CBS head says talks for Apple streaming TV have stopped for time being

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 28
    Better hope to god Apple doesn't buy Time Warner.  All I remember from the AOL buyout of them is that they were backstabbing assholes who actually sunk the merger.

    the last thing Apple needs is to import a TOXIC culture!
  • Reply 22 of 28
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,361member
    fallenjt said:
    Why would I care if Fox, CBS, ABC or NBC is available in AppleTV ? My $20 antenna already got those and more. I only need those non-broadcast channels like HBO or Showtime. 
    I got rid of cable/satellite TV for a long time. My SlingTV, Amazon Prime and OTA antenna serve 90% of my watching...HBO subscription is seasonal during Game of Thrones only.
    Same here. I have nearly the identical setup you do but with Tivo added. I wouldn't have done that either except for a promo they were running with a refurb'd Roamio and "lifetime subscription" (life of the Roamio) that came in at only about $200. Cheap enough. 
  • Reply 23 of 28
    512ke512ke Posts: 782member
    I'm a cord cutter and CBS has already trained me to stop watching any of their stuff, because they charge for everything and they are decidedly unfriendly to Apple TV. Wanna see a Fox, ABC or NBC show on your Apple TV? No problem. Try Hulu. Wanna see a CBS show?  Um.... Not as easy. 

    This is probably doesn't bother CBS because their core audience is over 50, and older people are more likely to have cable. 

    On on a side note, I wish Apple would buy some company that creates original content. That's where it's at in terms of the future. Pretty slick interfaces to repackage what's already available is not going to cut it. When it comes to streaming TV content is King. 
  • Reply 24 of 28
    apple ][ said:
    Apple should launch their service soon in my opinion.

    If there are still one or two holdouts, then I say screw them. It will end up being the holdout's loss, and they will eventually come on board I think, because if Apple releases an entire package without CBS for example, but everybody else is there, then who cares. Launch without them. 

    Apple's package will be very successful if the basic selection is good, and eventually, any few holdouts will be begging to be a part of it probably.
    Apple should attempt to make some key hires away from Netflix.
  • Reply 25 of 28
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,001member
    lkrupp said:
    You can hold out forever if you like. Nothing of the sort will happen. When has a major corporation ever “taken it in the shorts”? The content providers are in the driver’s seat. They produce the programs, shows, and movies you want to watch and they control who gets to deliver them to you. It’s called copyrights. It’s always hilarious to read posts from people like you who are always hoping AT&T, or Verizon, or CBS, or NBC, or whoever goes bankrupt. So you want it all for free or next to nothing? “Better for the consumer”? The consumer is the sucker who pays for it all.
    That is not even close to what my point was but thanks for putting words in my mouth.  Eventually some of these companies will have negative repercussions from holding content too tightly and not evolving with what the consumer wants/needs.  I do not want content for free.  I want to pay a fair price for only the content I want to watch in very similar fashion to the fact that I want to listen to the songs I want to and pay only for those versus the only choice being buy the album.  Maybe focus on being constructive instead of being an idiot.
    They have evolved but they still have the upper hand and as long as they do they evolve however they see fit, not how we think they should. 
  • Reply 26 of 28
    palomine said:
    Better hope to god Apple doesn't buy Time Warner.  All I remember from the AOL buyout of them is that they were backstabbing assholes who actually sunk the merger.

    the last thing Apple needs is to import a TOXIC culture!
    The only thing they have that would be any good to Apple is HBO and there is zero indication Time Warner is willing to break the company up and sell things off in pieces. Anyway I think Apple needs to give up on this skinny bundle thing. The data we have so far doesn't indicate Sling is that popular. Plus no one is going to want a skinny bundle of channels unless they're able to choose which channels are in the bundle and there's zero percent chance of that happening. 
    dasanman69
  • Reply 27 of 28
    That is not even close to what my point was but thanks for putting words in my mouth.  Eventually some of these companies will have negative repercussions from holding content too tightly and not evolving with what the consumer wants/needs.  I do not want content for free.  I want to pay a fair price for only the content I want to watch in very similar fashion to the fact that I want to listen to the songs I want to and pay only for those versus the only choice being buy the album.  Maybe focus on being constructive instead of being an idiot.
    They have evolved but they still have the upper hand and as long as they do they evolve however they see fit, not how we think they should. 
    Many of these companies are already offering stand alone subscription packages. What incentive is there for these companies to partner with Apple on a skinny bundle when they can just create a streaming media app for TV/iOS? I currently have DirecTV. I am able to stream every channel (with the exception of local affiliates) live on my iPad outside my home. The only thing a skinny bundle from Apple would be saving me is the fees I pay for DVR boxes. But with DirecTV (or cable service) at least I don't have to worry about going over my data caps.
  • Reply 28 of 28
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 2,246member
    If it's the same old bundle of channels for a set fee, Apple is wasting it's time.  That brings nothing new to the table.  I for one won't sign up.  I didn't cut the cord just so I could do the same thing again with Apple.
Sign In or Register to comment.