Apple TV Adds Apps for Vevo, Weather Channel, Disney, and Smithsonian Channel

[Menel]

I am thinking the same. Instead of paying $100/month to a cable company to access 500 channels that I don't watch, I would sooner pay, say, $5/month each to subscribe to, I dunno, HBO, Discovery Channel, Food Network, etc. Some channels could command more than others based on their programming demand.

Maybe this is what Steve's big idea was. Everyone could access only and exactly what they want to see, pay for only those channels, and get them streamed directly. Add to that some PVR or on-demand scheduling/streaming, and you've got the perfect way to watch whatever you want, whenever you want.

I've cut the cable.

$8/mo Netflix covers a bunch of random stuff.

I pay for Hulu, for one reason alone. Comedy Central. Colbert and Stewart. $8/mo. Which I can technically get for free from their websites anyway. But Hulu is so damned convenient I still pay.

If I could get HBO for $8. I'd be set. $24/mo TV covered. Might even drop Netflix.

NBC, FOX, CNN, ABC, CW, PBS and others, get about 30 channels and subchannels tuneable over the air out of a dinky hang on the wall hidden behind TV antenna.

 

[Scyanide]

It is open to developers via AirPlay.

Image

Don't know why one would want an increase in cost associated with built-in processing power when that processing power is in their iPhone/iPad/iPad Mini already.

You know, I've shown this same image to SOOOOOOO many Android/Microsoft fanboys claiming they can do such things and that iOS can't. We've had the ability for a long time now but Apple doesn't really push it or market it so we don't hear about it often. Nor do we see many games that take advantage of it.

I've got a few Microsoft fanboy friends that make a big deal out of SmartGlass saying it was going to change everything and how innovative it was. When I showed them what AirPlay is capable of with gaming and told them how not many people give a crap about it. They were like "Oh..."

AirPlay could do this for years but we now have WiiU, Microsoft SmartGlass, and Sony's PS Vita paired with PS3/4 which all do this. Maybe it'll kick off better for actual gaming consoles.

It is fun to show that Apple had it well before all these for those people that seem to think that having something out first makes it better for some reason.

 

[juanmanas]

1. Not a fact Apple is actively working on a watch right now
2. First to market isn't the same as best
3. They confirmed they are showing it on the 4th. Not the same as releasing it, which could be ages away

It's a fact

 

[SandboxGeneral]

Still no TWIT (twit.tv) channel? I'd love to be able to watch TWIT live without having to AirPlay from my iPad...

That would be nice! I don't think, though, that Leo has tried to get on there yet. At least, that I've heard.

I just download the podcasts to iTunes on the Mac and play them through the Apple TV over the network.

 

[alent1234]

What doesn't make sense to me is that if we have to have cable in order to view some of this content, like the new Disney Channels and HBO, then why would I even bother watching it through the AppleTV over just watching it directly on my TV through the cable box. We're adding an unnecessary middle-man.

Now, if this is all paving the way for allowing us to subscribe to these channels without having to buy cable tv then I'm all for this. I've been saying for years I'd be more than happy to give HBO 20-30 dollars a month to be able to stream their content online. I do watch enough of their content that I can easily justify the cost being 20-30.

via the apple TV is on demand
the problem with cable is not the price, but the delivery. shows play at specific times and if aren't there to watch them, you pay for nothing. DVR's cost money. apple TV and streaming via IP is better than DVR and cheaper

 

[Stack Overflow]

Does the Disney XD channel consist of Miley Cyrus twerking?

No, that would be CNN.

 

[TsMkLg068426]

Apple tell Charter Communications to activate HBO Go for Apple TV already.

 

[juanmanas]

No Disney in the UK which is a bit rubbish!

The only reason i pay for Sky is because of the Disney channel for my 2 year old boy!

Any idea when this will come to UK ATV?

Ask Disney

 

[HarryAinslie]

Ask Disney

Thought i'd ask you instead? Any idea??

 

[jeffbax]

I am thinking the same. Instead of paying $100/month to a cable company to access 500 channels that I don't watch, I would sooner pay, say, $5/month each to subscribe to, I dunno, HBO, Discovery Channel, Food Network, etc. Some channels could command more than others based on their programming demand.

Maybe this is what Steve's big idea was. Everyone could access only and exactly what they want to see, pay for only those channels, and get them streamed directly. Add to that some PVR or on-demand scheduling/streaming, and you've got the perfect way to watch whatever you want, whenever you want.

If you knew how Cable works, you'd realize this is unlikely. ESPN gets $4-5 per cable subscriber, regardless of whether they actually watch the channel. They aren't going to rush to give you a-la-carte when it means they're now not getting paid for every subscriber on cable and only $5 for you. They'd more likely charge you $10-15 by itself, probably even higher for HBO, so it may come down to paying $50+ for 10 channels without the bundling but you're not going to get the savings you want very easily.

Sad reality, but that's how the Cable market works. HBO (owned by Time Warner Cable) is never going to sell itself like Netflix if it means it's parent company stands to lose millions of far more lucrative cable subscribers and thus make less money in the end.

