" discount you are getting but you are still $40 a head.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmgregory1
Although it goes against what Apple is trying to do and has done with the music industry, they could work deals out with the cable / isp companies making tv more akin to the cell phone industry.
Nope. First, not sure that legally they could. Second, Apple and their iTunes system is designed to kill the need for cable. So this would be the cable companies killing themselves. Won't happen.
the folks to go to are the content creators. So the record labels, not the radio stations. The networks/studios not the cable companies
Quote:
Originally Posted by mknopp
Maybe it is finally time for Apple to buy their own network.
And they would still have to make content deals. So why not just make deals for what they have in place already. Especially when the deals with the current networks would block any deals with this new Apple network if it was a TV one. The best they could get it 4 months later on a syndie deal. No thanks.
As for becoming an ISP, perhaps Apple might do it. But getting the license to operate in various areas could be tricky. I used to be on Comcast here in LA but then TimeWarner managed to knock them and Adelphia out taking over both customer sets. I called Comcast to try to not get moved and was told that legally they could no longer service me because TWC has the rights to my area. I could go to ATT or Fios but that's it. I would love an Apple ISP but I don't expect it to happen
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor
If you want to help change the TV business, my advice is to cancel your cable subscription and fire up your bit torrent client.
Actually no. That's the way to make sure that things don't change.
One of the things that served Apple with the music folks is that they could point to millions of downloads. If you want to change the TV biz, legally buy your stuff from Apple and help them be able to go to folks like AMC and say "Hey look, in the first day the newest ep of the Walking Dead had 1 million downloads. With your cut, that's $700k of money to earn back the budget cost. And you're still getting downloads on that ep and the first two from the season. Not 'sample' viewers but real ones. Imagine if you opened this up for the world to download. You might make back the cost of each episode in first day downloads." THAT is what will get them to open up their eyes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831
Nah, firing up BT won't really change the television content market.
The reason? Live sporting events. That's where the big bucks are and where the key content deals reside.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831
For Apple (or anyone else) to make a dent in online sports content distribution, they really need to cover the major professional sports (NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, NASCAR, PGA/LPGA, ATP/WTA, etc.), major collegiate sports (football, basketball), and the larger events (Olympics, World Cup).
Right now on my Apple TV I can watch NBA, NHL, and MLB. All live, many out of market that aren't airing on my TV anyway. And if the other boys make an iOS app and offer such a service then you can bet that Apple will jump to make the deals to put it on the Apple TV as well.
Hollywood is a fucked up place. I am pretty sure suits sit around their big mahogany desks in their Aeron chairs to figure out ways to make it as difficult as possible for law-abiding citizens to consume their content.
If they provide it, I will pay. As it is, however, they don't provide it, so I BitTorrent.
I am the typical demographic: professional husband and father with nary a second in the day to brush my teeth, let alone go to the movies. I would kill to be able to pay, let's say, $20 to watch the latest blockbuster in the privacy of my home. Why do I need to go to the theaters to give you my money? I'll give it to you from the comfort of my couch. But you won't let me!
And guess what? After a week or so, I will have forgotten about your stupid movie. And I will especially overlook it when it finally comes out on Blu-Ray because it's no longer a blockbuster. And there you go: You have just devised an ingenious method to not accept my money.
And in comes BitTorrent. And a big Fuck You to your mesozoic ways.
Typical justification for being an asshole. Sorry, it didn't work.
Besides content deals, I would like to see Apple buy a carrier/ISP like Cogent to provide cheap fiber to business and homes. We are paying too much for low speeds.
You are correct sir. It all comes down to everyone grabbing for a piece of the pie. I just hope they don't knock the pie off the table and nobody gets any.
Yeah, disruption's a bitch. Cable monopolies like Comcast will fight this tooth and nail. Comcast doesn't even want people using TiVo's with CableCards if they could find a way to make you "choose" their DVR services bundle for the extra recurring fee. And they do by making CableCards as much hassle as possible. And they'd reset your TCP data streams to competing services if they could get away with it (they can--they have the equipment to do it--but don't seem to at the moment). The sooner we can cut the cord, the better.
A little off topic but, due to this article, current, nonetheless....
Is it just because of revelations being brought to light with the release of the book or does anyone else feel that the Apple's veil of secrecy may be slowly lifting?
