I don't get it, I mean, the idea with Apple TV is to keep everything centralized in iTunes. Now, you have to download data into this TakeTV thingy, then plug it into your computer's USB port. Umm....huh? This whole thing is just a personal vendetta against Apple's, or maybe NBC's arrogance. There's a major power stuggle going on here for the Internet delivery method. I think Apple has the winner here, but of course, Apple TV isn't winning and will probably disco'd next year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rtdunham
I thought NBC's objections had to do with apple's pricing and revenue sharing. All the options NBC is purportedly proposing involve "discounts". Makes you wonder what NBC's objections really were. Or makes these proposals look suspect.
Can anyone explain?
On a different note, the Sansa device looks like a nice, sneaker-net alternative to apple's scheme. If apple offered this solution as a half-price alternative to its apple tv, wouldn't we admire it? (On the other hand, maybe not a lot of diff in the Sansas and attaching our iPods to our TVs?
I don't get it, I mean, the idea with Apple TV is to keep everything centralized in iTunes. Now, you have to download data into this TakeTV thingy, then plug it into your computer's USB port. Umm....huh?
The Sansa might be playing into the FUD that setting up a network is hard. It doesn't have to be hard, and I really don't think sneakernet is a good solution when PVR and on-demand is available.
Well, it appears the children who run NBC are just doing these "anybody but Apple" deals simply for spite.
NBC fears losing control of it's own content. That is why they are doing this. Unfortunately Apple is the one who came out of those talks looking child like. Apple should have let NBC do expensive bundles on iTunes, then played the part of "I told you so" later.
Honestly, what brain children are running NBC/Universal? First, they back a fledging HD DVD format that is assured to lose in the optical realm to the highly superior Blu-ray, and now they shun Apple's iTunes that clearly dominates the download realm. I just don't get it. Are NBC/Universal trying to lose money?
NBC fears losing control of it's own content. That is why they are doing this. Unfortunately Apple is the one who came out of those talks looking child like. Apple should have let NBC do expensive bundles on iTunes, then played the part of "I told you so" later.
I disagree. Apple's iTunes is the front line for all purchases the average customers and the wags would stating that Apple is the one who has raised the prices, not that NBC demanded it despite Apple's request. Plus, it leaves the door wide open for all iTunes content providers to try different strategies to make more money at the expense of the consumer and iTunes Store reputation.
As part of its pact with NBC, SanDisk said it plans to use its expertise in security to implement a series of measures to protect the NBC Universal content offered via its Fanfare service, including partnering to explore the implementation of watermarking and filtering technology solutions.
With the iPhone SDK available soon, maybe some of our friends at the dev group
will have enough free time on their hands to hack the living crap out of this
Anybody else getting pop-under windows when clicking on links on AppleInsider?
Yep. Hate them. It's happening in both the latest Firefox on Mac and PC and Safari 3.0, despite all the browsers being set to block popups. I'll have to sit down and figure out the script so I can set PithHelmet to kill it.
Back on topic, it seems telling that NBC is using the "everything but the kitchen sink" approach to content downloads. This is what, the third service they'll be using concurrently? Seems they're very disorganized. Or desperate.
I'm using Safari 3.0.4 in Leopard and I don't see them.
Just because you are not noticing them, doesn't mean they aren't there.
On my slow PPC system I get to painfully watch as clicking on links in an AppleInsider page spawns what appears to be a Flash based popup window. The window draws and then vanishes. I'm really suspicious of what this is trying to do.
Also about 25% of the time, this causes Safari 3.0.4 to crash.
NBC fears losing control of it's own content. That is why they are doing this. Unfortunately Apple is the one who came out of those talks looking child like. Apple should have let NBC do expensive bundles on iTunes, then played the part of "I told you so" later.
I would hate to have to do business with Apple, and I can see why content providers are sick of it.
BUT, if NBC fails with more expensive downloads, it hurts Apple at the same time. I don't want to sound like an Apple apologist, but... at least they have some sense of vision for what the consumer wants, and have a model to provide that information.
The problem is that the video is too locked in with DRM to be successful. Making matters worse, TV has given us all lots of "free" content, but there is no equivalent to a "re-run" with video downloads in a price context.
I think Apple has things wrong on a number of fronts, but the challenge should be to provide better value with the downloads. Maybe Apple really should "open up" the TIVO world and see what that does to the industry.
I disagree. Apple's iTunes is the front line for all purchases the average customers and the wags would stating that Apple is the one who has raised the prices, not that NBC demanded it despite Apple's request. Plus, it leaves the door wide open for all iTunes content providers to try different strategies to make more money at the expense of the consumer and iTunes Store reputation.
