Apple's New TV Effort May Kick Off This Fall with Focus on Third-Party Apps

[gnasher729]

Originally Posted by Zunjine

This is one of my pet peeves. Peter Misek's claim wasn't refuted by Jim Dalrymple, it was repudiated by him. To refute means to prove wrong. To repudiate means to deny the truth of.

Almost every use of the word 'refute' is wrong, in my experience.

Dalrymple repudiate what Misek said. Given each of the party's reputations, that means Misek is refuted.

[iSunrise]

Originally Posted by gijoeinla

Seriously -- apps coming to Apple TV without a doubt would become a game changer in the CONTENT distribution business. If -- if in fact the content kings are fighting the prospects of a proposed paradigm shift towards "al la carte" programming -- that fight could deflated by a mass market device.. Think about it..

If ANY developer could in fact create an app that delivers "original" or "licensed" product -- what would Apple need network programming per say. Plus -- plus it would in a way make the App Store a type of "you tube" like marketplace -- where anyone literally could develop an app to deliver content..

Studios are you listening? I happen to work for one of the majors.. Apples iOS user base is just north of 500 mil and growing. Add a real Apple TV that is content loaded -- seriously HOLY ****-AH! Plus what would stop Apple itself or an acquired property from bringing or making its own content deals -- even though Apple claims it wouldn't do -- I call BS on that..

Content is king.. Mark my words -- the value of content will soon start to accelerate -- deals like NFL, NBA, etc etc.. All the players - Apple, Google, Microsoft, etc know all to well that it's the content stupid.. And yea software in my world is considered content.....

Apple TV unlocked could blow the lid off the way content gets distributed -- frankly the dynamics of this delivery will ultimately force Hollywoods hand..

I'm wrong? Tell that to the music industry...

Great post man! Someone who understands how HUGE this really is.

[gijoeinla]

Also -- I firmly believe that the "box" concept will continue to evolve first in Apples ecosystem before the TV unit itself..

I hear that one large telecom company is testing a Apple delivery device -- to see how it can handle "content" streaming and access speeds..

Clearly Apple TV could potentially just "sell" you AT&T, Verizon, or Time Warner services.. What do I mean? That even thru iTunes you could - could potentially "subscribe" to their service without ANY need for any additional equipment. Apple gets the interface and AT&T for example collects the content fees... This scenario makes a lot of sense.. I could totally see AT&T wireless stores selling Apple TV.. They already sell its Uverse service -- software built by Microsoft and Motorola...

----------

Originally Posted by iSunrise

Great post man! Someone who understands how HUGE this really is.

Dude.. Seriously.. Ask yourself this.. Why are players like Amazon AND Netflix now producing original CONTENT? HBOGo going live this week with AirPlay isn't really huge -- but buying HBO direct would be.. Remember HBO has its own content rights deals.. Their programming now is so popular they can easily easily branch out to a subscription based "app" approach and it wouldn't harm their cable / satellite business one bit..

[Michael CM1]

I still wager that this is a better bet to start some revolution instead of an all-in-one TV. If you have a 40" TV with all this fancy stuff built in versus the Apple TV box, you are going to sell at least 10-1 Apple TV boxes. I might think about the Apple-branded TV at some point -- when I need a new TV. I just bought a $1300 TV two years ago and a $500 TV for my bedroom about four years ago. I really hope I don't need a new TV any time soon.

However, I own two of the third-gen Apple TV boxes. Get apps that stream video like iPad apps currently available and people will flock to it.

[iSunrise]

Originally Posted by gijoeinla

Also -- I firmly believe that the "box" concept will continue to evolve first in Apples ecosystem before the TV unit itself..

I hear that one large telecom company is testing a Apple delivery device -- to see how it can handle "content" streaming and access speeds..

Clearly Apple TV could potentially just "sell" you AT&T, Verizon, or Time Warner services.. What do I mean? That even thru iTunes you could - could potentially "subscribe" to their service without ANY need for any additional equipment. Apple gets the interface and AT&T for example collects the content fees... This scenario makes a lot of sense.. I could totally see AT&T wireless stores selling Apple TV.. They already sell its Uverse service -- software built by Microsoft and Motorola...

----------



Dude.. Seriously.. Ask yourself this.. Why are players like Amazon AND Netflix now producing original CONTENT? HBOGo going live this week with AirPlay isn't really huge -- but buying HBO direct would be.. Remember HBO has its own content rights deals.. Their programming now is so popular they can easily easily branch out to a subscription based "app" approach and it wouldn't harm their cable / satellite business one bit..

