Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 12, 2012, 01:31 PM   #226
Petraeus
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
I will not buy this and will recommend to my friends they not buy it, because knowing apple, you won't be able to watch your own dvd collection without purchasing it from the itunes store or some other walled-garden sillyness that is typical of apple.


Knowing apple it won't even have hdmi in, because who conforms to silly standards anyways? Being fabulous and unique should satisfy the sheeps.

Want to play a tv show obtained from another source? Nope, buy it (or rent) from itunes or no tv for u!
Petraeus is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2012, 02:25 PM   #227
topmounter
macrumors 68000
 
topmounter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: FEMA Region VIII
Quote:
Originally Posted by scat999999 View Post
Considering Apple has more CASH than the US Government does, I'm not sure I see that as a stumbling block. As I said above, they'd just be another content provider at that point.
As sad as it is to say, that's not saying much.

Satellite television networks alone (broadcast network retrans fees and advertising not included) collected $25B from the cable and satellite providers and $22.3B in advertising revenue during 2010. And on average those numbers increase 9% annually. That's $47.3B in 2010, $51.5B in 2011 and $56B in 2012, etc., etc. ad infinitum or at least until the drones get tired of Honey Boo Boo, NCIS: Panacea, Dancing with the Tards, etc.

Speaking in oversimplified, gross generalizations, that means Apple would have to negotiate with every network and write a seriously big check each year to replace or offset the lost programming AND advertising revenue that each network would lose by nullifying their existing programming contracts with cable and satellite providers... considering the current AppleTV has had limited success, Apple would be doing this on the come and chasing revenues that they may or may not actually be able to generate (in a timely fashion or otherwise). And of course you have to take into account bidding wars for premium content, such as DirecTV's NFL Sunday Ticket (which costs them $1B / year now and it only gets them exclusivity for games not already carried by local affiliates).

As soon as those contracts are nullified (there is a certain level of exclusivity granted to cable and satellite providers in return for confiscatory programming fees, mandatory annual rate increases and compulsory carriage requirements), the cable and satellite providers would start moving high-cost and/or low-viewership channels from the (currently mandatory) basic line-up and into programming tiers (all technically feasible now that cable and satellite have (for the most part) dumped analog video distribution)... which has a detrimental effect on both programming fees (maybe higher per sub, but far lower volume - i.e. I'm dumping Disney, MTV, etc. first chance I get) and advertising revenue (less exposure for new programming to channel surfers and fewer potential eyeballs for advertisers). And of course this doesn't take into account programming agreements outside of the United States.

The numbers might work if Apple could get 10M $1,500 televisions into 10M households and have each household immediately start spending their current television bill ($50-100 per month) in programming every single month... but that doesn't happen until you have the content and based on the AppleTV's performance so far, it would be a HUGE risk (I use my Gen2 AppleTV to watch documentaries on Netflix and an Itunes movie once every few months, so I'm a long way from even $50/month).

Now you could also say that Apple should go out and start buying media companies. Unfortunately a $150B war chest doesn't get you much more than Disney ($88B) and maybe Viacom ($27.5B) and/or CBS ($23B) at their current market caps... and that's not taking into account the inevitable stock run-up that occurs when acquiring a public company... then of course there are the lessons learned (or not) from the AOL Time-Warner merger (among other lackluster major media mergers over the years)... and the anti-trust issues... and you still only have access to a portion of the available media and you're now competing directly with the other media companies who you need to be negotiating with to get their content on to your platform.

I'm not saying that cracking the content nut is impossible, I'm just saying it is a mess and (unlike the music industry a decade ago), the networks have very little incentive to change things much as long as they can continue to have their cake and eat it too (predictable and reliable revenue growth from both programming fees and advertising revenue).

And apparently Apple is not willing to integrate a CableCard Slot into their rumored television product (ala Tivo), for any number of reasons, even though it would give them instant access to every household in the US that can be served by a cable television operator.