Your point about having different strategies is well taken but I feel like Apple with it's better reputation could have overcome any bad publicity and then really stuck it to NBC all the while keeping them in the fold.
The real problem now is the perception of Apple being "my way or the highway" with visions of the music industry slaughter at it's feet. NBC is running like hell.
Makes you wonder what NBC's objections really were.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zendolphyn
I just don't get it... how does NBC think that this partnership, specifically, is better than iTunes for distributing digital content?
Three things NBC might have an interest in:
1. Getting their online content to consumers in a simple, easy way (meaning the on-screen interface AND the pricing schemes).
2. Making the most money they can (whether by sales, rental, subscriptions, or ads).
3. Taking power away from Apple, who clearly knows what they are doing in this area. Apple scares NBC because they are successful, and because they have pushed the music industry (kicking and screaming) in consumer-friendly directions.
NBC should be thinking of #2, but they seem to value #3 above all else. They would rather be the one in power, even if that means working with less-successful, less consumer-friendly service(s).
NBC's Hula might suck but they are determined to limp along until they get it right. Just as Microsoft has done with the Zune.
Would that be "got it right" like Zune's wireless sync that tech writers are paid to love? The wireless synch that ONLY works if you plug in a WIRE... and syncs far slower than an iPod that uses the same number of cables to sync?
I'm actually glad Sandisk and NBC came into this scene.
Before this happened, everybody was complaining about how bad Apple TV is. Now we get to see the alternatives:
a 4GB/8GB device for $100/$150 that you have to truck over from your PC to your TV and connect via composite or S-Video (NOT Hi-Def); or
a 40GB/160GB device that syncs wirelessly for $200/$300 (Costco is selling the 160GB Apple TV for $300 now) that connects via component or HDMI (Hi-Def 720p) and also syncs or streams your pictures, podcasts, music, and connects to YouTube (though you might not argue that as a feature )
I'm actually glad Sandisk and NBC came into this scene.
Before this happened, everybody was complaining about how bad Apple TV is. Now we get to see the alternatives:
a 4GB/8GB device for $100/$150 that you have to truck over from your PC to your TV and connect via composite or S-Video (NOT Hi-Def); or
a 40GB/160GB device that syncs wirelessly for $200/$300 (Costco is selling the 160GB Apple TV for $300 now) that connects via component or HDMI (Hi-Def 720p) and also syncs or streams your pictures, podcasts, music, and connects to YouTube (though you might not argue that as a feature )
There was alternatives long before AppleTV. Amazon.com has been selling crappy media extenders for some time. The prices range from less to more expensive than AppleTV (or did before AppleTV came along) and they all stream video with a very poor success rate. The only plus for these devices is the built in support for many codecs but that is little comfort when the device doesn't work as advertised. i know, I've owned and been pissed off at many of them.
On a different note, the Sansa device looks like a nice, sneaker-net alternative to apple's scheme. If apple offered this solution as a half-price alternative to its apple tv, wouldn't we admire it?
Comments
I thought NBC's objections had to do with apple's pricing and revenue sharing. All the options NBC is purportedly proposing involve "discounts". Makes you wonder what NBC's objections really were. Or makes these proposals look suspect.
Can anyone explain?
On a different note, the Sansa device looks like a nice, sneaker-net alternative to apple's scheme. If apple offered this solution as a half-price alternative to its apple tv, wouldn't we admire it? (On the other hand, maybe not a lot of diff in the Sansas and attaching our iPods to our TVs?
Can anyone explain the practical differences?)
Anybody else getting pop-under windows when clicking on links on AppleInsider?
yeah. sellin' out to da man.....
I don't get it, I mean, the idea with Apple TV is to keep everything centralized in iTunes. Now, you have to download data into this TakeTV thingy, then plug it into your computer's USB port. Umm....huh?
The Sansa might be playing into the FUD that setting up a network is hard. It doesn't have to be hard, and I really don't think sneakernet is a good solution when PVR and on-demand is available.
Well, it appears the children who run NBC are just doing these "anybody but Apple" deals simply for spite.
NBC fears losing control of it's own content. That is why they are doing this. Unfortunately Apple is the one who came out of those talks looking child like. Apple should have let NBC do expensive bundles on iTunes, then played the part of "I told you so" later.
NBC fears losing control of it's own content. That is why they are doing this. Unfortunately Apple is the one who came out of those talks looking child like. Apple should have let NBC do expensive bundles on iTunes, then played the part of "I told you so" later.
I disagree. Apple's iTunes is the front line for all purchases the average customers and the wags would stating that Apple is the one who has raised the prices, not that NBC demanded it despite Apple's request. Plus, it leaves the door wide open for all iTunes content providers to try different strategies to make more money at the expense of the consumer and iTunes Store reputation.
