LOLWUT? I've heard you say some pretty off the wall stuff before, but this probably takes the cake? Hollywood has little to do with the expansion of broadband penetration/speeds in this country. Unless you live on either coast or are in a large metropolitan area, you're probably SOL when it comes to high-speed internet choices, and that has nothing to do with Hollywood.
You just don't know. Of course Hollywood has that power. /s
It's nice. It has almost everything Netflix has- less some great shows like arrested development. I'm surprised you cut the cord and don't have Netflix. Amazon prime is fantastic because of the shows and shipping for less than $ Netflix annually. The downside is you can't even airplay to Apple TV- you'd have to mirror off a Mac which would be very inconvenient.
I'd say get the free trial to Netflix- if you like it, get that and wait until amazon gets on the Apple TV (if ever) to switch. Both are great for kids shows too.
I do prime for the shipping. The shows are a side benefit, but because of no ATV convenient access, I still have Netflix. The day they add it is when I save $7.99/mo.
Thanks for the info on the Airplay only option for Prime, that's a bit f a deal breaker for me, especially since they're not offering much more than Netflix-and I don't buy enough from Amazon to otherwise justify the cost.
I had been giving Netflix my money since they first came on the scene with mail-in DVDs. I recently gave it up on my ATV. I basically felt that Netflix didn't have much more to offer compared to Hulu+. Rather than pay for both Netflix and Hulu+, I gave up Netflix. It makes more sense for me to spend a little for a TV season on iTunes than go months on Netflix without seeing much I actually really want to see.
As a side note, even if Apple did have a Prime app on the Apple TV, would Amazon be able to offer their typically competitive content prices with Apple's 30% cut?
Thanks! The requirement for Airplay is the deal breaker for me. I can Airplay, but there's too much lag and the picture quality is not great. Maybe after I upgrade to 802.11ac from n for all my hardware I'll give it a shot. I recently gave up Netflix after I watched all of House of Cards because there was so little I wanted to watch. I switched to Hulu+ because there are more network shows and of course, the Criterion Collection. Having Hulu+ and Netflix didn't make much sense to me, so Amazon Prime might not make much sense right now-I don't do that much buying from Amazon.
When doing Airplay, the feed is send to the router then the Apple TV. If youre are far away from the router when at the TV that means 2 feeds with low signals = glitches. Another problem I have seen with Apple TV is wifi channels saturation. This can happen if youre surrounded with dozens of routers from neighbors.
That was not only funny, but sad at the same time. If we want to pay but cannot, we start to torrent. I guess the producers have no idea people need to resort to this?
Hello. Can someone tell me what is the benefit of this? You need an HBO subscription to watch HBO Go and you must already be a cable/satellite subscriber for ESPN. So, why would anyone watch either channel via their Apple TV (or Roku, etc.) when they can watch them on from their regular cable/satellite box that they're already paying to have?
Thanks for the info on the Airplay only option for Prime, that's a bit f a deal breaker for me, especially since they're not offering much more than Netflix-and I don't buy enough from Amazon to otherwise justify the cost.
I had been giving Netflix my money since they first came on the scene with mail-in DVDs. I recently gave it up on my ATV. I basically felt that Netflix didn't have much more to offer compared to Hulu+. Rather than pay for both Netflix and Hulu+, I gave up Netflix. It makes more sense for me to spend a little for a TV season on iTunes than go months on Netflix without seeing much I actually really want to see.
As a side note, even if Apple did have a Prime app on the Apple TV, would Amazon be able to offer their typically competitive content prices with Apple's 30% cut?
There is. Amazon Video app on iOS devices, how does it work there?
Hello. Can someone tell me what is the benefit of this? You need an HBO subscription to watch HBO Go and you must already be a cable/satellite subscriber for ESPN. So, why would anyone watch either channel via their Apple TV (or Roku, etc.) when they can watch them on from their regular cable/satellite box that they're already paying to have?
-Thanks.
Can't speak to espn, but for HBO, you get access to all their on demand content which trumps what any cable provider provides. Every episode of every TV show ever, etc
What AppleTV needs is CEC. Apple will never make an AppleTV that is a (physical) switchbox for all possible data sources that need to connect to your TV set. CEC is a protocol where HDMI devices are allowed to control each other. Customarily, all data sources are connected to your TV set. All the AppleTV needs to do is to use CEC to interrogate the TV's capabilities (available inputs), then tell the TV to accept input from the input you select.