Yes, there a practically no limits.

You need devices that are a perfect match for the current content from providers AND offer something that offers an opportunity to deliver content to people without the need of a multitude of devices that only confuse them, are expensive to support (different manufacturers, firmware improvements) and and are hard to use for the average consumer.

The TV itself is just hardware, the box is where the magic happens. Apple sold TVs can include the same hardware specs as an Apple TV, but I would consider this a second step, because they need to have a device that creates the opportunity first, after that, you can sell a TV that MAKES USE OF IT, without having to deal with dozens of TV manufacturers and confusing, needless specs alone.

[FirePhantom]

I can't wait for this. I want BBC iPlayer, ITV Player, and 4oD apps. AirPlay-ing these from my iPad just doesn't cut it.

[gijoeinla]

Originally Posted by iSunrise

Yes, there a practically no limits.

You need devices that are a perfect match for the current content from providers AND offer something that offers and opportunity to deliver content to people without the need of a multitude of devices that only confuse them, are expensive to support (different manufacturers, firmware improvements) and and are hard to use for the average consumer.

The TV itself is just hardware, the box is where the magic happens. Apple sold TVs can include the same hardware specs as an Apple TV, but I would consider this a second step, because they need to have a device that creates the opportunity first, after that, you can sell a TV that MAKES USE OF IT, without having to deal with dozens of TV manufacturers and confusing, needless specs alone.

Exactly.. That is so Steve Jobs... I agree the display is secondary... A game changer will be the box device... The display will come after..

[Fresh Pie]

Why haven't they done this sooner? I want an explanation.
Is Tim going to start things off by saying, "I'd just like to share something a little personal about Steve and I. We both had a particularly odd affliction; OCD prevented us from using the words 'Apple TV' and 'third-party apps' in the same sentence. Today, I'd like to announce that I've been cured of my OCD, and we can finally allow the Apple TV to run third-party apps."

[smulji]

Originally Posted by drcreek

You have to be careful with Jim.

He said they wouldn't hold an event for an SDK. He didn't say they wouldn't be holding one at all!

To be technical, he said there would be no Apple TV SDK event this March (Spring).

Still leaves a chance for something later this year.

[Zunjine]

Originally Posted by gnasher729

Dalrymple repudiate what Misek said. Given each of the party's reputations, that means Misek is refuted.

Nope.

[iSunrise]

Originally Posted by gijoeinla

Exactly.. That is so Steve Jobs... I agree the display is secondary... A game changer will be the box device... The display will come after..

What would also have been a game changer and major selling point for the Apple TV with regards to content:

http://www.gaikai.com/

Sony was faster, though. Imagine a native Gaikai cloud games app (without the JAVA component) on the Apple TV to play all games that are available on the PC/consoles. Sony really did a great job buying them as fast as they did. Why Apple didn´t do this is just beyond me. They have so much money that is just laying around. The technology to deliver games to people just blew my mind. It really looked fantastic when I demoed it. And it will get even better with more advanced compression algorithms like HEVC in the future.

[Donka]

The fact this would open some doors and make jailbreaking the ATV3 more likely is probably the biggest boon for me just now. I want XBMC on my ATV3 instead of the older ATV2.

[Westyfield2]

Plex on ATV3 please!

[robertosh]

AppStore for what? Everyone want the AppStore in the TV but.. will the apps be useful? If I look at my ipad apps, most of them won't be useful (necessary) on a TV screen. Safari? It will be a horrible experience.. Only the videos and some games are good for the TV screen and we already have them in the AppleTV and with Airplay Mirroring. I think that has more sense a "GameStore" but we need a physical buttons gamepad.

[Smartass]

So how exactly are people going to use these appstore games/apps? TV's don't have touchscreens.

Personally, i think this is a stupid idea. Xbox smartglass from Microsoft seems like a much better choice than this.

[vox1]

If Sony made a compatible controller or found a way to make the Apple TV work with a PS3 controller, then they could make a Gaikai app. That would certainly be interesting and a good step in the direction of cloud gaming.
Oh the possibilities!

[pittpanthersfan]

Looking forward to apps from networks (NBC, ABC, etc.) to complement their iPhone/iPad counterparts.

[till213]

Originally Posted by FirePhantom

I can't wait for this. I want BBC iPlayer, ITV Player, and 4oD apps. AirPlay-ing these from my iPad just doesn't cut it.

Yay, Synology DS video and DS audio, direct access to my NAS... THAT ALONE would justify to have apps on the Apple TV!

With the words of Xander Cage: "I WANT ALL THIS - IN HERE!"

