Apple in Talks to Build Cable Set-Top Box to Display Live Television - Page 3

soapsuds · Aug 15, 2012, 08:47 PM

I'd love to see Apple take a crack at a set-top box given how horrible the cable boxes are, but I can't see how this could happen business-wise, since the cable companies have a monopoly on all the content, and a near monopoly on broadband.

Since network neutrality failed, there's nothing keeping Comcast from throttling packets from Apple's streaming server to force people to use Comcast on-demand, etc. Apple has no leverage in this arena, unless they made a huge acquisition.

juker12 · 05:29 AM

Hd tv apple, apple tv movies agreements, production agreements, it sounds like s h i t summer or Reuters viral reputation Apple WSJ s h i t reload

WSJ=Digitimes

Rogifan · Aug 15, 2012, 08:59 PM

Another Apple TV rumor. And more 'Apple to shake up the TV industry' hyperbole. zzzzzz

Keebler · Aug 15, 2012, 09:00 PM

Whether or not it's Apple, I think this is the way the industry needs to go.

We canceled TV a year and a half ago. I don't miss it and most of the shows I watch are available through the network websites.

However some of the shows like AMC HBO etc. are unavailable so I would be willing to pay to have those channels available to me without paying the satellite or cable subscription.

Even if I had to pay $25 for that channel or this channel and it all added up to what I was spending on satellite before, I'd be fine with that as it would be content I want rather than having a pile of garbage channels shoved down my throat.

The TV delivery industry needs to change. The technology is available to make those changes whereas before, we didn't have choices.

However, I do see some major challenges regarding advertising as we all know commercials are how the networks get paid.

Hopefully Apple can figure it out (or someone else - as much as a fanboy I am, I could care less who it is as long as it changes

Cheers,
Keebler

MacDav · Aug 15, 2012, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leonard1818

I for one have had it with the big cable companies pushing us around and taking advantage when there are limited-to-no other options in the area.

On that premise, I recently cancelled cable (retaining internet). I COULDN'T BE HAPPIER... I went from $125/month for cable/internet to $50/month high speed internet. That's $75 PER MONTH that I am saving. That leaves me PLENTY of money for netflix, hulu, pandora (all of which I now subscribe to), Amazon prime, a TV mount and a fancy antenna for local stations.

Be careful who you partner with Apple... I liked the talks of a standalone apple branded TV set rather than a new cable box for my non-subscription...

I did the basically the same thing, only I got a TIVO for $20.00 a month. This allows me to record any show I want from my Antenna. I was amazed at the High Def you get over the Antenna, it's better than cable (May depend on where you live though). I talked to my cable provider before defecting and told them I wanted a la carte channels to continue to subscribe. He told me they want to offer a la carte, but the content providers won't let them do it. The whole thing is a big mess, but could be a big opportunity to the company that can "do it right".

iBreatheApple · Aug 15, 2012, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by applefanDrew

I want Sunday Ticket on apple tv.

It's free with any DirecTV plan that costs more than 34.99/month and that includes HD.

Rogifan · Aug 15, 2012, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iBreatheApple

It's free with any DirecTV plan that costs more than 34.99/month and that includes HD.

Apple would have to do something pretty f'ng amazing to pry me away from DirecTV. Don't see it happening. Why would the cable/satellite cos want to get in bed with Apple?

HiRez · Aug 15, 2012, 09:16 PM

I would rather Apple blow $100B on displacing the cable companies rather than making deals with them, which will undoubtedly suck for consumers and only further cement the cablecos' iron grip on content.

charlituna · Aug 15, 2012, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by portishead

I doubt this is true, but I really wish Apple would release a set top box like Tivo.

Why would they need to do that when they have the iTunes store. No ads, pretty decent quality. All they need to do is work out better release timing and pricing.

Billy Boo Bob · Aug 15, 2012, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by charlituna

Why would they need to do that when they have the iTunes store. No ads, pretty decent quality. All they need to do is work out better release timing and pricing.

Pricing is the biggie for me... If I were to order full seasons of all the shows that I want to watch it would cost me a fortune.

bommai · Aug 15, 2012, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Fusion

This is all so wrong...

I want a box that helps me CUT THE CORD with cable companies, not a box that keeps me with them!!!

That is exactly what I was thinking too. I already cut the cord and have not missed it.

portishead · Aug 15, 2012, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by charlituna

Why would they need to do that when they have the iTunes store. No ads, pretty decent quality. All they need to do is work out better release timing and pricing.