As soon as I operate the AppleTV remote (or some iOS app that acts like a remote), the AppleTV should assume control of the TV.
Apple's remote should also be able to control the TV's volume. This should have been possible from day 1.
You can't buy or rent anything from the iOS Amazon Prime app. You buy or rent from Amazon.com and then the item will show up in "Your Video Library" on the app. From a Blu-ray player, just enter your code to rent or buy. The UI on the iOS app is vastly superior to that on the Sony Blu-ray player that I have.
I manage my watchlist from the iOS app and then go to the Blu-ray if going to the tv.
Watch ESPN adds nothing to the app. The catch being affiliated providers. Even if your TV source carries the ESPNs, you can't watch live programming unless your provider is paying a spiff to ESPN.
DirecTV subscribers have been griping about this since Day 1 of the app. The addition to Apple TV is the same. I can watch ESPN live on DirecTV; but, not on my Apple TV. Their D* contract doesn't include the spiff.
Damn it, so I am guessing that this update similarly cripples HBO Go on the Apple TV, like it does on the Roku, since DirecTV won't allow their subscribers to play?
It may sound like we are missing out on all these free channels but to be honest, they are full of brainless American crap. I'd pay 25% more to keep it off my ATV.
However, no iTunes radio, that sucks.
I'm in the USA and have no need for the "brainless American crap." It's been years since I had my old CRT TV on. I have a life, and enjoy not being tied to the vacuous drivel that passes for entertainment these days.
I would add a +1 on BBC iPlayer and Formula 1. And add soccer (similar to what the XBox offers), rally, and MotoGP. The addition of SkyNews is very cool, I've watched them when in Europe. How about adding al-Jazeera?
HBO Go is just another step in chipping away at the traditional model -- I'm sure Apple and HBO both know that if they sell it as a standalone subscription, people will come. I would gladly pay for a standalone subscription to HBO, Showtime, and ESPN. But at the point when people can do that, the cable monopoly is doomed and the cable companies know it. They won't go quietly.
Starz and Netflix had a deal and cable companies forced them to choose: Netflix or us. Starz ended their deal with Netflix. HBO probably knows if they offer a subscription service cable companies are going to freak out. I don't know if HBO will risk their relationships with cable companies for an online-only service. The money they get out of cable subscriptions is all but assured.
Fact is, cable companies have you right where they want you. <span style="line-height:1.231;">They provide the high speed internet needed from the video and also have massive amounts of influence with stations and the entertainment industry. They'll make sure Starz, HBO and others don't stream their programming by ending contracts, throttling bandwidth, or implementing stricter data caps.</span>
Even if everyone said "screw you Comcast" and cut the cord anyway, the cable companies would just raise the rates on high-speed internet or implement ridiculously low data caps to force everyone back to cable.
It's going to take A LONG time, This is an uphill battle as cable companies have customers and networks over a barrel.
Are you in disbelief because you don't like agreeing with me or because you need proof that this industry can swing its bat hard enough to influence another?
I'm in the USA and have no need for the "brainless American crap." It's been years since I had my old CRT TV on. I have a life, and enjoy not being tied to the vacuous drivel that passes for entertainment these days.
Then you're missing out on Game of Thrones which is quite possibly the best TV show ever made and yes there's much American drivel but there's also quite a few extraordinary shows.
I would add a +1 on BBC iPlayer and Formula 1. And add soccer (similar to what the XBox offers), rally, and MotoGP. The addition of SkyNews is very cool, I've watched them when in Europe. How about adding al-Jazeera?
HBO Go is just another step in chipping away at the traditional model -- I'm sure Apple and HBO both know that if they sell it as a standalone subscription, people will come. I would gladly pay for a standalone subscription to HBO, Showtime, and ESPN. But at the point when people can do that, the cable monopoly is doomed and the cable companies know it. They won't go quietly.
Again people, HBO is owned by Time Warner who not only own a multitude of channels but are a cable company as well. They are not going to go against their better interest to benefit the consumer.