----------

Originally Posted by robertosh

... Safari? It will be a horrible experience..

An app for DIRECT access to your videos on the NAS (like XBMC, Synology video, you-name-it...)? MY STEVE! That would be ****ING AWESOME!

[Moccasin]

Originally Posted by Smartass

So how exactly are people going to use these appstore games/apps? TV's don't have touchscreens.

Personally, i think this is a stupid idea. Xbox smartglass from Microsoft seems like a much better choice than this.

How about multiplayer iOS games on a TV with iPhone or iPad as the handset? Yes you can already have multiplayer games but there's little social interaction.

Or you could get a couple of barebones iPod Touches as an accessory bundle. Wouldn't need much flash memory, might have just one camera and Bluetooth/wifi.

[LethalWolfe]

Originally Posted by gijoeinla

I'm wrong? Tell that to the music industry...

Totally different situation today than Napster and iTMS of 10-15yrs ago.

Originally Posted by gijoeinla

Clearly Apple TV could potentially just "sell" you AT&T, Verizon, or Time Warner services.. What do I mean? That even thru iTunes you could - could potentially "subscribe" to their service without ANY need for any additional equipment. Apple gets the interface and AT&T for example collects the content fees... This scenario makes a lot of sense.. I could totally see AT&T wireless stores selling Apple TV.. They already sell its Uverse service -- software built by Microsoft and Motorola...

Kinda like what's already happening with Xbox Live?

Dude.. Seriously.. Ask yourself this.. Why are players like Amazon AND Netflix now producing original CONTENT? HBOGo going live this week with AirPlay isn't really huge -- but buying HBO direct would be.. Remember HBO has its own content rights deals.. Their programming now is so popular they can easily easily branch out to a subscription based "app" approach and it wouldn't harm their cable / satellite business one bit..

With Smart TVs and a plethora of other devices that seamlessly connect 'dumb' TVs to streaming services what does Apple bring to the table as middle man? For example, why would HBO make an app exclusive for Apple when HBO would reach a much larger audience by making an app for every device under the sun just like Netflix does? Sure, Apple could drive a dump truck full of money over to HBO and buy their exclusivity but that doesn't seem like a very Apple thing to do.

I think TV has remained in 'hobby' status for so long because the tech and the industry is moving faster than Apple. When TV first came out it provided a unique function (easily getting streaming content onto a living room TV) but now you can't swing a dead cat with hitting an internet ready TV, set-top box, blu-ray player or video game console. Apple could release an actual TV but people don't replace their TVs nearly as often as they replace their phones, tablets, mp3 players or even computers.

I'm not counting Apple out by any means but I think breaking into the living room is going to be their biggest challenge in the last decade though I think they'll do it in typical Apple fashion. They'll continue to let other companies forge ahead, pickup on what works and what doesn't then release a product that integrates better and has a superior UI than the competition even if actually has less functionality overall.

[bbeagle]

Originally Posted by swingerofbirch

Farting apps for my TV?

I smell another revolution!

What we really need are trolls off these forums.

[samcraig]

I've said this several times before. I believe Apple's profit will lie in a companion box to TV and not an actual TV. It makes a lot more sense because then you can have whatever they are going to offer on any and every TV vs a limited set which would no doubt be cost prohibitive to have mass adoption. The TV market is not at all like the phone market.

Further - people don't upgrade their TVs often. Having a box makes it possible to upgrade OS/Firmware but then introducing new hardware with a shorter cycle and people will upgrade.

But if Apple can grow upon the Apple TV product and include Live TV, DVR (either via the device itself, attached hard drive and/or DVR capabilities added to iTunes software), plus other streaming partners + gaming? All you would need is one box and the tv.

[Hardtimes]

Originally Posted by FirePhantom

I can't wait for this. I want BBC iPlayer, ITV Player, and 4oD apps. AirPlay-ing these from my iPad just doesn't cut it.

Came here to say this.

I dont understand just why we dont have them yet..

If they add live TV aswell that would be even better.

[Radio]

Steve figured it out remember?

This was before Siri so stop thinking that ho will help

[Mr-Kerrse]

I can see Firecore releasing a legit app quite easily for their media player but whether apple would want a media player that plays any content available i am not so sure, the same going for Plex.

They have fallen way behind the norm though as my LG TV set has Plex on it & Iplayer, love film, netflix etc etc

Although funny enough I still actually use my apple TV because i like the way Firecores media player works compared to Plex & i can run it easily straight from my back up hard drive. I do also still access Netflix from my atv as well as i prefer the layout.