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.
A&E, History Channel, and Lifetime Channels Added to Apple TV
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
To be fair, Amazon has been on iOS for quite a while now, and is quite happy allowing Airplay. I suspect Apple is more likely the one stopping Amazon Prime on AppleTV than the other way around.
In our household we rarely watch Amazon Prime because of this. It certainly does "hurt" Amazon more than Apple - only if there is something we really want to watch do we airplay from the Mac Mini to the TV. On the other hand, it doesn't really hurt Amazon in the Prime subscription anyway since we put about $0 value on the video portion and get more than $100/year out of the shipping perks (my wife coaches a team and we order uniforms and such through Amazon which in a single month pretty much pays for the Prime subscription). But, if Amazon wanted Prime Video to be a "lock in", or more likely to goad people into paying for individual non-Prime streams (which I say is more likely since they insist on mixing non-Prime content in with Prime content throughout the interface), they aren't getting anything from it.
So, overall, I suspect Amazon loses a lot more with the current state of affairs than Apple does. However, maybe Apple will start seeing their lack of Amazon Prime support as driving would-be customers to Roku and Amazon Fire, which will change the calculus. At which point, IMHO, Amazon will suddenly be another app on the AppleTV alongside Netflix and Hulu.
----------
Okay, it's ugly, but seriously if you have more than just one TV with one AppleTV connected to it the Harmony remote line will save your sanity.
That said, I think it is time for a new revolution in entertainment control, which starts with a not-single-purpose device we all already own and have at our fingertips.
I know this comment will sound strange and not very practical for all.
Most of the channels that have been added recently only allow you to view recent episodes.
If Apple adds a way to cloud record the content for later this would be a good work around to not having a cable or satellite subscription.
Most of the channels that have been added recently only allow you to view recent episodes.
If Apple adds a way to cloud record the content for later this would be a good work around to not having a cable or satellite subscription.
More features exclusive to the USA! And that's why so many Aussies pirate so much and use the Apple TV purely as an airplay hub!
Apple really needs to work on rolling out international features sooner. Google does a great job at this... Pity I can't stand android.
Apple really needs to work on rolling out international features sooner. Google does a great job at this... Pity I can't stand android.
Well this new channels are useless they only work with 3 cable companies what a ****ing waste of space on Apple TV can not access them like HBO Go. Apple how about adding something more useful like Amazon Prime,other free streaming services or how about starting your own streaming service.
Sorry I was excited they added something new but it is useless
Sorry I was excited they added something new but it is useless
Why? Seems like a deal with Apple would provide them with more leverage, not less.
And we've already established that Apple's standard 30% cut would provide them with more revenue per subscriber.
Why would HBO limit themselves to only Apple? It makes the most sense for HBO to be on as many devices as possible (which is what they are already doing with HBO GO). I mean, the
TV install base is w-a-y smaller than the cable install base and still only around half the size of the current HBO subscriber base. Even the number of cord cutters is still very small and I don't see HBO rocking the boat until the cord cutters grow drastically in number.If I already subscribe to cable and want HBO why would pay for HBO GO separately when if I just add HBO to my cable package I get HBO GO for free? I would be surprised if HBO was priced higher than HBO GO.
HBO and cable/sat providers are currently business partners. If HBO started dealing direct to consumers then HBO becomes a direct competitor to cable/sat providers. How is going from business partner to direct competitor *not* disruptive?
And we haven't even touched on who owns the Internet pipes that HBO needs in order to stream content direct to customers. Yeah, if HBO goes direct to consumer I see a lot of disruption in their streaming service until they pay up like Netflix did.
I'm watching a full episode of something on history channel and it didn't make me log in to cable provider (I don't have cable.)
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Love these kinds of posts. We sling the increasingly overused word "strawman" and then only make points that supports a biased view, ignoring key realities of the situation. The seemingly logical suggestions (#1-3) you make require some kind of great force to be realized. Where does that force come from?
However, I'll take a leap here that you know what you're talking about it. Perhaps then you can explain the motivation and implementation of this "new model" to me.
Why do the cable companies "middlemen" that are also the broadband pipe owners allow an Apple to just take their cable TV subscription revenue and not de-motivate the shift by raising broadband rates to make up the difference?
Even if they could NOT de-motivate the shift, why don't they raise broadband rates to make up the difference? If they do so- and they will- and Apple gets to put their 30% on top, who takes the hit so that we can pay 5% or 10% of what we consumers pay now?
If that's the Studios taking the hit- because there's no one else left- why do they keep making the shows & movies? How do they keep making the shows & movies? What motivates them to also make the new shows that have potential to be our future favorites?
Lastly, why do the other players in this chain choose to embrace this new model? How do the Studios make more money with this? How do the cable or broadband middlemen make more money with this? How does Apple make a lot of money with this? And in all of them making MORE money- which is almost always the driver of such a big change from the status quo- how then do we (the last link in the chain) get to pay so much less??
No one ever addresses these questions. Instead:
- "we" just pretend that broadband rates are fixed for unlimited* data.
- "we" just assume that kicking out a Comcast but plugging in an Apple as the new middleman will somehow result in this HUGE savings for us consumers.
- "we" just assume that a Comcast will just roll over and let an Apple take that business when an Apple's replacement solution is ENTIRELY dependent on the connection of us consumers through a Comcast's pipes to Apple's iCloud.
- "we" just imagine that the Studios can sell us their stuff direct for much lower costs so we can have our much lower monthly costs AND Apple can get theirs but the quality, breadth & depth of the old and new "good" shows "we" want to watch can keep on coming.
I'll accept that you know more about all this than I do. Explain it to me. Answer the questions so that us "strawmen" can understand.