 

[juanmanas]

And STILL no Time Warner

Tim Cook needs to be fired

Not just for letting Roku beat them to it, but because of the big **** up that he allowed to happen today. Moron let Samsung beat them to the market with a SmartWatch.

He's got to go for his incompetence. He is killing Apple!

Is there any extension for Safari that automatically removes stupid comments?

 

[D.T.]

The only remaining services the Apple TV needs are Amazon Prime Instant Video and maybe an app store.

I don't see AP headed to ATV anytime soon, but I totally agree (our two main TVs at least have a native AP, though I'm sure I'd much prefer the ATV experience).

How about we work on apps that don't require a g-damn cable subscription! These apps are obviously useless to those who have cut the cord, but 9 times out of 10 they also leave Dish and DirecTV subscribers in the cold. Grr...

Yep, DTV subber too, and when I saw the Disney thing I got excited, thinking a $74 refurb in my little girls playroom would be terrific for Netflix Kids and now Disney content ... but no luck.

or Cinemax

I think she's usually on DirecTV channel 598 ...

 

[scapegoat81]

The way its set up right now, its almost as if Apple is encouraging people to use the sign in credentials from their friends and family who have cable subscriptions. . . I'm wondering when the crack down will begin.

The crack down hopefully will begin when they roll out their subscription based tv/video service like Amazon Prime/Hulu/Netflix.

At least I hope so, or I won't have any real viewing content

 

[Scyanide]

via the apple TV is on demand
the problem with cable is not the price, but the delivery. shows play at specific times and if aren't there to watch them, you pay for nothing. DVR's cost money. apple TV and streaming via IP is better than DVR and cheaper

That is true I guess. We can navigate and watch the show on our own time.

If a cable provider would allow us to pick and choose single networks and build our own package. I'd be more willing to get cable but as long as they continue to shovel 100 channels for every 1 I want then I won't touch it.

 

[herbapou]

It is open to developers via AirPlay.

Image

Don't know why one would want an increase in cost associated with built-in processing power when that processing power is in their iPhone/iPad/iPad Mini already.

Gaming over airplay is garbage, its glitches too much. For serious gaming we need to run the apps on the Apple TV. Until then its a major fail. On top of that ipads are too heavy to play like that for a long period of time.

I am not losing hope, Apple did introduced gaming controls API's at the WWDC.

 

[paul4339]

... Moron let Samsung beat them to the market with a SmartWatch.

He's got to go for his incompetence. He is killing Apple!

As if being first matters that much, would you want to have product released pre-maturely (ala Apple Maps)? Reminds me of CES 2010 where all those companies released demo tablets to come out before iPad ... and then a couple months later iPad 'flummoxes' them all, to the point where they cancel their products.

.

 

[840quadra]

It is open to developers via AirPlay.

Image

Don't know why one would want an increase in cost associated with built-in processing power when that processing power is in their iPhone/iPad/iPad Mini already.

Not looking for XBox or Playstayion caliber software on these things.

It has processing power already that could be used for simple applications. Using onboard power would reduce the chance for lag, or reduction in video quality due to WIFI or other wireless interference.

 

[TsMkLg068426]

One could only wonder why we still do nto get HBO Go on Apple TV from Charter Communications.

 

[CrickettGrrrl]

Cool! The Smithsonian channel is terrific! Just showed my parents how to navigate to it, and they think it's cool, but the TV is still rather suspect to them...

 

[charlituna]

If I recall Rio beat Apple to market with an MP3 player. Palm beat Apple to market with a smartphone. Pandora beat Apple to market with a customizable Internet radio station (still has them beat for the moment).

Remember all those folks that announced their tablet before Apple. None of which went on sale for a good six months after that. A few of which never did once they saw the sales of the first iPad.

Samsung etc could learn from Apple. Hold saying anything until it is really ready to go to the market and at the least you can mold your PR to highlight your strengths over Apple's stuff because you will know the facts not the rumors.

 

[gmanist1000]

Waiting for the update where I can put 90% of the apps I don't use in a folder.

 

[foodog]

The only remaining services the Apple TV needs are Amazon Prime Instant Video and maybe an app store.

Amazon prime, you're kidding right? Next maybe the Roku will stream video from iTunes

 

[Sharkus]

Perhaps already asked, so forgive the dupe, but is this a new software update for the device, or is it just Apple pushing a new channel out there to be picked up?

 

[springsup]

It is open to developers via AirPlay.

Image

Don't know why one would want an increase in cost associated with built-in processing power when that processing power is in their iPhone/iPad/iPad Mini already.

There shouldn't be any cost increase; the AppleTV already uses the same chips as the other iOS devices (since it also runs iOS).

In fact, the AppleTV can get away with a slower chip because even a 1080p TV has much less pixels to compute than an iPad.

 

[2010mini]

Wonderful!

Finally Apple is paying attention to their "hobby"

To those complaining about subscription based apps. Apple has NO control over that. The content providers have all the power and will fight to their death to keep tv the way it is.

Apple is being smart and working with them instead of against.