Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Indeed Talking with Cable Operators About New TV Product, But Launch Not Imminent
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I still think that there is no need for new hardware. The current ATV can already deliver 1080p video. Live TV streaming would not require new hardware. Any technologies holding that up (assuming they want to deliver it) would be related to the pipe to your house and/or Apple's server farm.
I suspect that if there's something to this rumor it relates to Apple and Comcast partnering to deliver TV shows (possibly including live TV) via the current ATV hardware. It might involve a new Comcast app on the home screen so that Comcast subscribers can watch what they're already paying for, or perhaps something more integrated into iTunes, and paying Apple (who maybe pays Comcast something behind-the-scenes). It might involve a monthly subscription, or perhaps just lower priced per-episode pricing.
In any case, the technology behind it would likely involve streaming these shows/live TV in MP4 format (which is how the current iTunes TV shows are already encoded) vs the MPEG2 format that current HDTV OTA and cable-provided shows are encoded in, the latter of which involves much larger filesizes and would be too large for the current internet speeds most people get as well as incompatible with the current ATV hardware.
I suspect that if there's something to this rumor it relates to Apple and Comcast partnering to deliver TV shows (possibly including live TV) via the current ATV hardware. It might involve a new Comcast app on the home screen so that Comcast subscribers can watch what they're already paying for, or perhaps something more integrated into iTunes, and paying Apple (who maybe pays Comcast something behind-the-scenes). It might involve a monthly subscription, or perhaps just lower priced per-episode pricing.
In any case, the technology behind it would likely involve streaming these shows/live TV in MP4 format (which is how the current iTunes TV shows are already encoded) vs the MPEG2 format that current HDTV OTA and cable-provided shows are encoded in, the latter of which involves much larger filesizes and would be too large for the current internet speeds most people get as well as incompatible with the current ATV hardware.
The gain is not having cables between two devices, and anti-theft qualities for hotels and other public places. For the TV manufacturer, it's a bullet point feature.
What you say makes sense though. But I see this happening at some point -- Apple should either identify that they want to do this themselves, or if they want to license the capability to manufacturers and let them innovate.
Even if the news about the TV was real. I am not that excited. What's it going to be? a Giant iMac with Apple TV built in and a slot for cable companies and dish companies for their cards.
Interface can be sleek etc.. but people are making too much out of this.
Interface can be sleek etc.. but people are making too much out of this.
What to do with Apple TV
Apple TV is great. A set top box would be OK (but Apple TV is already a set top box). Smart TVs are not really Smart, they are just connected to the Internet. If you want a really Smart TV, get Apple to add some of its magic.
If Apple wants to make a game changer, why not license its technology to TV manufacturers? Unlike Mac computers, they do not make money selling TV hardware (well not much anyway). However, if they had an Apple TV Apps Store, where people could buy Apps, Movies, TV programs, Games etc etc, they could get a massive revenue stream plus get their technology into loads of consumers homes.
iPhone has totaly revolutionised Apple and is a huge revenue stream for them. Why not try to repeat this with the TV? The problem with creating a TV is it is a very hard market to get into and people do not change their TVs very often (unlike mobile phones). But if they could license their software they may have the answer.
Apple TV is great. A set top box would be OK (but Apple TV is already a set top box). Smart TVs are not really Smart, they are just connected to the Internet. If you want a really Smart TV, get Apple to add some of its magic.
If Apple wants to make a game changer, why not license its technology to TV manufacturers? Unlike Mac computers, they do not make money selling TV hardware (well not much anyway). However, if they had an Apple TV Apps Store, where people could buy Apps, Movies, TV programs, Games etc etc, they could get a massive revenue stream plus get their technology into loads of consumers homes.
iPhone has totaly revolutionised Apple and is a huge revenue stream for them. Why not try to repeat this with the TV? The problem with creating a TV is it is a very hard market to get into and people do not change their TVs very often (unlike mobile phones). But if they could license their software they may have the answer.
Lol hobby is a term apple could throw around
----------
Remember Steve jobs figured the tv out
Lol
Hopefully not with Siri that pos
Unless their TV is literally just a sheet of glass about 2mm thick with no visible innards that displays a holographic image, I can't imagine what it could do that you can't already get from Samsung et al.
I hope it's an 80 inch Apple Tv that can function as an iMac.
That would be what.. a pixel count of about {7680,4320} ??
{2560,1440} *3 = {7680,4320}
:>)
That would be what.. a pixel count of about {7680,4320} ??
{2560,1440} *3 = {7680,4320}
:>)
Right, it would really just come down to Apple advertising the Apple TV with commercials plus a big keynote for the press and developers.
They would see a ton of sales, they know it, they're just waiting for the right time to roll out the new Apple TV software.
This.