Can't speak to espn, but for HBO, you get access to all their on demand content which trumps what any cable provider provides. Every episode of every TV show ever, etc
Exactly, if you want to watch The Wire in it's entirety you can't do through the cable box VOD but you can with HBO Go.
Not where I live. I had DSL but I never got speeds much better than 800Kbps and I was paying for 10Mbps. Needless to say, I canceled and switched to cable and finally get speeds I am paying for. Most people around here have had similar situations. People get Satellite Internet to get away from CenturyLink (our DSL provider). I have no idea what's wrong with their service, but they never were able to get our speed up to where it was supposed to be.
Are you in disbelief because you don't like agreeing with me or because you need proof that this industry can swing its bat hard enough to influence another?
I agree with plenty of people. I don't agree with you because you are completely wrong. I'm not the only one who thinks what you said is completely idiotic.
LOLWUT? I've heard you say some pretty off the wall stuff before, but this probably takes the cake? Hollywood has little to do with the expansion of broadband penetration/speeds in this country. Unless you live on either coast or are in a large metropolitan area, you're probably SOL when it comes to high-speed internet choices, and that has nothing to do with Hollywood.
If it was that easy, I'm sure the content creators would have chosen it over blue-ray. After all, with digital they have way more control; the consumer can't lend a movie to their buddy, resell it on e-bay, or even pass it on to their loved ones once they are gone.... Blu-ray has these advantages for consumers (although I'm still not buying them)...
I mean really... Your argument that Hollywood has the ability to change broadband allocation is because of- and I quote- "lobbyists and whatever else they do". Wow! How convincing! :no:
"Everyone would have 20mbps speed if it weren't for Blu Ray". You're actually listening to yourself- right?
Not where I live. I had DSL but I never got speeds much better than 800Kbps and I was paying for 10Mbps. Needless to say, I canceled and switched to cable and finally get speeds I am paying for. Most people around here have had similar situations. People get Satellite Internet to get away from CenturyLink (our DSL provider). I have no idea what's wrong with their service, but they never were able to get our speed up to where it was supposed to be.
DSL is contingent on distance from the central office and runs on cables that are decades old.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s
LOLWUT? I've heard you say some pretty off the wall stuff before, but this probably takes the cake? Hollywood has little to do with the expansion of broadband penetration/speeds in this country. Unless you live on either coast or are in a large metropolitan area, you're probably SOL when it comes to high-speed internet choices, and that has nothing to do with Hollywood.
You just don't know. Of course Hollywood has that power. /s
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol
It's nice. It has almost everything Netflix has- less some great shows like arrested development. I'm surprised you cut the cord and don't have Netflix. Amazon prime is fantastic because of the shows and shipping for less than $ Netflix annually. The downside is you can't even airplay to Apple TV- you'd have to mirror off a Mac which would be very inconvenient.
I'd say get the free trial to Netflix- if you like it, get that and wait until amazon gets on the Apple TV (if ever) to switch. Both are great for kids shows too.
I do prime for the shipping. The shows are a side benefit, but because of no ATV convenient access, I still have Netflix. The day they add it is when I save $7.99/mo.
Thanks for the info on the Airplay only option for Prime, that's a bit f a deal breaker for me, especially since they're not offering much more than Netflix-and I don't buy enough from Amazon to otherwise justify the cost.
I had been giving Netflix my money since they first came on the scene with mail-in DVDs. I recently gave it up on my ATV. I basically felt that Netflix didn't have much more to offer compared to Hulu+. Rather than pay for both Netflix and Hulu+, I gave up Netflix. It makes more sense for me to spend a little for a TV season on iTunes than go months on Netflix without seeing much I actually really want to see.
As a side note, even if Apple did have a Prime app on the Apple TV, would Amazon be able to offer their typically competitive content prices with Apple's 30% cut?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carthusia
Thanks! The requirement for Airplay is the deal breaker for me. I can Airplay, but there's too much lag and the picture quality is not great. Maybe after I upgrade to 802.11ac from n for all my hardware I'll give it a shot. I recently gave up Netflix after I watched all of House of Cards because there was so little I wanted to watch. I switched to Hulu+ because there are more network shows and of course, the Criterion Collection. Having Hulu+ and Netflix didn't make much sense to me, so Amazon Prime might not make much sense right now-I don't do that much buying from Amazon.