It seems even less likely that Apple could stomach a deal with Comcast, Time-Warner, FIOS, etc. to integrate their respective next-gen IP / Cloud video platforms into an "Apple Television" product. Of course Apple was able to stomach a deal with AT&T to get into the cell phone market, so maybe they can do the same with some or all of the incumbent video providers (even though such a deal would be perceived as a huge sell-out by those most desirous of an "Apple Television" that want it to be a way to "stick it to the man", i.e. their cable or satellite provider).
__________________
In33weTrust.com
topmounter is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2012, 02:36 PM   #228
Jaredly
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by gnasher729 View Post
You should re-take your statistics class.

The size of the population doesn't make any difference (except the obvious one that a 1% error for 30 million people is 300,000, while a 1% error for 300 million people is 3 million).

You can use any sample size you want including a sample size of one. Depending on your results and the sample size you can then calculate error bounds. The larger the sample size, the lower the error bounds. With a sample size of one, the error bounds are just very large.

(An example of valid sample size one: You claim that 99.99% of people agree with X. If I ask one random person, and that person disagrees with X, then your claim is very likely wrong, because the chances of that one random person disagreeing if 99.99% agree is only one in ten thousand. On the other hand asking 1000 people and they all agree with X still leaves plenty of room for error).
What you are saying does make total sense to me that you can have any sample size as long as you put in the percent error but I though a common rule was a sample size above 30 is what is accepted while one under 30 can be considered inaccurate?
Jaredly is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 23, 2012, 09:41 PM   #229
W1LLk
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Antonio
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmwebs View Post
So lets break this down.

4k resolution - whilst owning one would be cool, 99% of your content would be lower resolution, with an awful lot of it (mainly older films and tv shows) not even being full hd.

Siri - I cant see how this is really a killer feature for anything. It's voice control hooked into a search api. Nothing fancy really, and the only part that would be of any use on a TV is the voice control part...but even then will still be a lot more hassle than using a remote.

Integrated cable box so a lump of plastic to put cables in? Seriously?

HDMI & Thunderbolt/Lightning/USB
Thunderbolt would have no use on a TV. It's meant for high speed transfers and such. You wouldn't be doing that with a TV. The most you'd use it for is to plug in an external HDD, at which point you eliminate the point of having all this stuff built into the TV instead of as a set top box. Lightning would be pointless, but USB may be useful for some.

a la carte shows or channels controlled via iTunes If this happens, it isnt something that could be done quickly. I'm not talking months, I'm talking YEARS. The licensing restrictions around Tv shows and movies is insane, and theres no way Apple would be granted any sort of global channel license in a flash.

So at this point you're happy to pay $5k for what is essentially exactly the same as the current AppleTV, but with a fancy screen. $5k for a screen. That's the only part of your list that cant be implemented into the existing AppleTV.
Well, that is sort of the idea. Current UHD/4K sets range well over $10K. I would also hope that an Apple designed TV with integrated cable would not require a ton of cables from the wall. I would imagine that a power cable and a Thunderbolt cable carrying content would be adequate. Maybe Cat6 instead? Either way, I suppose you would need some sort of adapter or hidden device to transfer local transmissions from fiber/copper to the data/internet based Apple Solution.

I also can't believe you argued that most content would be a lower resolution. I heard people complain about that when 1080p came out. My player upscaled and guess what, the rest of the industry played catch up (except cable bahahaha).

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by aperry View Post
Of course, more than likely this beautiful product will be locked to a small number of networks. So if you want your HBO then you'll still need that Comcast Cable Box, thereby killing the whole value proposition (seamless, simple experience).
No HBO, no deal.
__________________
I want all the things.
W1LLk is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Analyst Claims Apple Launching 55- and 65-Inch 4K Televisions Late Next Year MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 212 Nov 5, 2013 10:03 AM
Apple Senior Vice Presidents Phil Schiller and Dan Riccio Sell Stock Worth Over $20 Million MacRumors Mac Blog Discussion 58 Aug 19, 2013 02:13 PM
Apple Directors Bill Campbell and Millard Drexler Exercise and Sell Stock Options Worth $13.8 Million MacRumors Mac Blog Discussion 15 Aug 1, 2013 09:01 PM
Foxconn's Push Into Televisions Hints at Preparation for Possible Apple Television MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 83 May 12, 2013 05:16 PM
Kodak to Sell Patent Portfolio to 12-Member Consortium Including Apple for $525 Million MacRumors iOS Blog Discussion 13 Dec 19, 2012 03:53 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:29 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC