Apple to reportedly unveil video service at star-studded March 25 event

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited February 13
Apple is not only aiming to unveil both video and news subscription services at a special event rumored for March 25, but also kick off the announcement with celebrities like J.J. Abrams and Jennifer Garner, a report said on Wednesday.

Jennifer Garner.
Jennifer Garner.


Other Hollywood figures coming to the supposed event may include actresses Reese Witherspoon and Jennifer Aniston, a Bloomberg source indicated. Aniston and Witherspoon are set to star in an untitled morning show drama alongside Steve Carell, Billy Crudup, and Gugu Mbatha-Raw. Garner and Abrams are similarly tied to Apple projects.

Echoing a number of reports over the past year, multiple sources described Apple's video platform as similar to Netflix or Amazon Prime Video, saying it will debut with dozens of original shows and movies. The company "hasn't wrapped them in a paid subscription yet," Bloomberg said, although a paid tier should be ready by summer 2019. Earlier rumblings have suggested that Apple's material will initially be free through the TV app on iPhones, iPads, and Apple TVs, but that the company is hunting for "tentpole" shows that could prop up a paid option -- and may even be willing to evolve past its family-friendly content policies.

Earlier Wednesday, it was reported that Apple is hoping to launch some form of the service in April. While the company is expected to make money by selling outside subscriptions -- CBS, Viacom, and Starz are already onboard -- two holdouts are some of the most popular in the world, Netflix and HBO.

The Apple News subscription service, known as Apple News Magazines, should come in the form of a new tab in iOS 12.2, due sometime this spring. Customers will likely pay about $10 per month for access to a variety of magazines and newspapers, though Apple is allegedly facing opposition to its demand for up to 50 percent of revenues.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 21
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 584unconfirmed, member
    This is gonna be F'N HUGE
    lollivermdriftmeyerMisterKit
  • Reply 2 of 21
    Apple seems to have waited a long time before getting into TV. Here's hoping they come up with a very compelling product and not just another Netflix.
    trashman69
  • Reply 3 of 21
    Apple seems to have waited a long time before getting into TV. Here's hoping they come up with a very compelling product and not just another Netflix.
    Yeah, Apple needs to drop the family friendly crap and get into some really porno crapola. But, i’d Bet they’ll but Netflicks and then strip out all the good shows...
    trashman69
  • Reply 4 of 21
    Instead of only allowing family friendly content, why not innovate with parental controls? Make parental controls extremely easy to use, and effective. Perhaps integrate a fingerprint id into the remote? This wouldn't have to interfere with Apple's idea of being a destination for family content.
    edited February 13 tmay80s_Apple_Guyclaire1jcs2305
  • Reply 5 of 21
    Apple seems to have waited a long time before getting into TV. Here's hoping they come up with a very compelling product and not just another Netflix.
    Yeah, Apple needs to drop the family friendly crap and get into some really porno crapola. But, i’d Bet they’ll but Netflicks and then strip out all the good shows..
    edited February 13
  • Reply 6 of 21
    dougddougd Posts: 224member
    Something else I won't pay for.  
    mike54
  • Reply 7 of 21
    I think Apple's going to find that Services are not like hardware. In hardware Apple is usually a year or two behind while they perfect the components etc. This is good and Apple buyers appreciate this. In Services being late to the party isn't such a great thing. Even a better UI or remote often won't be enough to pull people away from what they have now. Unless they have some real magic that brings both great content and real innovative features I'm not sure this will be slam dunk they're hoping for. 
    minicoffeemike54
  • Reply 8 of 21
    Yawn. AirPods 2, please.