Thinking different than all the posts and the article, what if the Apple HDTV was a tv that got rid of all the boxes on you entertainment center. A device that would replace the DVR, the cablebox, the surround sound system (but had speaker connections) plus it would have a great picture and a network connection, did all of the things that the current Apple TV does also. Allowing immediate use by anyone with any cable/satellite provider, plus had the internet also. The content delivery piece would then follow afterwards as the popularity of it increased the pressure on the content makers. Then there wouldn't need to be any deals with Comcast or the others, the TV would just work straight out of the box, it would be beautiful, it would be classy, it would be easy. And the back deals could take their time getting in place.
We may be thinking of this wrong. One of the game-changing things about the iPhone was when the phone function became just another app. Apple may have plans for a 55" screen in the living room, but I bet it will not be another TV.
My guess is it will be "iWall", with modular borderless screens that can be combined into one "desktop". TV will just be one of many windows.
The content delivery piece would then follow afterwards as the popularity of it increased the pressure on the content makers.
The only reason the little black box gets away with its relatively meager popularity is because of its price. The same would not be true for a $999 iTV with no TV subscription..
They either get the shows that people want at a monthly fee or they don't sell a TV. I think it's literally that simple. They don't need 'every show', but they do need the vast majority of them, but more importantly they absolutely need a monthly deal. Otherwise they can't make it a revolution.
The only reason the little black box gets away with its relatively meager popularity is because of its price. The same would not be true for a $999 iTV with no TV subscription..
They either get the shows that people want at a monthly fee or they don't sell a TV.
Witness hydrogen powered cars. Incidentally, I disagree w/your sig. Add a microphone to the Apple Remote so you don't have to fight w/ however many people (or screaming kids) you have in your living room, and voice control for the television is easily handled.
Incidentally, I disagree w/your sig. Add a microphone to the Apple Remote so you don't have to fight w/ however many people (or screaming kids) you have in your living room, and voice control for the television is easily handled.
Give the remote a MIC and SiRi you're still fighting for a remote. A remote with a 2 day bettery life. Besides, talking to your TV remote seems like the yuckiest, most un-Apple thing I've ever heard.
iTV will have a physical remote, and the UI will be an iTV iOS variant with the UI on the TV. The remote better be Bluetooth though, because as much as I like the shape and design of the Apple aluminium remote, IR sucks donkey dick.
Comments
all we need is ISPs nothing else for all services, voice, data, tv, whatever. c'mon, it's 21st century, everything is data these days we don't need a company for phone, we don't need a company for tv and a company which sells us internet connection. we just need one internet access provider, that's it.
I suspect that if Apple were to bid and win the upcoming broadcast spectrum auction(s) -- that it might level the playing field and allow Apple to negotiate form position of strength -- to provide access to, and deliver of, content.
Finally, a sane article in this TV business, but it doesn't go far enough. There are still going to be plenty of people who are perfectly happy with the current HDTV they have (whether they recently bought it or brand loyalty) so I'm wondering why these content deals wouldnt be for the current AppleTV as well, a far more mass market device than a $1000+ TV.
They in effect could be because they would be for iTunes in general.
Wu is right about the cable companies, networks etc being hesitant about this, because of the head in the sand clinging to the Nielsens and considering online the same as OTA so Syndie deals cut off access on iTunes, hulu, netflix etc.
But he is also a tad wrong about the whole music thing. They didn't turn to iTunes because of piracy. They were terrified of iTunes for that reason. They thought that the iTunes store would make it easier for folks to pirate. Especially with Apple wanted to yank DRM.
The networks and studios are likely feeling the same way and sure as heck are worried about an all you can eat buffet at a price like even $50 a month. Especially if Apple wants them to also put up everything without delays (HBO, Showtime etc included). So don't. Get the titles yes but not the buffet. Many folks would be happy with just knocking $1.00 off all the purchasing prices for shows. They would also be happy with a 1080p file that was half the bit rate of a blu-ray and 2.1 sound. Toss in the features from the disk sets on a little companion pack or as 'season pass only' add ons (preferably both).
For movies, give us a EXTRAS that works on appletv, computer, iPad etc with one buy. Create an API that will recognize if we already bought the movie for those iOS apps and then give us the video clips in a features pack or something for the computer. Give us that same 1080p/2.1 HD from the TV shows with perhaps a SuperHD that is true blu-ray quality and sound for those nuts enough to buy it.
