The antenna is hardly the way to move forward. I can't see Apple having anything to do with that. These rumours are pointing to a very disappointing approach. All that seems to be happening is a switch from cable supplying shows over their wires to shows coming over cable wires to the Apple TV to the viewer advertising and all.
It's amazing that all these people don't work for Apple. The solution would be so simple. This issue is more complex than many realize. The sentence about it taking 2 years to get only 8 of their own stations up is very telling. If anybody can unravel this Gordion knot, Apple can, but it will neither be fast nor cheap.
True. And the real deal-killer: in-market pro sports. Nobody, not even Apple, could unravel that mess, not in a hundred years.
The point is that satellite bypassess the typical local OTA format already.
I don't understand your format comment. Satellite providers get local feeds from the broadcast station and re-broadcast them in real time by satellite. They negotiate the right to carry these channels under FCC "must carry" rules that give them access to local channels, but also obligate them to carry any local channel that provides them a feed.
Apple is looking to do the same thing, get local feeds of OTA stations and re-broadcast them. If the must carry rules also apply to streaming services (I have no idea), it seems that Apple should be able get access to all local channels as long as they are willing to carry the less popular (often foreign language or public access) local channels. So either the rules are different for streaming services, or Apple doesn't want to operate under must carry, or they are trying to do something different, like offering out of market channels.
Here's an idea. Apple has your mailing address and everything else about you from your Itunes account. Why not just stream whatever the local commercials are for that area to you. Done fixed!!
I can't wait to see all those crappy locally produced Medford commercials again, that I have been "missing" since I disconnected tv 5 years ago.
That can't easily be done either. When a commercial is made under a union contract, the unions want separate payments for the spots that are also streamed. That's why when you listen to certain commercial radio stations on the stream, there are sometimes huge blanks or alternate programming where the commercials go. They have to take them out.
But there shouldn't be such a problem with doing deals with OTA local channels if the FCC considers Apple to be an MSO, same as a cable company. There are mandatory carry provisions where a cable company gets the feed as long as they're willing to pay the appropriate fees, however, those can be expensive and it would be quite complex to do a deal with every TV station. Not-including translators and low-power stations, there are about 2200 TV stations in the U.S. It's not just a matter of dealing with the networks, even though I think most consumers would be satisfied with the network feed.
Is that really true? I've heard that the quality beats regular HD?
Wasn't this the raison d'être for Aereo's (short) existence?
If you can receive reception, over-the-air digital reception is generally superior to many (but not all) cable or satellite systems because the over-the-air signal is not compressed. But digital broadcast TV has lower powered signals than its analog counterpart and especially out of the primary reception area, it's all or nothing. With analog TV, you might have gotten a really bad picture, but you'd get something. Line-of-sight is also much more important with digital signals.
With my particular provider, if I switch back and forth between cable and the roof antenna, the difference is barely perceptible and one doesn't necessarily come across as better than the other.
In NYC, they're currently running some tests at night to see if the coverage is better from the new World Trade Center building than from the Empire State Building.
I was never personally convinced that Aereo's tiny little 3" antennas were going to work (if indeed they were actually being used and weren't just for show).
Personally, I think Apple may be putting too much emphasis on the over-the-air channels. But maybe as a temporary measure, they build an antenna jack into the Apple TV and for people who have access to a roof antenna, the Apple TV can pass the signal and make it part of the UI. Phase 2 would be to get the network feeds and major independent stations. Once it's established and if it's successful, the local TV stations would probably come to them because they wouldn't want their local audience missing their locally inserted ads.
Their other choice would be to do some big deal with Comcast or Time-Warner, although there would still be tremendous rights issues because the program content owners would consider any such deal to be not within Comcast's or Time-Warner's resell rights. (I've developed rights management systems for many of the cable networks, so I have a good understanding of what they're dealing with.) Comcast would have some advantages because they own NBC and could do with it what they want, although they would still have to be careful about alienating their independent affiliates.
This is a non issue I already stream local to ? tv With AirPlay Easier solution Allow us to create bookmarks on appletv screen like ios And bingo URL is all you need and no heart ache
I could care less about local content except for Football (American style) and PBS but I can get that HD over the air or on ATV already... Local TV really sucks so local should be a non-issue.
I relegated my old Apple TV to a 2007 LED TV. Both feel like "soviet era" products by today's standards. I'm no fan of Samsung, but my 2015 4K panel features state of the art hardware, software, and an extremely slick point and click laser UI. At a minimum an updated Apple TV will have to stream 4K. I assume it can with a A8. The interface and software will require modernization as well. I expect that's what a new Apple TV looks like on paper.
As for TV streaming services, Apple has been trying to craft a deal with the networks since SJ was still alive and well. Years later it's still in the rumor stage. I have no doubt Apple will pull it off but it's all dependent on releasing a modern Apple TV first.