Your last point- the one where consumers quit watching (and paying) for television is the ONE that would drive down the costs of content. If the masses would choose to quit paying, the whole model would adjust down. But, I think that's the same as assuming the masses will quit cellular service to get cellular service rates way down- an easy thing to write but a hard thing to realize. "We" gripe and gripe and gripe about costs of everything (except whatever Apple wants for their stuff) but then we pay up. Cable knows this. The Studios know this. Apple is interested because it wants to bite into that lucrative monthly cash. I don't see any of them interested in turning $100/month into $5 or $10/month.
Last edited:
'ya gotta be tied to a cable company. Who gives a crap about these new channels? I use Apple TV to be free of cable.
All fair points...which perhaps begs the question...is TV really broken? Maybe not. The $132/month I give Verizon FiOS for 50MB/s internet, HD Extreme package (290+ channels, 75 HD...including NFL Network, NatGeo, and others), and home phone doesn't seem like such a bad deal now that I think about it.
So if the content delivery isn't broken, I do think we all agree the UI of these cable boxes is. The complicated remotes, button input lag, and uninspired menu systems could use help from a real software company. Not sure if that's Apple, but that would be a game changer in it's own right. Changing the way we navigate content and find what we need.
All these basic cable channels that have been added require a basic cable subscription. It seems to me that later this year, you'll be able to buy a basic cable subscription from.. Apple! Bingo, Apple becomes your cable provider. A new, more sophisticated Apple TV box will follow, which runs apps and has Siri control.I bet each of these cable channels that were added are already signed to this deal.
In this thread: people that don't understand how the cable industry works, and cry that Apple is hasn't done anything to take the cable middleman out.
Put simply: despite it's growing current trend, the number of cord cutters still pales in comparison to the number of pay TV subscribers. Both the cable companies and networks know this. If networks offer their services directly to people without the need for the cable companies, they run the risk of the cable companies dropping their channels all together. Not even Apple has the money to mitigate the loss this would create on any kind of large, sustainable scale.
The only way a change is going to take place is by the networks seeing that there is more money in dealing with it's customers directly as opposed to dealing with the cable companies. Right now, that just isn't the case.
Put simply: despite it's growing current trend, the number of cord cutters still pales in comparison to the number of pay TV subscribers. Both the cable companies and networks know this. If networks offer their services directly to people without the need for the cable companies, they run the risk of the cable companies dropping their channels all together. Not even Apple has the money to mitigate the loss this would create on any kind of large, sustainable scale.
The only way a change is going to take place is by the networks seeing that there is more money in dealing with it's customers directly as opposed to dealing with the cable companies. Right now, that just isn't the case.
Definitely something we can all agree with. Every single cable/satellite provider has the same general UI, and they are all objectively terrible. A new way to navigate would be a huge step.
Apple TV definitely is not that step though
Definitely something we can all agree with. Every single cable/satellite provider has the same general UI, and they are all objectively terrible. A new way to navigate would be a huge step.
Apple TV definitely is not that step though
I actually think Uverse and FiOS are pretty solid UIs. And TiVo is flat out great.
Because with the current model they make way much more.
Disney currently get $5 per cable subscriber for ESPN whether they watch it or not! This is besides the other revenue they get just from that channel.
In your model, disney only gets money from who subscribes. The currently model...they get paid just for you signing up for paid tv.
Why would content owners entertain making less?
Actually, i really like the apple remote. Sorry.
It does what it needs to with only a few buttons, and it works better than all the other remotes in my lineup.
And this is what I hate about the current system. The other thing is the greed of the cable companies. Try offering real entertainment, not infomercials and junk reality shows.
I remember when the scifi channel had scifi, MTV had music videos etc.
There is no wonder why Netflix is doing so well.
Great price for shows that people want to watch.
I'm tired of paying for 200 channels to be able to get the three channels I actually watch.
If the satellite and cable companies were smart they would just give people what they want before its to late.
If Apple gets a few more channels, the 3 I watch, and adds the rumored cloud recorder then I can cancel my satellite subscription and won't have to pay dish anymore.
Last edited:
If people stopped watching junk shows companies would stop making junk shows. The most watched program in the history of Animal Planet was a fake documentary on Mermaids. Duck Dynasty is one of the most watch shows in the history of cable TV. It's horrible but there's tons of money to be made from it. If they ratings aren't good enough the show goes away, it's as simple as that.
As for MTV and music videos...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ysyZF-DZFY
Eheemm..
So it's here , it's free, but only can be accessed by a handful of us cable subscribers. I have History channel on my cable tv in Serbia. How would I access History channel from ATV ?
The most watched show on my Apple TV is: "Not Available in Your Region"
So it's here , it's free, but only can be accessed by a handful of us cable subscribers. I have History channel on my cable tv in Serbia. How would I access History channel from ATV ?
The most watched show on my Apple TV is: "Not Available in Your Region"
FiOS UI looks ok, but navigating with a remote is tedious. A Bluetooth keyboard/Magic Trackpad type combo would be better as an input device...I think
They wouldn't. Apple TV was just what we were discussing.
It makes the most sense for HBO to be on as many devices as possible (which is what they are already doing with HBO GO). I mean, the
Again, why not. Where is the risk? Same price for consumers. More profit.
Why do you keep making up obstacles? No one said anything about paying for HBO GO separately. Pay once to either cable or Apple or whoever. Play anywhere. Of course, you do lose access to the cable channels if you don't pay through cable.
Again, it is disruptive to the cable industry. How is that a problem for HBO? Again, they would have more leverage when they are not dealing with local monopolies.
That's true. Until we either get net neutrality laws or more competition in internet delivery.
Don't be sorry (as if you really were
). Everyone has an opinion. I wish they would add one or two "favorites" buttons that you could customize for quick access to certain stations.