    Netflix will be dead within 3 years, FYI. Disney pulling their content is just the beginning. 
  • Reply 9 of 21
    A major initiative on Apple’s part and I hope the expense and time was all worth it. I’ve heard that Amazon is planning to scale back on their video service, so they must be seeing diminishing returns on streaming already.
  • Reply 10 of 21
    crowleycrowley Posts: 5,733member
    I think Apple's going to find that Services are not like hardware. In hardware Apple is usually a year or two behind while they perfect the components etc. This is good and Apple buyers appreciate this. In Services being late to the party isn't such a great thing. Even a better UI or remote often won't be enough to pull people away from what they have now. Unless they have some real magic that brings both great content and real innovative features I'm not sure this will be slam dunk they're hoping for. 
    1 month free with every device purchase would be a good start.
    minicoffee
  • Reply 11 of 21
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,376member
    dougd said:
    Something else I won't pay for.  
    If the rumors are true and Apple's original content is offered free on Apple products, then you won't have to. It's up to you whether you watch it, and then whether you decided to subscribe to your preferred services through Apple, or continue to subscribe to them individually though a handful of desperate apps scattered around your devices.
    JinTech
  • Reply 12 of 21
    Instead of only allowing family friendly content, why not innovate with parental controls? Make parental controls extremely easy to use, and effective. Perhaps integrate a fingerprint id into the remote? This wouldn't have to interfere with Apple's idea of being a destination for family content.
    Who said they were doing that? You know you can buy plenty of R-rated stuff on iTunes, why would this be any different?
  • Reply 13 of 21
    A major initiative on Apple’s part and I hope the expense and time was all worth it. I’ve heard that Amazon is planning to scale back on their video service, so they must be seeing diminishing returns on streaming already.
    Amazon video sucks to begin with. It's the only service you pay a fee for and then most of the stuff you have to rent anyway. Netflix and Hulu, you pay you watch all the content they have. 
    lolliver
  • Reply 14 of 21
    A major initiative on Apple’s part and I hope the expense and time was all worth it. I’ve heard that Amazon is planning to scale back on their video service, so they must be seeing diminishing returns on streaming already.
    Amazon video sucks to begin with. It's the only service you pay a fee for and then most of the stuff you have to rent anyway. Netflix and Hulu, you pay you watch all the content they have. 
    Huh? They offer all of their original content plus a large assortment of content included with Prime, but also offer rental/purchases just like the iTunes Store. It doesn't suck, it's a great value add to Prime in general.
  • Reply 15 of 21
    mac_128 said:
    dougd said:
    Something else I won't pay for.  
    If the rumors are true and Apple's original content is offered free on Apple products, then you won't have to. It's up to you whether you watch it, and then whether you decided to subscribe to your preferred services through Apple, or continue to subscribe to them individually though a handful of desperate apps scattered around your devices.
    Exactly. What I find funny about all these “cable cutter” services is, you are still subscribing to different content providers due to the fact that they all have original content. So there will be Amazon, Apple, Hulu, Netflix, YouTube...anymore I’m missing? All that will have a monthly fee likely with a total that is higher than cable in general!
    edited February 14 mike54
  • Reply 16 of 21
    Apple seems to have waited a long time before getting into TV. Here's hoping they come up with a very compelling product and not just another Netflix.
    Yeah, Apple needs to drop the family friendly crap and get into some really porno crapola. But, i’d Bet they’ll but Netflicks and then strip out all the good shows...
    Bollocks.

    The only thing Apple "needs" to do is make money for their investors.  If they can do that within a "family friendly" framework, then that's all they need to do.

    Personally, I don't care whether the content Apple offers is family friendly or hardcore gratuitous sex and violence.  Content can be "adult" and outstanding, or it can be a steaming pile.  Content can be "family friendly" and outstanding, or it can be a steaming pile.  There is no line with good and adult on one side, and bad and family oriented on the other.  If it's good content of the variety I want to consume, I'll buy it.  If it's not, I won't.  Since Apple has a history of producing good stuff, I'm not overly worried.
    StrangeDaysradarthekat
  • Reply 17 of 21
    Apple seems to have waited a long time before getting into TV. Here's hoping they come up with a very compelling product and not just another Netflix.
    How does one streaming service distinguish from another? Taste is subjective so there are shows you like and shows you don’t. HBO has loads of crap too if you look thru it. Netflix has far more crap in their catalog of “original” (really just licensed) programming than I care to sort thru.
    fastasleep
  • Reply 18 of 21
    A major initiative on Apple’s part and I hope the expense and time was all worth it. I’ve heard that Amazon is planning to scale back on their video service, so they must be seeing diminishing returns on streaming already.
    Amazon video sucks to begin with. It's the only service you pay a fee for and then most of the stuff you have to rent anyway. Netflix and Hulu, you pay you watch all the content they have. 
    Huh? They offer all of their original content plus a large assortment of content included with Prime, but also offer rental/purchases just like the iTunes Store. It doesn't suck, it's a great value add to Prime in general.
    I preferred $80 prime delivery and no video or music streaming.
  • Reply 19 of 21
    JinTech said:
    mac_128 said:
    dougd said:
    Something else I won't pay for.  
    If the rumors are true and Apple's original content is offered free on Apple products, then you won't have to. It's up to you whether you watch it, and then whether you decided to subscribe to your preferred services through Apple, or continue to subscribe to them individually though a handful of desperate apps scattered around your devices.
    Exactly. What I find funny about all these “cable cutter” services is, you are still subscribing to different content providers due to the fact that they all have original content. So there will be Amazon, Apple, Hulu, Netflix, YouTube...anymore I’m missing? All that will have a monthly fee likely with a total that is higher than cable in general!
    There’s the same silly comment — the bogus assumption that everyone is going to subscribe to every service. Nuts. For streamers I pay only for Netflix year-round. During GoT I pay for HBO for a few months. Please explain how that adds up to your massive cable bill. Considering I bailed on cable TV and its buffet of garbage two decades ago, it’s saved me quite a bit. 
    edited February 14
  • Reply 20 of 21
    A major initiative on Apple’s part and I hope the expense and time was all worth it. I’ve heard that Amazon is planning to scale back on their video service, so they must be seeing diminishing returns on streaming already.
    Amazon video sucks to begin with. It's the only service you pay a fee for and then most of the stuff you have to rent anyway. Netflix and Hulu, you pay you watch all the content they have. 
    Huh? They offer all of their original content plus a large assortment of content included with Prime, but also offer rental/purchases just like the iTunes Store. It doesn't suck, it's a great value add to Prime in general.
    I preferred $80 prime delivery and no video or music streaming.
    Me too!!!
Sign In or Register to comment.