I could care less about local content except for Football (American style) and PBS but I can get that HD over the air or on ATV already... Local TV really sucks so local should be a non-issue.
A lot of us cannot get HD over the air.
Streaming PBS is good, but not live. Most content appears a day after live broadcasts. This matters mainly for the news programs, assuming you watch them.
You cannot stream in-market sports, period (unless you hack the blackouts with a proxy server).
Your or my opinion of the value of local TV is totally beside any important point.
I relegated my old Apple TV to a 2007 LED TV. Both feel like "soviet era" products by today's standards. I'm no fan of Samsung, but my 2015 4K panel features state of the art hardware, software, and an extremely slick point and click laser UI. At a minimum an updated Apple TV will have to stream 4K. I assume it can with a A8. The interface and software will require modernization as well. I expect that's what a new Apple TV looks like on paper.
As for TV streaming services, Apple has been trying to craft a deal with the networks since SJ was still alive and well. Years later it's still in the rumor stage. I have no doubt Apple will pull it off but it's all dependent on releasing a modern Apple TV first.
Where are you currently streaming 4K content that you feel it a "must have" for the new model ATV? Is this a service Samsung offers with there new 4k panels? It's obvious you have a Samsung brand monitor even though you made a point to not say so? I also am confused by what you mean by "soviet era" products when referring to ATV? If you are that blown away by Samsung's UI I am not sure Apple minimalist approach to UI will ever truly satisfy you.
My opinion does matter just as yours does... If enough people don't care about local programming then it becomes a non-issue and Apple can drop it with out bothering or forcing us to pay to watch the local advertising just to get local programming.
In reality I would rather miss football then pay for local broadcasting... just not that important.
PBS news is fine and a day after is fine by me as well... If I need anything faster there are many outlets that I can get up to the minute news on the net... It's been a long time since I felt the need for immediate news... I don't live in an area where natural disasters are likely.
I believe you can now stream local sports on ESPN via Sling TV.
Where are you currently streaming 4K content that you feel it a "must have" for the new model ATV? Is this a service Samsung offers with there new 4k panels? It's obvious you have a Samsung brand monitor even though you made a point to not say so? I also am confused by what you mean by "soviet era" products when referring to ATV? If you are that blown away by Samsung's UI I am not sure Apple minimalist approach to UI will ever truly satisfy you.
My Samsung streams 4K from Netflix, Amazon, YouTube, etc. It employs an intuitive laser point and click/voice command interface featuring an interactive guide. Apple TV hasn't changed its interface in years. In tech terms thats the "soviet era" metaphorically speaking. Why do you think I bothered to put that in quotes in the first place? Standard Def HD is dead! If some people on AI don't grasp this I can assure you Apple does. I'm not touting Samsung's hardware and interface, I'm comparing it. As of today Apple has about a half decade of catching up to do. Can they, will they? I predict Apple can and will produce a HD STB that will blow Samsung away... When it gets its duck in a row.
Why can't Apple just build a digital antennae into the box...they're pretty small these days? The OS can then automatically handle getting the feed from that source in the background when you switch to that channel.
Yeah...and then Apple will get sued for the antenna incapable to get the channels for those idiots living deep inside shitty complex.
>Correct me if I'm wrong, but Dish Network offers most local
> channels in their packages these days. Clearly it can be done
> (though I recall it did take time to add them all).
The article is talking about streaming services, like Dish's Sling TV, not their satellite broadcast service.
I remember they offering an attachment that went on top of the satellite dish in order to get the OTA broadcast channels. Is that still the case?
My opinion does matter just as yours does... If enough people don't care about local programming then it becomes a non-issue and Apple can drop it with out bothering or forcing us to pay to watch the local advertising just to get local programming.
In reality I would rather miss football then pay for local broadcasting... just not that important.
PBS news is fine and a day after is fine by me as well... If I need anything faster there are many outlets that I can get up to the minute news on the net... It's been a long time since I felt the need for immediate news... I don't live in an area where natural disasters are likely.
I believe you can now stream local sports on ESPN via Sling TV.
Last I checked, many local TV stations were still in business. This means people watch them. I don't watch them much, but your or my opinion about whether they suck or not doesn't figure into anything of significance. I am not trying to impose my viewing preferences on anyone else. I am simply pointing out that a great many people do have these viewing preferences. This tells me that any successful streaming solution would have to take them into account.
ESPN is not a solution to in-market sports viewing. They might broadcast two local games a season, which would not be enough, even if their broadcasting didn't suck.
I'm looking forward to the App store. Then, an app can be developed to stream local TV through a Silicon Dust HD HomeRun. The app is already available on iOS. Having the AppleTV be able to grab the stream on its own would be perfect. Then I never have to touch my TV remote again!