As part of its pact with NBC, SanDisk said it plans to use its expertise in security to implement a series of measures to protect the NBC Universal content offered via its Fanfare service, including partnering to explore the implementation of watermarking and filtering technology solutions.
With the iPhone SDK available soon, maybe some of our friends at the dev group
will have enough free time on their hands to hack the living crap out of this
"security".
Anybody else getting pop-under windows when clicking on links on AppleInsider?
Yep. Hate them. It's happening in both the latest Firefox on Mac and PC and Safari 3.0, despite all the browsers being set to block popups. I'll have to sit down and figure out the script so I can set PithHelmet to kill it.
Back on topic, it seems telling that NBC is using the "everything but the kitchen sink" approach to content downloads. This is what, the third service they'll be using concurrently? Seems they're very disorganized. Or desperate.
I'm using Safari 3.0.4 in Leopard and I don't see them.
Just because you are not noticing them, doesn't mean they aren't there.
On my slow PPC system I get to painfully watch as clicking on links in an AppleInsider page spawns what appears to be a Flash based popup window. The window draws and then vanishes. I'm really suspicious of what this is trying to do.
Also about 25% of the time, this causes Safari 3.0.4 to crash.
NBC fears losing control of it's own content. That is why they are doing this. Unfortunately Apple is the one who came out of those talks looking child like. Apple should have let NBC do expensive bundles on iTunes, then played the part of "I told you so" later.
I would hate to have to do business with Apple, and I can see why content providers are sick of it.
BUT, if NBC fails with more expensive downloads, it hurts Apple at the same time. I don't want to sound like an Apple apologist, but... at least they have some sense of vision for what the consumer wants, and have a model to provide that information.
The problem is that the video is too locked in with DRM to be successful. Making matters worse, TV has given us all lots of "free" content, but there is no equivalent to a "re-run" with video downloads in a price context.
I think Apple has things wrong on a number of fronts, but the challenge should be to provide better value with the downloads. Maybe Apple really should "open up" the TIVO world and see what that does to the industry.
I disagree. Apple's iTunes is the front line for all purchases the average customers and the wags would stating that Apple is the one who has raised the prices, not that NBC demanded it despite Apple's request. Plus, it leaves the door wide open for all iTunes content providers to try different strategies to make more money at the expense of the consumer and iTunes Store reputation.
Your point about having different strategies is well taken but I feel like Apple with it's better reputation could have overcome any bad publicity and then really stuck it to NBC all the while keeping them in the fold.
The real problem now is the perception of Apple being "my way or the highway" with visions of the music industry slaughter at it's feet. NBC is running like hell.
http://real-us.news.yahoo.com/s/nm/2...1/tv_nm/nbc_dc
They're not only FOURTH in the network race, making NO MONEY from iTunes, et. al . . . They're giving money back now!
Makes you wonder what NBC's objections really were.
I just don't get it... how does NBC think that this partnership, specifically, is better than iTunes for distributing digital content?
Three things NBC might have an interest in:
1. Getting their online content to consumers in a simple, easy way (meaning the on-screen interface AND the pricing schemes).
2. Making the most money they can (whether by sales, rental, subscriptions, or ads).
3. Taking power away from Apple, who clearly knows what they are doing in this area. Apple scares NBC because they are successful, and because they have pushed the music industry (kicking and screaming) in consumer-friendly directions.
NBC should be thinking of #2, but they seem to value #3 above all else. They would rather be the one in power, even if that means working with less-successful, less consumer-friendly service(s).
Microsoft must be behind it
Now it makes sence
NBC's Hula might suck but they are determined to limp along until they get it right. Just as Microsoft has done with the Zune.
Would that be "got it right" like Zune's wireless sync that tech writers are paid to love?
Before this happened, everybody was complaining about how bad Apple TV is. Now we get to see the alternatives:
I'm actually glad Sandisk and NBC came into this scene.
Before this happened, everybody was complaining about how bad Apple TV is. Now we get to see the alternatives:
There was alternatives long before AppleTV. Amazon.com has been selling crappy media extenders for some time. The prices range from less to more expensive than AppleTV (or did before AppleTV came along) and they all stream video with a very poor success rate. The only plus for these devices is the built in support for many codecs but that is little comfort when the device doesn't work as advertised. i know, I've owned and been pissed off at many of them.
On a different note, the Sansa device looks like a nice, sneaker-net alternative to apple's scheme. If apple offered this solution as a half-price alternative to its apple tv, wouldn't we admire it?
They do...ever hear of the iPod nano?