When doing Airplay, the feed is send to the router then the Apple TV. If youre are far away from the router when at the TV that means 2 feeds with low signals = glitches. Another problem I have seen with Apple TV is wifi channels saturation. This can happen if youre surrounded with dozens of routers from neighbors.
That was not only funny, but sad at the same time. If we want to pay but cannot, we start to torrent. I guess the producers have no idea people need to resort to this?
Just stream it from your iPad, available for the past two years:
http://www.broadbandtvnews.com/2011/10/21/bbc-iplayer-stream-from-ipad-to-tv/
https://itunes.apple.com/app/bbc-iplayer-global/id449130604?l=en&mt=8
Don't know if that iTunes link will work as I removed the 'nl' bit as I copied it from the Dutch Store
Hello. Can someone tell me what is the benefit of this? You need an HBO subscription to watch HBO Go and you must already be a cable/satellite subscriber for ESPN. So, why would anyone watch either channel via their Apple TV (or Roku, etc.) when they can watch them on from their regular cable/satellite box that they're already paying to have?
-Thanks.
There is. Amazon Video app on iOS devices, how does it work there?
Can't speak to espn, but for HBO, you get access to all their on demand content which trumps what any cable provider provides. Every episode of every TV show ever, etc
Apple will never make an AppleTV that is a (physical) switchbox for all possible data sources that need to connect to your TV set.
CEC is a protocol where HDMI devices are allowed to control each other.
Customarily, all data sources are connected to your TV set.
All the AppleTV needs to do is to use CEC to interrogate the TV's capabilities (available inputs), then tell the TV to accept input from the input you select.
As soon as I operate the AppleTV remote (or some iOS app that acts like a remote), the AppleTV should assume control of the TV.
Apple's remote should also be able to control the TV's volume. This should have been possible from day 1.
I manage my watchlist from the iOS app and then go to the Blu-ray if going to the tv.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evilution
It sucks to be from the UK but I'm used to it.
It may sound like we are missing out on all these free channels but to be honest, they are full of brainless American crap. I'd pay 25% more to keep it off my ATV.
However, no iTunes radio, that sucks.
I'm in the USA and have no need for the "brainless American crap." It's been years since I had my old CRT TV on. I have a life, and enjoy not being tied to the vacuous drivel that passes for entertainment these days.
I would add a +1 on BBC iPlayer and Formula 1. And add soccer (similar to what the XBox offers), rally, and MotoGP. The addition of SkyNews is very cool, I've watched them when in Europe. How about adding al-Jazeera?
HBO Go is just another step in chipping away at the traditional model -- I'm sure Apple and HBO both know that if they sell it as a standalone subscription, people will come. I would gladly pay for a standalone subscription to HBO, Showtime, and ESPN. But at the point when people can do that, the cable monopoly is doomed and the cable companies know it. They won't go quietly.
DSL.
Are you in disbelief because you don't like agreeing with me or because you need proof that this industry can swing its bat hard enough to influence another?
Then you're missing out on Game of Thrones which is quite possibly the best TV show ever made and yes there's much American drivel but there's also quite a few extraordinary shows.
Again people, HBO is owned by Time Warner who not only own a multitude of channels but are a cable company as well. They are not going to go against their better interest to benefit the consumer.
Exactly, if you want to watch The Wire in it's entirety you can't do through the cable box VOD but you can with HBO Go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iaeen
DSL.
Not where I live. I had DSL but I never got speeds much better than 800Kbps and I was paying for 10Mbps. Needless to say, I canceled and switched to cable and finally get speeds I am paying for. Most people around here have had similar situations. People get Satellite Internet to get away from CenturyLink (our DSL provider). I have no idea what's wrong with their service, but they never were able to get our speed up to where it was supposed to be.
I agree with plenty of people. I don't agree with you because you are completely wrong. I'm not the only one who thinks what you said is completely idiotic.
I mean really... Your argument that Hollywood has the ability to change broadband allocation is because of- and I quote- "lobbyists and whatever else they do". Wow! How convincing! :no:
"Everyone would have 20mbps speed if it weren't for Blu Ray". You're actually listening to yourself- right?
DSL is contingent on distance from the central office and runs on cables that are decades old.