But, if you think about all of this. It's a fucking sales event for Apple. Surely they want to try to tap into that feeding frenzy that is the 60,000+ that are viewing the presentation?
Hell, if Apple got 10,000 people to buy something out of those 60,000 viewers, that's a lot of revenue.
"According to sources, live webcast video streams of events such as Jobs' keynote presentations, on average, are costly and yield few benefits to Apple as a company."
Oh...and...
"Apple has scaled back on realtime webcasts in favor post-event video-on-demand steams, which reportedly costs the company much less."
So it sounds like it will be available with a minor delay.
Everyone quit whining like a bunch of 4 year olds that were just told by Mom to turn off the TV.
Everyone quit whining like a bunch of 4 year olds that were just told by Mom to turn off the TV.
Hmm, I don't think you grasp the the whole picture here. If lowly C-SPAN can bradcast the 9/11 hearings around the globe, you can bet your sour ass that Apple can too.
Heck they are selling millions of songs thru ITMS using the same technology every week. There is nothing, but will, that stops Apple from bradcasting the MWSF keynote on the net.
I'm no communication-guru, but that explanation is the lamest ever. Millions are wating for the news from Apple. You just don't cut them off without a damn good reason. Not enough bandwith? By more. This is it. The single one venue Apple controls from start to finish. Use it...
Well its the correct explanation so read it again and try and learn to deal with it.
Well its the correct explanation so read it again and try and learn to deal with it.
For all I know you are correct. But no word from Apple yet, so I'm hopefull they realize the magnitude of their potential faliure before it's to late.
Assuming you have the goods on this one could you please share a scource? If not, refrase your assertion as hearsay. And no, MacInTouch is not a reliable scource...
One that's trying to convince us that Streaming QuickTime is fun and easy? I mean, if Apple can't afford it, then who can?
Upfront I have to tell you, streaming is expensive. Very expensive. And I doubt things get cheaper when its done live. Apple isn't trying to convince anyone about QuickTime here. They built QuickTime, that is what they are going to use.
It isn't too expensive for Apple to do though. If they wanted to live webcast they could. But they have to weight things out and see how significant the costs are to the revenue they receive from it. There could be many reasons but they chose not to do so.
A satellite broadcast though, I'm hoping they at least offer that. I have a system all setup to downlink
Uhm...do you really think it costs anything they can't recoup easily enough? Otherwise why would they have ever broadcast any previous shows? Why?
Well, I guess I am willing to give this new rumor some benefit of the doubt...well...more benefit of the doubt than most of people on this board that have absolutely NO insight into Apple's finances or (probably) the costs of this kind of operation.
So do I believe it? At this point, yes. It seems reasonable to believe.
Well, I guess I am willing to give this new rumor some benefit of the doubt...well...more benefit of the doubt than most of people on this board that have absolutely NO insight into Apple's finances or (probably) the costs of this kind of operation.
So do I believe it? At this point, yes. It seems reasonable to believe.
Which are based on what? Some BS from an obscure Mac site? How about waiting for Apple to say something either way, then we can stop speculating about their financial strategy regarding keynote-streaming.
I have always used the Keynotes to invite WIndoze friends to watch to help me switch them from the dark side. Steve's presentation is a big help in switching people from Windoze.
I can't judge whether this is good or bad for Apple, whether the stream is expensive or not. However, it is sad that we won't be able to watch it live (assuming the rumor is true). The MWSF live stream has been a strong tradition for Apple fans.
When I lived in Japan I would stay up all night to watch (2:00AM start time) and would get a specially good bottle of wine and some snacks to accompany the show. The first year we did that we could hardly get any video, mostly audio. Now that the streams are technically so much better it is a shame that Apple might no longer broadcast them.
Which are based on what? Some BS from an obscure Mac site? How about waiting for Apple to say something either way, then we can stop speculating about their financial strategy regarding keynote-streaming.
Look, I'm not really speculating about anything. I am replying to the rampant whining (and speculation) about this rumored report. All I said...quite reasonably...was that it seemed like a plausible thing to me and that cost reasons also seemed reasonable. I could end up being wrong...and I'm perfectly fine with that. Get off my back about it.
Excuse me, but if there was no plan for a broadcast, then why did our local Apple rep invite everyone locally to it? Here at the University of Illinois, they put a live feed at the television station on campus. It's been great in the past, almost like being at MW. I just got an email from the campus rep with an official reply from Apple about the broadcast being cancelled.
Somethin' happened, not sure what. A big disappointment but we'll all live.
Apple doesn't have money to broadcast the event but Steve Jobs is one of the best paid CEOs of USA, sure they can't live broadcast the keynote but they have no problem to give him a 77 million air plane
Upfront I have to tell you, streaming is expensive. Very expensive. And I doubt things get cheaper when its done live. Apple isn't trying to convince anyone about QuickTime here. They built QuickTime, that is what they are going to use.
It isn't too expensive for Apple to do though. If they wanted to live webcast they could. But they have to weight things out and see how significant the costs are to the revenue they receive from it. There could be many reasons but they chose not to do so.
A satellite broadcast though, I'm hoping they at least offer that. I have a system all setup to downlink
know streaming is expensive, but to most users, but it's a trend they started. They need to meet their customer's expectations. You can argue they don't have to, but obviously, it's having a negative affect on some of their customers. Otherwise we all wouldn't be here bitching about it. So it is a negative reflection on their brand. That's what concerns me.
To me, the Keynote is exciting. It's one of the things that makes Apple an exciting company. If they just released stuff, you might just say, oh well that's OK. But if you have Steve Jobs pouring lovingly over all the nifty things you can do with this great new gadget and the crowd is cheering... well, it's no wonder where Apple gets it's lust factor from.
I know streaming is expensive, but their stock Tripled this year. Their making money all over the place and all signs point to continued success in 2005. This really should be the event to tell the world, "We have arrived! 2005 will rock!"
Comments
Originally posted by OrbitPink
But, if you think about all of this. It's a fucking sales event for Apple. Surely they want to try to tap into that feeding frenzy that is the 60,000+ that are viewing the presentation?
Hell, if Apple got 10,000 people to buy something out of those 60,000 viewers, that's a lot of revenue.
"According to sources, live webcast video streams of events such as Jobs' keynote presentations, on average, are costly and yield few benefits to Apple as a company."
Oh...and...
"Apple has scaled back on realtime webcasts in favor post-event video-on-demand steams, which reportedly costs the company much less."
So it sounds like it will be available with a minor delay.
Everyone quit whining like a bunch of 4 year olds that were just told by Mom to turn off the TV.
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Everyone quit whining like a bunch of 4 year olds that were just told by Mom to turn off the TV.
Hmm, I don't think you grasp the the whole picture here. If lowly C-SPAN can bradcast the 9/11 hearings around the globe, you can bet your sour ass that Apple can too.
Heck they are selling millions of songs thru ITMS using the same technology every week. There is nothing, but will, that stops Apple from bradcasting the MWSF keynote on the net.
Originally posted by Tyrihans
I'm no communication-guru, but that explanation is the lamest ever. Millions are wating for the news from Apple. You just don't cut them off without a damn good reason. Not enough bandwith? By more. This is it. The single one venue Apple controls from start to finish. Use it...
Well its the correct explanation so read it again and try and learn to deal with it.
Originally posted by vinney57
Well its the correct explanation so read it again and try and learn to deal with it.
You are lame.
Apple used to broadcast these events when they were in financial distress.
Originally posted by OrbitPink
You are lame.
Apple used to broadcast these events when they were in financial distress.
And now, perhaps, they are being run more wisely (financially).
Originally posted by vinney57
Well its the correct explanation so read it again and try and learn to deal with it.
For all I know you are correct. But no word from Apple yet, so I'm hopefull they realize the magnitude of their potential faliure before it's to late.
Assuming you have the goods on this one could you please share a scource? If not, refrase your assertion as hearsay. And no, MacInTouch is not a reliable scource...
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
And now, perhaps, they are being run more wisely (financially).
Uhm...do you really think it costs anything they can't recoup easily enough? Otherwise why would they have ever broadcast any previous shows? Why?
Originally posted by MegaSmack
One that's trying to convince us that Streaming QuickTime is fun and easy? I mean, if Apple can't afford it, then who can?
Upfront I have to tell you, streaming is expensive. Very expensive. And I doubt things get cheaper when its done live. Apple isn't trying to convince anyone about QuickTime here. They built QuickTime, that is what they are going to use.
It isn't too expensive for Apple to do though. If they wanted to live webcast they could. But they have to weight things out and see how significant the costs are to the revenue they receive from it. There could be many reasons but they chose not to do so.
A satellite broadcast though, I'm hoping they at least offer that. I have a system all setup to downlink
MacIntouch is BS, btw.
Usually the announcement about the streaming keynote comes on the Saturday before the event.
Originally posted by OrbitPink
Uhm...do you really think it costs anything they can't recoup easily enough? Otherwise why would they have ever broadcast any previous shows? Why?
Well, I guess I am willing to give this new rumor some benefit of the doubt...well...more benefit of the doubt than most of people on this board that have absolutely NO insight into Apple's finances or (probably) the costs of this kind of operation.
So do I believe it? At this point, yes. It seems reasonable to believe.
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Well, I guess I am willing to give this new rumor some benefit of the doubt...well...more benefit of the doubt than most of people on this board that have absolutely NO insight into Apple's finances or (probably) the costs of this kind of operation.
So do I believe it? At this point, yes. It seems reasonable to believe.
Why, based on previous years and MacWorld events?
Originally posted by OrbitPink
Why, based on previous years and MacWorld events?
Based on what these new reports are saying.
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Based on what these new reports are saying.
Which are based on what? Some BS from an obscure Mac site? How about waiting for Apple to say something either way, then we can stop speculating about their financial strategy regarding keynote-streaming.
Eric
When I lived in Japan I would stay up all night to watch (2:00AM start time) and would get a specially good bottle of wine and some snacks to accompany the show. The first year we did that we could hardly get any video, mostly audio. Now that the streams are technically so much better it is a shame that Apple might no longer broadcast them.
Originally posted by OrbitPink
Which are based on what? Some BS from an obscure Mac site? How about waiting for Apple to say something either way, then we can stop speculating about their financial strategy regarding keynote-streaming.
Look, I'm not really speculating about anything. I am replying to the rampant whining (and speculation) about this rumored report. All I said...quite reasonably...was that it seemed like a plausible thing to me and that cost reasons also seemed reasonable. I could end up being wrong...and I'm perfectly fine with that. Get off my back about it.
No need to get undies in a bunch.
Somethin' happened, not sure what. A big disappointment but we'll all live.
Chas
Originally posted by Macmedia
Excuse me, but if there was no plan for a broadcast, then why did our local Apple rep invite everyone locally to it?
He probably just assumed based on past experience.
I don't get all the whining either. I mean, so a few thousand fan boys don't get the visceral thrill of immediacy. Big whop.
Originally posted by IonYz
Upfront I have to tell you, streaming is expensive. Very expensive. And I doubt things get cheaper when its done live. Apple isn't trying to convince anyone about QuickTime here. They built QuickTime, that is what they are going to use.
It isn't too expensive for Apple to do though. If they wanted to live webcast they could. But they have to weight things out and see how significant the costs are to the revenue they receive from it. There could be many reasons but they chose not to do so.
A satellite broadcast though, I'm hoping they at least offer that. I have a system all setup to downlink
know streaming is expensive, but to most users, but it's a trend they started. They need to meet their customer's expectations. You can argue they don't have to, but obviously, it's having a negative affect on some of their customers. Otherwise we all wouldn't be here bitching about it. So it is a negative reflection on their brand. That's what concerns me.
To me, the Keynote is exciting. It's one of the things that makes Apple an exciting company. If they just released stuff, you might just say, oh well that's OK. But if you have Steve Jobs pouring lovingly over all the nifty things you can do with this great new gadget and the crowd is cheering... well, it's no wonder where Apple gets it's lust factor from.
I know streaming is expensive, but their stock Tripled this year. Their making money all over the place and all signs point to continued success in 2005. This really should be the event to tell the world, "We have arrived! 2005 will rock!"