Because iTunes store doesn't have live tv. It's also way too expensive. The main networks are pretty much free.

Abobrek · Aug 15, 2012, 09:28 PM

Apple is known to set industry standards, for example iTunes. I think what Apple has plans to do is change the entire cable industry by doing something similar to what is done with the iPhone and iPad, by creating the hardware with features installed in them and having each individual company sell them with a plan. Cable companies would be like wireless carriers, a monthly fee would be charged just as they do now but, instead of a cable box, the customer would purchase an entire tv, in this case an Apple retina television. It is done in the wireless industry, why not the cable industry? A customer could as well buy an Apple tv at major retailers just as they would if they were in the market for a television today. Major retailers offer the ability to purchase Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint phones and plans, like an iPhone or iPad. It would benefit cable providers greatly, expanding their market from being solely sold by them, to selling their services in a larger commercial market, the retail store. Cable boxes are unasthetically pleasing to the eye as well, wires hang down from a tv or are hidden. If the cable box is included in the television, only one remote, an Apple device could be used as well to replace the one provided by the cable provider. Apple TV is considered only a hobby, a full fledged retina quality television with cable incorporated into it would be EXACTLY what Apple is known to do, think different.

JS82712 · Aug 15, 2012, 09:31 PM

Steve woud've never allowed this.

David Sharpe · Aug 15, 2012, 09:32 PM

Partnering with ATT U-Verse is the only thing I could imagine. Dish and Direct are worthless.

I would prefer Apple to create a new system and break up cable providers.

Think, ATT already has the channels. Apple develops a better delivery system over DSL. H.265 proposal just came out, cutting video bandwidth requirements in half.

mono1980 · Aug 15, 2012, 09:41 PM

Apple needs to start threatening to buy some of these companies to force them to negotiate or to get bought out.

BigQid · Aug 15, 2012, 09:49 PM

I love TV. I think Apple could do 2 things very well. 1) Give me the best possible ways to manage and organize content. 2) Create a smooth path to take shows with me on iOS devices.
Whichever cable provider gives me a choice of an Apple cable box is the one I'm going with the same way everyone went to AT&T for the iphone.

koobcamuk · Aug 15, 2012, 09:55 PM

This isn't what I had in mind when I heard Apple had "cracked TV".

iBreatheApple · Aug 15, 2012, 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JS82712

Steve woud've never allowed this.

I'm so freaking sick of hearing people say 'Steve would have never allowed this."

rei101 · Aug 15, 2012, 09:57 PM

1. Cable operators does not have the same problem record labels had when iTunes music store came out, I mean, no piracy.

2. I work at a cable tv station with 3 tv channels and having Apple running business for them would make the entire business structure 100 times more complicated. I mean, for our company is a nightmare already.

So, I am sure Apple has a great product but the ones providing Apple with the signal are APES!!!!! and each community of APES works differently on each state.

For example, Comcast had manages our signal, in California we are fine, but in Texas we realized there was this APE who gave more advertisement to our competitors because this APE used to work for them.

Now, if Apple start to manage the signals, a lot of deals and corruption will disappear. And a lot of the actual business too. For example:

Our company has to visit every call center to promote our channels to the operators. With the Apple TV set up box, the call centers will make no sense. And... how do we promote our channels then? Should we talk to Apple?

I mean, cable operators are a very complex web that does not make any sense but somewhat it works. It is crap but you will need all Apple personnel on the field just to organize the system.

zombiecakes · Aug 15, 2012, 09:57 PM

huh? what is there to negotiate? Cable cards are non-negotiable and cable companies are required by the FCC to support them at no cost. This must be a made up rumor, Apple and any other company only needs FCC approval to make a cable card device.

Satellite companies do not use cable cards and are proprietary networks, so Apple would have to negotiate with them, but absolutely would not have to negotiate with Comcast.

tdar · Aug 15, 2012, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Sharpe

Partnering with ATT U-Verse is the only thing I could imagine. Dish and Direct are worthless.

I would prefer Apple to create a new system and break up cable providers.

Think, ATT already has the channels. Apple develops a better delivery system over DSL. H.265 proposal just came out, cutting video bandwidth requirements in half.

U-verse is dead. No longer being expanded. Same for Fios (except where franchise agreements exist). Cable card would be Apple's best bet for full TV service.

