This is all about building up a massive install base. Apple does not want to limit the AppleTV to people who are cord cutters. Its a device for EVERYONE with a TV and internet.
Once their install base is large enough ( 30-50 million) then they will have the leverage to push out deals with the content providers.
I bet in within 2 years, Apple will *BAM* on this. TV service is too good to pass up. It will happen before next ATV refresh.
1. Better user interface. Cable/Sat user interfaces are HORRIBLE.
2. Better hardware. Cable/Sat hardware SUCKS and is expensive. If you have 3 TV's you are paying $60 a month just to rent those crappy boxes.
AppleTV would solve both of those problems and I'd be willing to pay the exact amount I pay the cable companies. In fact I'd be willing to pay MORE for the same channels with an AppleTV if it means a better UI and hardware I can OWN instead of paying hundreds each year in equipment rent.
Tivo Roamio. Refurbished including lifetime service. Less than $300 if you time it right.
I think the term "cord-cutting" means you move to over-the-air (OTA) stations to supplement other streaming options. There are some interesting dongles made by eyeTV that might make for an interesting tvOS app. But OTA might not be consistent with the stated "the future of TV is apps."
Tivo Roamio. Refurbished including lifetime service. Less than $300 if you time it right.
Are those guaranteed to work on my Cable network? No.
Will Tivo even be in business next few years? No.
Can I play games, apps, music, and sync seemlessly with my iOS devices? No.
Why would I pay DOUBLE for a lesser product then an AppleTV?
From a company that is a few bad quarters to bankruptcy?
With more and more people cutting the cord the TiVo option is going to be more attractive.
Mr. Cue, and Apple, has no interest in directly antagonizing the cable monopolies since these are largely the same companies who also control high speed broadband and have exclusive rights to much of the premium content. They also have to consider their relations with the key content providers (HBO, Showtime, etc.) who also do not want to antagonize the same cable monopolies that carry the majority of their programming. Apple TV, and other devices, are the future of television. If alternative broadband providers, such as Google Fiber and others can widely buildout their high speed fiber networks then things become really interesting. Heck, if I could like stream Major League Baseball and NFL, I'd cancel my cable in a heartbeat...
Are those guaranteed to work on my Cable network? No.
Will Tivo even be in business next few years? No.
Can I play games, apps, music, and sync seemlessly with my iOS devices? No.
Why would I pay DOUBLE for a lesser product then an AppleTV?
From a company that is a few bad quarters to bankruptcy?
Why wouldn't it work with your cable system? As for the suggestion in the first place you were asking about hardware you could own that replaces your cable box. An Apple TV no way. Tivo roamio? Yup.
Tivo and Apple TV fill two entirely different needs so don't get upset. You can use both as neither does everything the other does.
This is excellent wordsmithing by Cue. "Not for cord cutters" is the perfect statement for Apple to be making at this time.
As sog35 stated, it's about building the user base and then--BAM!-- hitting the industry upside the head with what Apple does best (I don't know what would be in the case of TV!).
This is all about building up a massive install base. Apple does not want to limit the AppleTV to people who are cord cutters. Its a device for EVERYONE with a TV and internet.
Once their install base is large enough ( 30-50 million) then they will have the leverage to push out deals with the content providers.
Good point! As it is now, there are hardly any providers that offer live streaming. The ones I can think of off the top of my head are CNN, ESPN, Fox News, Showtime, etc. If Apple had a large enough install base, I think content providers would take a second look and not solely rely on the big pockets of cable companies. With 30 plus million, Apple would be large enough to negotiate and make it worthwhile for content providers. As things stand now, I think content providers are reluctant to piss of the large cable companies.
I don't get the big deal about cord cutting. So you replace cable with a bunch of stand alone subscriptions or some skinny bundle that's basically just like cable but fewer channels? More and more cable/sat providers are offering on demand channels where you can watch things when you want. Until there is real ala carte channel by channel options that can be built into a package I couldn't care less about cord cutting. But even if ever happened I'm sure it would be quite expensive.
You don't get the big deal about canceling a $60-70 per month TV service from Time Warner? To each his own...
1. Better user interface. Cable/Sat user interfaces are HORRIBLE.
2. Better hardware. Cable/Sat hardware SUCKS and is expensive. If you have 3 TV's you are paying $60 a month just to rent those crappy boxes.
AppleTV would solve both of those problems and I'd be willing to pay the exact amount I pay the cable companies. In fact I'd be willing to pay MORE for the same channels with an AppleTV if it means a better UI and hardware I can OWN instead of paying hundreds each year in equipment rent.