Comments
Also who wants to watch TV over an antenna with a sometime crappy signal?
Is that really true? I've heard that the quality beats regular HD?
Wasn't this the raison d'être for Aereo's (short) existence?
Can someone recommend an antenna? Amazon Basics?
It's amazing that all these people don't work for Apple. The solution would be so simple. This issue is more complex than many realize. The sentence about it taking 2 years to get only 8 of their own stations up is very telling. If anybody can unravel this Gordion knot, Apple can, but it will neither be fast nor cheap.
True. And the real deal-killer: in-market pro sports. Nobody, not even Apple, could unravel that mess, not in a hundred years.
The point is that satellite bypassess the typical local OTA format already.
I don't understand your format comment. Satellite providers get local feeds from the broadcast station and re-broadcast them in real time by satellite. They negotiate the right to carry these channels under FCC "must carry" rules that give them access to local channels, but also obligate them to carry any local channel that provides them a feed.
Apple is looking to do the same thing, get local feeds of OTA stations and re-broadcast them. If the must carry rules also apply to streaming services (I have no idea), it seems that Apple should be able get access to all local channels as long as they are willing to carry the less popular (often foreign language or public access) local channels. So either the rules are different for streaming services, or Apple doesn't want to operate under must carry, or they are trying to do something different, like offering out of market channels.
Here's an idea. Apple has your mailing address and everything else about you from your Itunes account. Why not just stream whatever the local commercials are for that area to you. Done fixed!!
I can't wait to see all those crappy locally produced Medford commercials again, that I have been "missing" since I disconnected tv 5 years ago.
That can't easily be done either. When a commercial is made under a union contract, the unions want separate payments for the spots that are also streamed. That's why when you listen to certain commercial radio stations on the stream, there are sometimes huge blanks or alternate programming where the commercials go. They have to take them out.
But there shouldn't be such a problem with doing deals with OTA local channels if the FCC considers Apple to be an MSO, same as a cable company. There are mandatory carry provisions where a cable company gets the feed as long as they're willing to pay the appropriate fees, however, those can be expensive and it would be quite complex to do a deal with every TV station. Not-including translators and low-power stations, there are about 2200 TV stations in the U.S. It's not just a matter of dealing with the networks, even though I think most consumers would be satisfied with the network feed.
Is that really true? I've heard that the quality beats regular HD?
Wasn't this the raison d'être for Aereo's (short) existence?
If you can receive reception, over-the-air digital reception is generally superior to many (but not all) cable or satellite systems because the over-the-air signal is not compressed. But digital broadcast TV has lower powered signals than its analog counterpart and especially out of the primary reception area, it's all or nothing. With analog TV, you might have gotten a really bad picture, but you'd get something. Line-of-sight is also much more important with digital signals.
With my particular provider, if I switch back and forth between cable and the roof antenna, the difference is barely perceptible and one doesn't necessarily come across as better than the other.
In NYC, they're currently running some tests at night to see if the coverage is better from the new World Trade Center building than from the Empire State Building.
I was never personally convinced that Aereo's tiny little 3" antennas were going to work (if indeed they were actually being used and weren't just for show).
Personally, I think Apple may be putting too much emphasis on the over-the-air channels. But maybe as a temporary measure, they build an antenna jack into the Apple TV and for people who have access to a roof antenna, the Apple TV can pass the signal and make it part of the UI. Phase 2 would be to get the network feeds and major independent stations. Once it's established and if it's successful, the local TV stations would probably come to them because they wouldn't want their local audience missing their locally inserted ads.
Their other choice would be to do some big deal with Comcast or Time-Warner, although there would still be tremendous rights issues because the program content owners would consider any such deal to be not within Comcast's or Time-Warner's resell rights. (I've developed rights management systems for many of the cable networks, so I have a good understanding of what they're dealing with.) Comcast would have some advantages because they own NBC and could do with it what they want, although they would still have to be careful about alienating their independent affiliates.
I already stream local to ? tv With AirPlay
Easier solution
Allow us to create bookmarks on appletv screen like ios
And bingo URL is all you need and no heart ache
I relegated my old Apple TV to a 2007 LED TV. Both feel like "soviet era" products by today's standards. I'm no fan of Samsung, but my 2015 4K panel features state of the art hardware, software, and an extremely slick point and click laser UI. At a minimum an updated Apple TV will have to stream 4K. I assume it can with a A8. The interface and software will require modernization as well. I expect that's what a new Apple TV looks like on paper.
As for TV streaming services, Apple has been trying to craft a deal with the networks since SJ was still alive and well. Years later it's still in the rumor stage. I have no doubt Apple will pull it off but it's all dependent on releasing a modern Apple TV first.