----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by koobcamuk

This isn't what I had in mind when I heard Apple had "cracked TV".

Steve said he had cracked the INTERFACE, not the source of delivery.

----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by zombiecakes

huh? what is there to negotiate? Cable cards are non-negotiable and cable companies are required by the FCC to support them at no cost. This must be a made up rumor, Apple and any other company only needs FCC approval to make a cable card device.

You don't even need FCC approval (other than the standard for any electronic device), but you do need CableLabs approval. So far only given to Microsoft.

AppleScruff1 · Aug 15, 2012, 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leonard1818

I for one have had it with the big cable companies pushing us around and taking advantage when there are limited-to-no other options in the area.

On that premise, I recently cancelled cable (retaining internet). I COULDN'T BE HAPPIER... I went from $125/month for cable/internet to $50/month high speed internet. That's $75 PER MONTH that I am saving. That leaves me PLENTY of money for netflix, hulu, pandora (all of which I now subscribe to), Amazon prime, a TV mount and a fancy antenna for local stations.

Be careful who you partner with Apple... I liked the talks of a standalone apple branded TV set rather than a new cable box for my non-subscription...

It will be much better to be pushed around by Apple, won't it?

zombiecakes · Aug 15, 2012, 10:09 PM

Quote:

You don't even need FCC approval (other than the standard for any electronic device), but you do need CableLabs approval. So far only given to Microsoft.

Thats what I mean, basic FCC approval of the electronics. As for only MS supporting it, Linux works with cable tv and of course theres Tivo, and then there was another cable card DVR that is no longer being made.

dmcdayton · Aug 15, 2012, 10:15 PM

I think Cable Companies have a simple question...do they want to be AT&T or RIM?

Apple can support live tv via OTA or cable pretty easily. The fact they gave in on Hulu suggests they are ok giving up share on content in exchange for hdw sales

Scientific Atlanta will get crushed

Think about how outdated the concept of a channel is? There's brand and content.

Aug 15, 2012, 08:52 PM	#52
juker12 macrumors newbie Join Date: Aug 2009	Hd tv apple, apple tv movies agreements, production agreements, it sounds like s h i t summer or Reuters viral reputation Apple WSJ s h i t reload WSJ=Digitimes Last edited by maflynn; Aug 16, 2012 at 05:29 AM. Reason: removed image
	0

Aug 15, 2012, 08:59 PM	#53
Rogifan macrumors 68040 Join Date: Nov 2011	Another Apple TV rumor. And more 'Apple to shake up the TV industry' hyperbole. zzzzzz __________________ I love Apple products but am not a Steve Jobs fanboy
	0

Aug 15, 2012, 09:16 PM	#58
HiRez macrumors 68040 Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Western US	I would rather Apple blow $100B on displacing the cable companies rather than making deals with them, which will undoubtedly suck for consumers and only further cement the cablecos' iron grip on content. __________________ Go outside, the graphics are amazing!
	3

Aug 15, 2012, 09:55 PM	#68
koobcamuk macrumors 68040 Join Date: Oct 2006	This isn't what I had in mind when I heard Apple had "cracked TV". __________________ Flickr® \| Life in Japan \| Backup your Mac, NOW!!
	1

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Aug 15, 2012, 08:47 PM	#51
soapsuds macrumors member Join Date: Nov 2004	I'd love to see Apple take a crack at a set-top box given how horrible the cable boxes are, but I can't see how this could happen business-wise, since the cable companies have a monopoly on all the content, and a near monopoly on broadband. Since network neutrality failed, there's nothing keeping Comcast from throttling packets from Apple's streaming server to force people to use Comcast on-demand, etc. Apple has no leverage in this arena, unless they made a huge acquisition.
	0

Aug 15, 2012, 09:00 PM	#54
Keebler macrumors 68030 Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Canada	Whether or not it's Apple, I think this is the way the industry needs to go. We canceled TV a year and a half ago. I don't miss it and most of the shows I watch are available through the network websites. However some of the shows like AMC HBO etc. are unavailable so I would be willing to pay to have those channels available to me without paying the satellite or cable subscription. Even if I had to pay $25 for that channel or this channel and it all added up to what I was spending on satellite before, I'd be fine with that as it would be content I want rather than having a pile of garbage channels shoved down my throat. The TV delivery industry needs to change. The technology is available to make those changes whereas before, we didn't have choices. However, I do see some major challenges regarding advertising as we all know commercials are how the networks get paid. Hopefully Apple can figure it out (or someone else - as much as a fanboy I am, I could care less who it is as long as it changes Cheers, Keebler
	1

Aug 15, 2012, 09:28 PM	#63
Abobrek macrumors newbie Join Date: Aug 2012	Apple is known to set industry standards, for example iTunes. I think what Apple has plans to do is change the entire cable industry by doing something similar to what is done with the iPhone and iPad, by creating the hardware with features installed in them and having each individual company sell them with a plan. Cable companies would be like wireless carriers, a monthly fee would be charged just as they do now but, instead of a cable box, the customer would purchase an entire tv, in this case an Apple retina television. It is done in the wireless industry, why not the cable industry? A customer could as well buy an Apple tv at major retailers just as they would if they were in the market for a television today. Major retailers offer the ability to purchase Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint phones and plans, like an iPhone or iPad. It would benefit cable providers greatly, expanding their market from being solely sold by them, to selling their services in a larger commercial market, the retail store. Cable boxes are unasthetically pleasing to the eye as well, wires hang down from a tv or are hidden. If the cable box is included in the television, only one remote, an Apple device could be used as well to replace the one provided by the cable provider. Apple TV is considered only a hobby, a full fledged retina quality television with cable incorporated into it would be EXACTLY what Apple is known to do, think different.
	0

Aug 15, 2012, 09:31 PM	#64
JS82712 Banned Join Date: Jul 2009	Steve woud've never allowed this.
	1

Aug 15, 2012, 09:32 PM	#65
David Sharpe macrumors newbie Join Date: Jan 2006	Partnering with ATT U-Verse is the only thing I could imagine. Dish and Direct are worthless. I would prefer Apple to create a new system and break up cable providers. Think, ATT already has the channels. Apple develops a better delivery system over DSL. H.265 proposal just came out, cutting video bandwidth requirements in half.
	0

Aug 15, 2012, 09:41 PM	#66
mono1980 macrumors regular Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Lansing, MI	Apple needs to start threatening to buy some of these companies to force them to negotiate or to get bought out.
	0

Aug 15, 2012, 09:49 PM	#67
BigQid macrumors regular Join Date: Feb 2010	I love TV. I think Apple could do 2 things very well. 1) Give me the best possible ways to manage and organize content. 2) Create a smooth path to take shows with me on iOS devices. Whichever cable provider gives me a choice of an Apple cable box is the one I'm going with the same way everyone went to AT&T for the iphone.
	0

Aug 15, 2012, 09:57 PM	#70
rei101 macrumors 6502 Join Date: Dec 2011	1. Cable operators does not have the same problem record labels had when iTunes music store came out, I mean, no piracy. 2. I work at a cable tv station with 3 tv channels and having Apple running business for them would make the entire business structure 100 times more complicated. I mean, for our company is a nightmare already. So, I am sure Apple has a great product but the ones providing Apple with the signal are APES!!!!! and each community of APES works differently on each state. For example, Comcast had manages our signal, in California we are fine, but in Texas we realized there was this APE who gave more advertisement to our competitors because this APE used to work for them. Now, if Apple start to manage the signals, a lot of deals and corruption will disappear. And a lot of the actual business too. For example: Our company has to visit every call center to promote our channels to the operators. With the Apple TV set up box, the call centers will make no sense. And... how do we promote our channels then? Should we talk to Apple? I mean, cable operators are a very complex web that does not make any sense but somewhat it works. It is crap but you will need all Apple personnel on the field just to organize the system.
	0

Aug 15, 2012, 09:57 PM	#71
zombiecakes macrumors member Join Date: Jul 2012	huh? what is there to negotiate? Cable cards are non-negotiable and cable companies are required by the FCC to support them at no cost. This must be a made up rumor, Apple and any other company only needs FCC approval to make a cable card device. Satellite companies do not use cable cards and are proprietary networks, so Apple would have to negotiate with them, but absolutely would not have to negotiate with Comcast.
	1

Aug 15, 2012, 10:15 PM	#75
dmcdayton macrumors newbie Join Date: Jan 2008	I think Cable Companies have a simple question...do they want to be AT&T or RIM? Apple can support live tv via OTA or cable pretty easily. The fact they gave in on Hulu suggests they are ok giving up share on content in exchange for hdw sales Scientific Atlanta will get crushed Think about how outdated the concept of a channel is? There's brand and content.
	1