The safe route for Apple is another puck or less likely, updated software for older gens. But the biggest hint that something bigger is happening could be the constant hobby references; the Apple TV is now maturing quite well and is quite capable, content holds it back the most. 1st 2nd and 3rd gens have provided plenty of beta testing for a service, and the only thing that provides a big splash is a full size TV set. (Just would wait for the 3rd or 4th gen before you buy)
Wrangling together all these companies is hellish. I bet Apple has a nightmare situation. Such a device might be best as a "come to the market" affair, like iTunes store or the App store. Except in this case it is "put your channel up on our pay-per-view subscriber system enabled by the net.
That might be a bit hit-and-miss, but it is the way of the past and present with the music and video market. It will have to be the way of the future of television, because television is so crap and poorly bundled.
Cable stations will dissolve within a decade of such a system coming into existence, unless the change into something else or something more. Who wants to watch all those channels?? I'd buy maybe 2 channels and forget the rest.
Industry vs Apple. The biggest potential to sway is the content providers, because they can easily make or break what happens with Apple. Cable channels might break apart into production houses allowing content out to the individual subscribers instead of repeating it on channels.
That announcement could be about 10 minutes before the product shows up on the Apple Store site.
Television isn't so "new" that it needs a huge introduction for a device which will make it easier and more convenient. Smart TVs and the Apple TV and other devices are paving the public awareness which will allow a greater Apple TV-type product to launch without months of hype.
It might be best if Apple integrated their TV idea into their computers instead of making it a purely stand-alone product. Buy an iMac, the iMac serves as an Apple TV provider, etc. And likewise: an Apple TV becomes a mini-computer on your TV.
That might be a bit hit-and-miss, but it is the way of the past and present with the music and video market. It will have to be the way of the future of television, because television is so crap and poorly bundled.
Cable stations will dissolve within a decade of such a system coming into existence, unless the change into something else or something more. Who wants to watch all those channels?? I'd buy maybe 2 channels and forget the rest.
Industry vs Apple. The biggest potential to sway is the content providers, because they can easily make or break what happens with Apple. Cable channels might break apart into production houses allowing content out to the individual subscribers instead of repeating it on channels.
That announcement could be about 10 minutes before the product shows up on the Apple Store site.
Television isn't so "new" that it needs a huge introduction for a device which will make it easier and more convenient. Smart TVs and the Apple TV and other devices are paving the public awareness which will allow a greater Apple TV-type product to launch without months of hype.
It might be best if Apple integrated their TV idea into their computers instead of making it a purely stand-alone product. Buy an iMac, the iMac serves as an Apple TV provider, etc. And likewise: an Apple TV becomes a mini-computer on your TV.
3D was dead on arrival. I bought a 3D plasma and bluray player (it was part of the sale) and can count how many times I've watched 3d on my hand. So why in the hell would I pay a premium for it on a handheld device. Horrible idea. People don't want 3d. They want to get rid of the hassle of cable/satellite providers and the stupidly overpriced channel packages. They want al a carte channels plain and simple. I don't believe this will happen anytime soon, but more and more people are "cutting the cord". Eventually the cable providers are going to have to change their model.
With TV viewership in decline and media being able to be delivered right to you cell phone or tablet, I don't think the TV space is worth investing in for Apple, even as a hobby. Fixed displays are becoming rarer in this age of portability.
The only problem is that cell phones and tablets with 40 inch screens are so hard to carry around. If Apple figured out how to make a portable 40 inch display, that would be a winner.
Apple would obviously be talking to cable and/or content providers no matter if they were working on a tv, setbox or otherwise involved with TV content.
No brainer.
It's also a no brainer that a launch is not imminent.
Given the amount of leaks coming from Apple re: iPhone and otherwise - I'm pretty sure when/if Apple releases a TV - there will be a good solid year of "prototypes" being photographed...
No brainer.
It's also a no brainer that a launch is not imminent.
Given the amount of leaks coming from Apple re: iPhone and otherwise - I'm pretty sure when/if Apple releases a TV - there will be a good solid year of "prototypes" being photographed...
While i like aspects of my Apple TV, it is disappointing that Apple locks it down so much.
The Apple TV ought to:
1- have an microSD slot to add memory
2- Be able to add more channels of content, HBO, Showtime, Epix, NFL, MLB and other providers which have apps on other devices that are not enabled on Apple TV
3- Be able to add app's like Sirius/XM and other music app's a Spotify one would be great.
4- let the user pick content without apple censorship. ie politics, food, etc. whatever someone wants to add Even other movie stores, Ultra-violet content, Amazon VOD/Prime, Vudu. etc.
5- games apps, Roku has games.
Apple TV is nice for some functionality, but the reality it is too locked down. Apple needs to let people access what they want
The Apple TV ought to:
1- have an microSD slot to add memory
2- Be able to add more channels of content, HBO, Showtime, Epix, NFL, MLB and other providers which have apps on other devices that are not enabled on Apple TV
3- Be able to add app's like Sirius/XM and other music app's a Spotify one would be great.
4- let the user pick content without apple censorship. ie politics, food, etc. whatever someone wants to add Even other movie stores, Ultra-violet content, Amazon VOD/Prime, Vudu. etc.
5- games apps, Roku has games.
Apple TV is nice for some functionality, but the reality it is too locked down. Apple needs to let people access what they want
"... If my aTV could control the volume for my TV, I would be 1000% happier..."
Odd thing is that if you mirror YouTube to your iTV you can control the volume it pushes to your monitor and sound system... Seems no reason this feature is not possible for all signal coming thru the iTV unit.
Odd thing is that if you mirror YouTube to your iTV you can control the volume it pushes to your monitor and sound system... Seems no reason this feature is not possible for all signal coming thru the iTV unit.
To quote the title here:
"Apple Indeed Talking with Cable Operators"
I bet the Apple employees assigned to "talking" instead of "suing" are very happy with their assignments.
"Apple Indeed Talking with Cable Operators"
I bet the Apple employees assigned to "talking" instead of "suing" are very happy with their assignments.
you'll be lucky this day in age if a modern day TV lasts 7 years LOL. Heck you'd be lucky if it lasts 5. Stuff is built so poorly these days not really built to last more than a decade maximum.
I think TiVo provided a glimpse into the future of Apple TV when it released the TiVo Stream add-on for its 4-tuner DVR. The TiVo Stream will simultaneously stream different HDTV recordings and channels to up to four Apple devices simultaneously without interrupting what is showing on TV. One person can watch a program on TV while four (yes, four) others can watch separate HDTV programs, live or recorded, on their iPads and iPhones. TiVo has said it will extend this streaming capability to TVs with a low-cost extender in the coming months (streaming to other TVs currently requires a separate TiVo on each TV).
The key limitation of the TiVo approach is that all tuners and recordings are stored in the 4-tuner 2TB box and streaming of liveTV and recordings to up to four iPhones and iPads only works within the home. If you want to take content outside the home you have to download it first. TiVo allows iPhones and iPads to download and save recordings (720p MP4 format) for playback later, but that is not a substitute for out-of-the-home streaming, because you have to remember to download your favorite programs first if you want to watch them away from the home.
Apple could take this capability to the next level by storing recordings and tuners in the cloud. DirecTV and Dish Network already obtain feeds of HD local channels and send them back to data centers for uplink to satellite, and Apple could do the same, except deliver them via cloud streaming instead of satellite. Apple could do the same for HD cable channels from major television providers. That would eliminate the need for a costly CableCard DVR with a massive hard drive and allow them to use existing AppleTV hardware. Subscribe to cable service (from Apple or another cable company) and you would have streaming access to the same content from all your iOS devices and Macs.
Alternatively, Apple could offer a TiVo-like CableCard DVR with local storage and combine it with an iTunesMatch-like cloud service for TV, so any program recorded on the DVR would automatically be available for streaming from Apple's servers to iOS devices. In theory, such a service could also work with existing cable company hardware, since cable companies already track what you watch and record for advertising purposes; subscribe to Apple's iTunesMatch service and you would automatically have access to all the television shows recorded on your cable company DVR from any iOS device or Mac (through Apple servers).
Attachments
Last edited:
My current TV, a Sony rear-projection HDTV, is still going strong after 8 years and only 1 lamp change (last year). I'd hope that any new TV I buy lasts the same amount of time.
I'm familiar with it, and it's definitely very cool. I'm already doing something very similar. I have a Windows Media Center PC along with a SiliconDust HD HomeRun Prime (networked box with cablecard slot and 3 tuners). I run Plex's server app on my PC and another script/app which renames my Windows .wtv recordings so that Plex knows how to pull down the metadata for them. Then, I can run the Plex client app on my iPhone or iPad and stream my recordings to those devices, including then pushing them to the ATV via AirPlay.
One big limitation is that I can't watch Live TV on my devices. The Plex server app can only deal with .wtv files that have finished recording. Also, in order to get high picture quality, you need the computer running the Plex server app needs to be fairly current/powerful. TiVo gets around that latter issue presumably by having some sort of hardware-based MPEG2-to-MP4 (or whatever) video encoding chip in the TiVo Stream.