Expecting AppleTV to cost less than Cable is like expecting the iPhone to cost less than Blackberry. It probably won't.
But it isn't about cost. Its about a FAR BETTER user experience.
I don't mind my DirecTV interface it works OK. There are things DirecTV offers that I would never give up so unless Apple can offer the same it's a no go for me.
You don't get the big deal about canceling a $60-70 per month TV service from Time Warner? To each his own...
But what are you replacing it with? A maybe $20-30 cheaper "skinny" bundle from Apple that might have the channels you want? Or Netflix, Hulu, HBO, Showtime, etc. subscriptions. Those things start to add up.
If you're (already) a cord cutter, then you already know the major networks are too scared of the Internet to let you stream for "free" (even including ads).
Any Apple TV, including the new one, is just fine for cord cutters.
If you're thinking of cutting the cord, relax and make the leap. Your life will be so much better without that crap. And you can be smug about not supporting overpaid athletes, brain injuries, steroid use and physical abuse. That's money in your bank.
Mr. Cue, and Apple, has no interest in directly antagonizing the cable monopolies since these are largely the same companies who also control high speed broadband and have exclusive rights to much of the premium content. They also have to consider their relations with the key content providers (HBO, Showtime, etc.) who also do not want to antagonize the same cable monopolies that carry the majority of their programming. Apple TV, and other devices, are the future of television. If alternative broadband providers, such as Google Fiber and others can widely buildout their high speed fiber networks then things become really interesting. Heck, if I could like stream Major League Baseball and NFL, I'd cancel my cable in a heartbeat...
Yep. Apple still has to play nice with the cable companies, until they get the leverage to dictate the terms. They don't have that leverage just yet, but when enough users are using Apple TV, and the ecosystem is a huge money maker, then they will. Attacking cable companies directly at this point, when Apple TV is so depending on them for much of their apps, would be idiotic.
People like Msantii don't get it, or they're disappointed that Eddy Cue doesn't want to outright lie, or live in his own bubble.
"Eddy Cue dodges questions about original TV content, says Apple TV not for cord-cutters"
Um, he said literally the exact opposite. That the Apple TV is a better experience for viewing TV, except that some channels right now require authentication. So some people can cut the cord today, others will have to wait.
If you're (already) a cord cutter, then you already know the major networks are too scared of the Internet to let you stream for "free" (even including ads).
Any Apple TV, including the new one, is just fine for cord cutters.
If you're thinking of cutting the cord, relax and make the leap. Your life will be so much better without that crap. And you can be smug about not supporting overpaid athletes, brain injuries, steroid use and physical abuse. That's money in your bank.
I'm fortunate enough to get every major network OTA, and using Tivo as a DVR and "what's on" listing. Total cost including an indoor antenna? Less than $350 with no ongoing expenses. As a bonus I stream some content to it from Amazon as a Prime member. The one downside is I did have to sign up for a $20 Sling package to get ESPN dang it. Not gonna miss college football.
I don't mind my DirecTV interface it works OK. There are things DirecTV offers that I would never give up so unless Apple can offer the same it's a no go for me.
Being a big fan of soccer, it would be impossible for me to get rid of DirecTV. They are the only ones that offer all the Champions League matches for free during the knockout rounds. Based on how much international TV rights are going now for the top leagues in Europe, an a la cart model for cord cutters would be pretty expensive I imagine.
I am a cable cutter and I have an AppleTV (gen 3) and some of the channels (or apps) operate either with ads (YouTube, Vevo) or as paid streaming (Netflix, Hulu, HBO), or pay-per-view/cloud (iTunes Store). If you find these sources sufficient, as I do, you can totally use AppleTV for cord cutting. My cable provider has been reduced to a dumb pipe.
I too am a cord cutter, and use only my Apple TV, X-Box or RedBox. I have Netflix, Amazon Prime, and HBO. The Amazon Prime I stream from my phone or iPad. Back when I had cable, I verified some other apps like ABC that required verification. I hardly ever watch ABC on the Apple TV, but those apps that required verification still work now that I no longer have cable.
I also have an HD antennae hooked up to my TV and get regular live channels like FOX, ABC, and NBC as well as others for free in HD that way. I probably get 35 channels over the air for free. I suspect many people don't know that pretty good quality channels can be had for free just by hooking up an antennae to their TV.
I do not miss cable. When I had cable I would spend so much time flipping through the hundreds of channels trying to find something to watch.
I agree that right now its not for cord-cutters. The content providers are icing them out right now (except maybe CBS). But yeah, once they get enough users, then it'll be for cord-cutters. I would pay just about anything (within reason) to get the ala carte channels I want over my existing Internet connection. But considering the Apple TV has zero installs right now, they have their work cut out for them.
Strange, I am a cord cutter and I have been using Apple TV for quite a while as my primary entertainment source. I get Netflix, and HBO on the Apple TV. There are some other channels like the history channel and PBS that don't need a cable subscription. Further, I can stream Amazon Prime from my phone. I could also get Showtime if I wanted it.
Most people can get other big networks like CBS, NBC, ABC, and Fox free just by connecting an antenna.
Strange, I am a cord cutter and I have been using Apple TV for quite a while as my primary entertainment source. I get Netflix, and HBO on the Apple TV. There are some other channels like the history channel and PBS that don't need a cable subscription. Further, I can stream Amazon Prime from my phone. I could also get Showtime if I wanted it.
Most people can get other big networks like CBS, NBC, ABC, and Fox free just by connecting an antenna.
Yep that's my problem. I cannot put an antenna up and I'm too far away for an indoor antenna. I thought Aereo was going to be my savior, but the courts thought otherwise. So right now I have a hodge-podge of Playstation Vue, Sling, CBS All Access and Hulu. That covers pretty much everything I want. But if Apple could somehow work out a deal where I can get local channels and an ala carte of cable channels I want, I would be forever in their debt.
Comments
I've been thinking about making that move.
I think the term "cord-cutting" means you move to over-the-air (OTA) stations to supplement other streaming options. There are some interesting dongles made by eyeTV that might make for an interesting tvOS app. But OTA might not be consistent with the stated "the future of TV is apps."
With more and more people cutting the cord the TiVo option is going to be more attractive.
Mr. Cue, and Apple, has no interest in directly antagonizing the cable monopolies since these are largely the same companies who also control high speed broadband and have exclusive rights to much of the premium content. They also have to consider their relations with the key content providers (HBO, Showtime, etc.) who also do not want to antagonize the same cable monopolies that carry the majority of their programming. Apple TV, and other devices, are the future of television. If alternative broadband providers, such as Google Fiber and others can widely buildout their high speed fiber networks then things become really interesting. Heck, if I could like stream Major League Baseball and NFL, I'd cancel my cable in a heartbeat...
Tivo and Apple TV fill two entirely different needs so don't get upset. You can use both as neither does everything the other does.
This is excellent wordsmithing by Cue. "Not for cord cutters" is the perfect statement for Apple to be making at this time.
As sog35 stated, it's about building the user base and then--BAM!-- hitting the industry upside the head with what Apple does best (I don't know what would be in the case of TV!).
I can tell you what it would be; …cord cutting.
This is all about building up a massive install base. Apple does not want to limit the AppleTV to people who are cord cutters. Its a device for EVERYONE with a TV and internet.
Once their install base is large enough ( 30-50 million) then they will have the leverage to push out deals with the content providers.
Good point! As it is now, there are hardly any providers that offer live streaming. The ones I can think of off the top of my head are CNN, ESPN, Fox News, Showtime, etc. If Apple had a large enough install base, I think content providers would take a second look and not solely rely on the big pockets of cable companies. With 30 plus million, Apple would be large enough to negotiate and make it worthwhile for content providers. As things stand now, I think content providers are reluctant to piss of the large cable companies.
I don't get the big deal about cord cutting. So you replace cable with a bunch of stand alone subscriptions or some skinny bundle that's basically just like cable but fewer channels? More and more cable/sat providers are offering on demand channels where you can watch things when you want. Until there is real ala carte channel by channel options that can be built into a package I couldn't care less about cord cutting. But even if ever happened I'm sure it would be quite expensive.
You don't get the big deal about canceling a $60-70 per month TV service from Time Warner? To each his own...
Tivo Roamio. Refurbished including lifetime service. Less than $300 if you time it right.
Are those guaranteed to work on my Cable network? No.
Will Tivo even be in business next few years? No.
Can I play games, apps, music, and sync seemlessly with my iOS devices? No.
Why would I pay DOUBLE for a lesser product then an AppleTV?
From a company that is a few bad quarters to bankruptcy?
Are those guaranteed to work on my Cable network? Yes
Will Tivo even be in business next few years? Yes
Can I play games, apps, music, and sync seemlessly with my iOS devices? No, but have no interest in that, as it relates to "Television".
TiVo is about managing "Television". Still the best device there is for doing that.
I don't mind my DirecTV interface it works OK. There are things DirecTV offers that I would never give up so unless Apple can offer the same it's a no go for me.
But what are you replacing it with? A maybe $20-30 cheaper "skinny" bundle from Apple that might have the channels you want? Or Netflix, Hulu, HBO, Showtime, etc. subscriptions. Those things start to add up.