Where do you get your 4k content?
I could care less about local content except for Football (American style) and PBS but I can get that HD over the air or on ATV already... Local TV really sucks so local should be a non-issue.
A lot of us cannot get HD over the air.
Streaming PBS is good, but not live. Most content appears a day after live broadcasts. This matters mainly for the news programs, assuming you watch them.
You cannot stream in-market sports, period (unless you hack the blackouts with a proxy server).
Your or my opinion of the value of local TV is totally beside any important point.
I relegated my old Apple TV to a 2007 LED TV. Both feel like "soviet era" products by today's standards. I'm no fan of Samsung, but my 2015 4K panel features state of the art hardware, software, and an extremely slick point and click laser UI. At a minimum an updated Apple TV will have to stream 4K. I assume it can with a A8. The interface and software will require modernization as well. I expect that's what a new Apple TV looks like on paper.
As for TV streaming services, Apple has been trying to craft a deal with the networks since SJ was still alive and well. Years later it's still in the rumor stage. I have no doubt Apple will pull it off but it's all dependent on releasing a modern Apple TV first.
Where are you currently streaming 4K content that you feel it a "must have" for the new model ATV? Is this a service Samsung offers with there new 4k panels? It's obvious you have a Samsung brand monitor even though you made a point to not say so? I also am confused by what you mean by "soviet era" products when referring to ATV? If you are that blown away by Samsung's UI I am not sure Apple minimalist approach to UI will ever truly satisfy you.
My opinion does matter just as yours does... If enough people don't care about local programming then it becomes a non-issue and Apple can drop it with out bothering or forcing us to pay to watch the local advertising just to get local programming.
In reality I would rather miss football then pay for local broadcasting... just not that important.
PBS news is fine and a day after is fine by me as well... If I need anything faster there are many outlets that I can get up to the minute news on the net... It's been a long time since I felt the need for immediate news... I don't live in an area where natural disasters are likely.
I believe you can now stream local sports on ESPN via Sling TV.
Where are you currently streaming 4K content that you feel it a "must have" for the new model ATV? Is this a service Samsung offers with there new 4k panels? It's obvious you have a Samsung brand monitor even though you made a point to not say so? I also am confused by what you mean by "soviet era" products when referring to ATV? If you are that blown away by Samsung's UI I am not sure Apple minimalist approach to UI will ever truly satisfy you.
My Samsung streams 4K from Netflix, Amazon, YouTube, etc. It employs an intuitive laser point and click/voice command interface featuring an interactive guide. Apple TV hasn't changed its interface in years. In tech terms thats the "soviet era" metaphorically speaking. Why do you think I bothered to put that in quotes in the first place? Standard Def HD is dead! If some people on AI don't grasp this I can assure you Apple does. I'm not touting Samsung's hardware and interface, I'm comparing it. As of today Apple has about a half decade of catching up to do. Can they, will they? I predict Apple can and will produce a HD STB that will blow Samsung away... When it gets its duck in a row.
I agree. Apple needs to get in the game sooner than later. All they need is enough content from the majors.
Why can't Apple just build a digital antennae into the box...they're pretty small these days? The OS can then automatically handle getting the feed from that source in the background when you switch to that channel.
Yeah...and then Apple will get sued for the antenna incapable to get the channels for those idiots living deep inside shitty complex.
I remember they offering an attachment that went on top of the satellite dish in order to get the OTA broadcast channels. Is that still the case?
My opinion does matter just as yours does... If enough people don't care about local programming then it becomes a non-issue and Apple can drop it with out bothering or forcing us to pay to watch the local advertising just to get local programming.
In reality I would rather miss football then pay for local broadcasting... just not that important.
PBS news is fine and a day after is fine by me as well... If I need anything faster there are many outlets that I can get up to the minute news on the net... It's been a long time since I felt the need for immediate news... I don't live in an area where natural disasters are likely.
I believe you can now stream local sports on ESPN via Sling TV.
Last I checked, many local TV stations were still in business. This means people watch them. I don't watch them much, but your or my opinion about whether they suck or not doesn't figure into anything of significance. I am not trying to impose my viewing preferences on anyone else. I am simply pointing out that a great many people do have these viewing preferences. This tells me that any successful streaming solution would have to take them into account.
ESPN is not a solution to in-market sports viewing. They might broadcast two local games a season, which would not be enough, even if their broadcasting didn't suck.
I'm looking forward to the App store. Then, an app can be developed to stream local TV through a Silicon Dust HD HomeRun. The app is already available on iOS. Having the AppleTV be able to grab the stream on its own would be perfect. Then I never have to touch my TV remote again!
OTA HDTV is much better than cable/satellite. She's probably up in the sticks