And add visual audio tracks with the CC. Even if it has to be added later and we are allowed to redownload.
and go global. Separate online and OTA and just allow all shows and video out at the same time. or on tv within a week or two. If folks know that the global file is going out in a week those that pirate due to delayed access won't be as inclined.
And the number one way that iTunes etc can counter pirating. MAKE IT COUNT. If folks know that their purchase or their view is being counted along side the ratings they are more inclined to get their fav shows though legal means because what they do can keep or kill a show. That only 25k folks are counted in the ratings means for millions "doesn't matter what I do so why not just torrent it and save the cable money"
I suspect that if Apple were to bid and win the upcoming broadcast spectrum auction(s) -- that it might level the playing field and allow Apple to negotiate form position of strength -- to provide access to, and deliver of, content.
Spectrum has nothing to do with access to content. That is all in the hands of the studios and networks that own the shows/movies
That's just one sport, a nice start, but not enough to get America to cancel their cable and satellite subscriptions.
For Apple (or anyone else) to make a dent in online sports content distribution, they really need to cover the major professional sports (NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, NASCAR, PGA/LPGA, ATP/WTA, etc.), major collegiate sports (football, basketball), and the larger events (Olympics, World Cup).
Apparently, nobody gets the NBA
Spectrum has nothing to do with access to content. That is all in the hands of the studios and networks that own the shows/movies
I realize that!
But the content owners are interested in selling their content!
Who can they sell their content to?
Why, to companies that deliver that content to consumers (and aggregators)!
Currently, that includes OTA Broadcast, Cable, and some Internet.
If Apple had a BBB (Big Bag of Bandwidth), I suspect that the content owners would be willing to discuss "selling access" to their content with Apple.
There is a term, "whinger"
whinge |(h)winj | Brit. verb
complain persistently and in a peevish or irritating way:
noun
an act of complaining in such a way.
whingeingly adverb ,
whinger noun ,
whingy |-jē | adjective
"WAAAAAH! My predictions about the iPhone nano didn't come true! Better start raping some other baseless rumor!"
"WAAAAAH! My predictions about the xMac didn't come true! Better start raping some other baseless rumor!"
"WAAAAAH! My predictions about the redesigned iPhone didn't come true! Better start raping some other baseless rumor!"
Frigging analysts.
My guess is it will be "iWall", with modular borderless screens that can be combined into one "desktop". TV will just be one of many windows.
I think the bigger worry to me would be the local cable companies who also control internet service to the home. If I cancel my TV with Comcast, who's to stop them from lowering my monthly bandwidth allowance, only offering a slower speed, and charging more for the "pleasure" of it?
Contracts and potential lose of customers. They aren't that stupid. Sure they will cut that $10 a month or whatever "multi-item" discount you are getting but you are still $40 a head.
Although it goes against what Apple is trying to do and has done with the music industry, they could work deals out with the cable / isp companies making tv more akin to the cell phone industry.
Nope. First, not sure that legally they could. Second, Apple and their iTunes system is designed to kill the need for cable. So this would be the cable companies killing themselves. Won't happen.
the folks to go to are the content creators. So the record labels, not the radio stations. The networks/studios not the cable companies
Maybe it is finally time for Apple to buy their own network.
And they would still have to make content deals. So why not just make deals for what they have in place already. Especially when the deals with the current networks would block any deals with this new Apple network if it was a TV one. The best they could get it 4 months later on a syndie deal. No thanks.
As for becoming an ISP, perhaps Apple might do it. But getting the license to operate in various areas could be tricky. I used to be on Comcast here in LA but then TimeWarner managed to knock them and Adelphia out taking over both customer sets. I called Comcast to try to not get moved and was told that legally they could no longer service me because TWC has the rights to my area. I could go to ATT or Fios but that's it. I would love an Apple ISP but I don't expect it to happen
If you want to help change the TV business, my advice is to cancel your cable subscription and fire up your bit torrent client.
Actually no. That's the way to make sure that things don't change.
One of the things that served Apple with the music folks is that they could point to millions of downloads. If you want to change the TV biz, legally buy your stuff from Apple and help them be able to go to folks like AMC and say "Hey look, in the first day the newest ep of the Walking Dead had 1 million downloads. With your cut, that's $700k of money to earn back the budget cost. And you're still getting downloads on that ep and the first two from the season. Not 'sample' viewers but real ones. Imagine if you opened this up for the world to download. You might make back the cost of each episode in first day downloads." THAT is what will get them to open up their eyes.