If you're (already) a cord cutter, then you already know the major networks are too scared of the Internet to let you stream for "free" (even including ads).
Any Apple TV, including the new one, is just fine for cord cutters.
If you're thinking of cutting the cord, relax and make the leap. Your life will be so much better without that crap. And you can be smug about not supporting overpaid athletes, brain injuries, steroid use and physical abuse. That's money in your bank.
Mr. Cue, and Apple, has no interest in directly antagonizing the cable monopolies since these are largely the same companies who also control high speed broadband and have exclusive rights to much of the premium content. They also have to consider their relations with the key content providers (HBO, Showtime, etc.) who also do not want to antagonize the same cable monopolies that carry the majority of their programming. Apple TV, and other devices, are the future of television. If alternative broadband providers, such as Google Fiber and others can widely buildout their high speed fiber networks then things become really interesting. Heck, if I could like stream Major League Baseball and NFL, I'd cancel my cable in a heartbeat...
Yep. Apple still has to play nice with the cable companies, until they get the leverage to dictate the terms. They don't have that leverage just yet, but when enough users are using Apple TV, and the ecosystem is a huge money maker, then they will. Attacking cable companies directly at this point, when Apple TV is so depending on them for much of their apps, would be idiotic.
People like Msantii don't get it, or they're disappointed that Eddy Cue doesn't want to outright lie, or live in his own bubble.
"Eddy Cue dodges questions about original TV content, says Apple TV not for cord-cutters"
Um, he said literally the exact opposite. That the Apple TV is a better experience for viewing TV, except that some channels right now require authentication. So some people can cut the cord today, others will have to wait.
I don't mind my DirecTV interface it works OK. There are things DirecTV offers that I would never give up so unless Apple can offer the same it's a no go for me.
Being a big fan of soccer, it would be impossible for me to get rid of DirecTV. They are the only ones that offer all the Champions League matches for free during the knockout rounds. Based on how much international TV rights are going now for the top leagues in Europe, an a la cart model for cord cutters would be pretty expensive I imagine.
I am a cable cutter and I have an AppleTV (gen 3) and some of the channels (or apps) operate either with ads (YouTube, Vevo) or as paid streaming (Netflix, Hulu, HBO), or pay-per-view/cloud (iTunes Store). If you find these sources sufficient, as I do, you can totally use AppleTV for cord cutting. My cable provider has been reduced to a dumb pipe.
I too am a cord cutter, and use only my Apple TV, X-Box or RedBox. I have Netflix, Amazon Prime, and HBO. The Amazon Prime I stream from my phone or iPad. Back when I had cable, I verified some other apps like ABC that required verification. I hardly ever watch ABC on the Apple TV, but those apps that required verification still work now that I no longer have cable.
I also have an HD antennae hooked up to my TV and get regular live channels like FOX, ABC, and NBC as well as others for free in HD that way. I probably get 35 channels over the air for free. I suspect many people don't know that pretty good quality channels can be had for free just by hooking up an antennae to their TV.
I do not miss cable. When I had cable I would spend so much time flipping through the hundreds of channels trying to find something to watch.
I agree that right now its not for cord-cutters. The content providers are icing them out right now (except maybe CBS). But yeah, once they get enough users, then it'll be for cord-cutters. I would pay just about anything (within reason) to get the ala carte channels I want over my existing Internet connection. But considering the Apple TV has zero installs right now, they have their work cut out for them.
Strange, I am a cord cutter and I have been using Apple TV for quite a while as my primary entertainment source. I get Netflix, and HBO on the Apple TV. There are some other channels like the history channel and PBS that don't need a cable subscription. Further, I can stream Amazon Prime from my phone. I could also get Showtime if I wanted it.
Most people can get other big networks like CBS, NBC, ABC, and Fox free just by connecting an antenna.
Strange, I am a cord cutter and I have been using Apple TV for quite a while as my primary entertainment source. I get Netflix, and HBO on the Apple TV. There are some other channels like the history channel and PBS that don't need a cable subscription. Further, I can stream Amazon Prime from my phone. I could also get Showtime if I wanted it.
Most people can get other big networks like CBS, NBC, ABC, and Fox free just by connecting an antenna.
Yep that's my problem. I cannot put an antenna up and I'm too far away for an indoor antenna. I thought Aereo was going to be my savior, but the courts thought otherwise. So right now I have a hodge-podge of Playstation Vue, Sling, CBS All Access and Hulu. That covers pretty much everything I want. But if Apple could somehow work out a deal where I can get local channels and an ala carte of cable channels I want, I would be forever in their debt.