The other solution that Apple could go with (which I've posted about before) is to create a Windows Media Center alternative. El Gato makes EyeTV which is along those lines, but their software doesn't support cablecards, so you can't tune in the full cable lineup. Apple would need to develop the DVR software and get it certified by cablelabs. IMO, rather than make it an OSX app, they should create a new AirPort Extreme/TimeCapsule router with a built-in cablecard slot, iTunes server, DVR functionality, and a chip capable of doing MPEG2-to-MP4 on-the-fly transcoding, so that the shows would be recorded OTA or from the cable company, converted on-the-fly to MP4, and stored on a hard drive. The on-board iTunes server could then serve it up to all of your iOS devices in your house.
But I suspect that Apple (Jobs?) didn't like that approach because it still saddled the user with commercials (they could have software designed to strip those out, but those approaches aren't always foolproof and it would also put them in a bad relationship with the cable companies). So, instead, their approach has been to try to establish relationships with the content producers, and offer a-la-carte pricing for shows. The other advantage with their approach is that the shows are stored in the cloud, so you can use whatever router you want and don't have to worry about how much free disk space you've got.
I have no problem with their approach vs the one I've thrown out their as an alternative, but the main problem with it is: a) they haven't seemed to get the per-show pricing as low as most consumers would want to see it, and b) there's still a need for live TV (e.g., morning news, sporting events) which they're present solution has yet to fully address (e.g., there is an MLB app, but no NFL app).
I'm sure you'll get a few anomalies, but the majority of that model will have died long ago.
I have quite an amount of vintage tech in my room "its 70's space age inspired" still going strong after 30 plus years. My alarm clock is a good case in point. Its a Sony Digitmatic flip clock from 1969 still keeping excellent time, with everything else working on it after 43 years. Same goes for my 1978 Toshiba music centre again working fine, same with my 1976 Decca 8-track player too working fine and all my vintage SLR cameras all work too. They just don't make stuff to last these days,
Hm, if you actually care about Live TV, why don't you simply run Windows Media Center on the PC with an extender or two (those can be purchased dirt cheap nowadays, as they have all been EOL-ed, as far as I am aware. If you have a cable card device, it will stream perfectly as well.
I had a set up like this for years, but found that I never watch Live TV anymore and both my extender D-Link died, so now I have a couple of Apple TV 3s instead.
Again, if Apple wants to make ATV into a useful HTPC, all they have to do is allow apps.
There are already apps which will stream Live TV from HDHomeRun, there are apps will will stream MKVs, AVIs, etc..
But Apple will not do it, because they want to SELL you everything you watch on their little box.
I am hoping that at some point soon we'll have better options from either Google TV, or Boxee, or some Chinese outfit with a good implementation of Android stuffed into a small box.
Or maybe Apple will see the light and just allow apps, if they want to stay in this business.
But making actual TV sets, or cable boxes, is a stupid business idea for Apple at this time.
There are two ways Apple could succeed with TV. Both paths require them to subvert and/or destroy the media/delivery conglomerates (Comcast/Universal in particular).
They either use anti-trust laws, additional regulation, or a ****-load of money to obtain equal, or at least equivalent access to programming from the media creation companies. That is, they get themselves a seat at the table with the networks and cable channels. In other words, they do what Netflix has been up to for years.
Either that or they get a seat at the next tier - trying to get equivalent access to the channels to distribute their content. That is, to try to compete with Comcast, Cox and Time/warner's cable TV business.
There are two additional paths that I think are unlikely at best.
One is to open up a "channel store" the same as Roku. There, one would expect content providers to set up apps to gate access to content. I would envision a "Discovery channel app," an "E!" app, an "HBO" app, etc. I don't see this as being a reasonable solution without Apple simultaneously succeeding with either of the two other options above.
The second is to augment the existing Apple TV with a second box that is effectively a UI-less DVR. You connect it to your LAN or WAN, and to either an antenna and/or a cablecard-and-cable. The problem with this idea is that it cedes power and control to Apple's competitors - competitors that Apple should use options 1 or 2 above to destroy.
They either use anti-trust laws, additional regulation, or a ****-load of money to obtain equal, or at least equivalent access to programming from the media creation companies. That is, they get themselves a seat at the table with the networks and cable channels. In other words, they do what Netflix has been up to for years.
Either that or they get a seat at the next tier - trying to get equivalent access to the channels to distribute their content. That is, to try to compete with Comcast, Cox and Time/warner's cable TV business.
There are two additional paths that I think are unlikely at best.
One is to open up a "channel store" the same as Roku. There, one would expect content providers to set up apps to gate access to content. I would envision a "Discovery channel app," an "E!" app, an "HBO" app, etc. I don't see this as being a reasonable solution without Apple simultaneously succeeding with either of the two other options above.
The second is to augment the existing Apple TV with a second box that is effectively a UI-less DVR. You connect it to your LAN or WAN, and to either an antenna and/or a cablecard-and-cable. The problem with this idea is that it cedes power and control to Apple's competitors - competitors that Apple should use options 1 or 2 above to destroy.