Nah, firing up BT won't really change the television content market.
The reason? Live sporting events. That's where the big bucks are and where the key content deals reside.
For Apple (or anyone else) to make a dent in online sports content distribution, they really need to cover the major professional sports (NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, NASCAR, PGA/LPGA, ATP/WTA, etc.), major collegiate sports (football, basketball), and the larger events (Olympics, World Cup).
Right now on my Apple TV I can watch NBA, NHL, and MLB. All live, many out of market that aren't airing on my TV anyway. And if the other boys make an iOS app and offer such a service then you can bet that Apple will jump to make the deals to put it on the Apple TV as well.
Hollywood is a fucked up place. I am pretty sure suits sit around their big mahogany desks in their Aeron chairs to figure out ways to make it as difficult as possible for law-abiding citizens to consume their content.
If they provide it, I will pay. As it is, however, they don't provide it, so I BitTorrent.
I am the typical demographic: professional husband and father with nary a second in the day to brush my teeth, let alone go to the movies. I would kill to be able to pay, let's say, $20 to watch the latest blockbuster in the privacy of my home. Why do I need to go to the theaters to give you my money? I'll give it to you from the comfort of my couch. But you won't let me!
And guess what? After a week or so, I will have forgotten about your stupid movie. And I will especially overlook it when it finally comes out on Blu-Ray because it's no longer a blockbuster. And there you go: You have just devised an ingenious method to not accept my money.
And in comes BitTorrent. And a big Fuck You to your mesozoic ways.
Typical justification for being an asshole. Sorry, it didn't work.
You are correct sir. It all comes down to everyone grabbing for a piece of the pie. I just hope they don't knock the pie off the table and nobody gets any.
Yeah, disruption's a bitch. Cable monopolies like Comcast will fight this tooth and nail. Comcast doesn't even want people using TiVo's with CableCards if they could find a way to make you "choose" their DVR services bundle for the extra recurring fee. And they do by making CableCards as much hassle as possible. And they'd reset your TCP data streams to competing services if they could get away with it (they can--they have the equipment to do it--but don't seem to at the moment). The sooner we can cut the cord, the better.
Is it just because of revelations being brought to light with the release of the book or does anyone else feel that the Apple's veil of secrecy may be slowly lifting?
We may be thinking of this wrong. One of the game-changing things about the iPhone was when the phone function became just another app. Apple may have plans for a 55" screen in the living room, but I bet it will not be another TV.
My guess is it will be "iWall", with modular borderless screens that can be combined into one "desktop". TV will just be one of many windows.
Go work for Microsoft.
Jobs' comments in the biography were extremely vague, so assumptions at this point are risky. What he meant is totally open to interpretation.
Isn't everything?
The content delivery piece would then follow afterwards as the popularity of it increased the pressure on the content makers.
The only reason the little black box gets away with its relatively meager popularity is because of its price. The same would not be true for a $999 iTV with no TV subscription..
They either get the shows that people want at a monthly fee or they don't sell a TV. I think it's literally that simple. They don't need 'every show', but they do need the vast majority of them, but more importantly they absolutely need a monthly deal. Otherwise they can't make it a revolution.
The only reason the little black box gets away with its relatively meager popularity is because of its price. The same would not be true for a $999 iTV with no TV subscription..
They either get the shows that people want at a monthly fee or they don't sell a TV.
Witness hydrogen powered cars. Incidentally, I disagree w/your sig. Add a microphone to the Apple Remote so you don't have to fight w/ however many people (or screaming kids) you have in your living room, and voice control for the television is easily handled.
Incidentally, I disagree w/your sig. Add a microphone to the Apple Remote so you don't have to fight w/ however many people (or screaming kids) you have in your living room, and voice control for the television is easily handled.
Give the remote a MIC and SiRi you're still fighting for a remote. A remote with a 2 day bettery life. Besides, talking to your TV remote seems like the yuckiest, most un-Apple thing I've ever heard.
iTV will have a physical remote, and the UI will be an iTV iOS variant with the UI on the TV. The remote better be Bluetooth though, because as much as I like the shape and design of the Apple aluminium remote, IR sucks donkey dick.