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.
Apple Adds CNNGo Channel to Apple TV
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well, nobody forced them to use those gigantic icons. On my 55" TV, each ATV icon is about the size of an iPad. It's like the UI was designed for 16" TV sets.
I think they meant to that instead of auto installing each channel that becomes available, having it available in the app store instead would at least make it our cluttered mess since we have to go download it.
I bought my parents an Apple TV, and while setting it up just thought wow, so many channels to hide. No big deal, hide them and they're gone. But it does make me wish for folders though.
Anyone else notice the wording on the Apple Store web site for AppleTV says "Starting at $69" ?
But the pricing seems to End at $69 too, so looks almost like something else is coming
Nice catch. I have seen less significant things make the front page here!
----------
I don't know if this is a complete list (they're missing today's announcement, as well as the recently announced HBO Now), but it's a decent list.
http://store.apple.com/us/buy-appletv/appletv
Folders are so, so, so...Windows.I think they meant to that instead of auto installing each channel that becomes available, having it available in the app store instead would at least make it our cluttered mess since we have to go download it.
I bought my parents an Apple TV, and while setting it up just thought wow, so many channels to hide. No big deal, hide them and they're gone. But it does make me wish for folders though.
Seriously, there's got to be a better way than using folder structure. I used to have that on some of my early media streamers, like WD, and that format was just a PITA (a well as really ugly).
Because you could decide which of these channels you want and not have them installed as the default on every new Apple TV.
----------
These channels all have unique interfaces for their content. They're apps just like the TV apps on the iPad are apps.
Last edited:
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Television is about the chance for us consumers to SEE the commercials. The shows are just there to bait us into watching. If they could get away with only showing commercials there would be no shows. It's NOT about the shows.
If the business of Cable is dead, say hello to all that cable revenue becoming added broadband bills AND paying someone like Apple to be the new cable middlemen.
I can gripe about commercials right with you, but that's other people- not you or I- paying money toward the artists that make the stuff I do want to watch. Most of those commercials run on those channels "we" aren't watching, but those subsidies are being paid anyway and that money helps make the stuff "we" do want to see. Kill those commercials and that revenue needs to be made up OR the quality and/or breadth & depth of programming will need to fall accordingly.
We frame cable companies as the bad guys but what we think we want doesn't work if:
-we get a huge discount off of what we pay now and
-we kill the subsidy revenues of commercials and
-an Apple gets to inject itself into the mix and take a big cut
unless there is a dramatic drop in quality (can you say youtube-like productions and/or more Kardashian-like reality programming?).
Some of us are getting away with "cord cutting" now because the masses aren't doing it. As soon as the masses move on it, broadband rates will make up for cableTV subscription revenue shortfalls (and where are you going to go for alternative broadband?) AND we'll also be paying an Apple as a new middleman injected into the "new model" chain. It is not a recipe for much cheaper monthly pricing to get everything "we" want commercial-free unless what we want is something like youtube quality stuff or mostly B-movie and in-the-can programming on services like Netflix.
Last edited:
You know...they're really gonna have to add an App Store soon. This is like the default apps on iPhone which you can't delete but will never use. Plus an App Store opens it up to developers and TV networks who want to put their catchup channels on there.
I hate to use a pun but .. Channels are coming to Apple TV fast and furious...
To me IMO these new channels "require" a provider for now..
I highly doubt they will operate this way under a new model coming soon.
It's happening folks!
It's not Apple or Google pushing for change it's the marketplace. Content is king. And either the content companies follow the dollar or they will end up fragmented like the music industry who is still -- still in search of a reasonably stable revenue stream (pun).
Physical or "digital to own" Content sales across the board are down down down. There's so much alternative content out there that people no longer care who they get it from but do care about access and price.
What I think is needed are a few breakthrough "channels," if you will, that are not carried on cable therefore at the mercy of cable and satellite companies.
We already have Netflix and a few popular original shows. One might even say quality original programming. Not on cable!
Unfortunately I have not seen the same quality in a streaming/online news "channel." To me they feel amateurish and that no doubt is because they don't have much operating capital. They seem to be getting better but if someone were to pour some cash into such an endeavor it could mean CNN et al can be ignored--as well as the cable companies they seemingly have a sworn allegiance to. Yes that would mean ads but hopefully not to the extent of cable and maybe even targeted towards the viewers' demographic. I, personally, do not need to see commercials for reverse mortgages or a better denture cream.
Michael
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Of course it will be. Nobody is interested in the dream of commercial-free, al-a-carte at a huge discount over the "as is" model in place now except some of us consumers who think we will somehow get it. Might as well dream of rMBP for $100 and iPads for $50. There's probably as good a chance of Apple taking huge hits to the revenue of what they sell but still magically continuing to produce it all at the same quality.
What everyone beyond us consumers want in some "new model" (al-a-carte or not) is a way to make MORE money next year than they make this year. Our concept of al-a-carte being a path to paying a fraction of what we pay for cable now is in complete opposition to that.
Interesting about your first line. You're right, Apple should at least design the ATV UI to be like their website, especially if the website is simpler.
The second one, that's not gonna happen. The cable companies won't allow Apple to make it that easy for customers to avoid them. They could just pull out of Apple if it's a simple one-button operation to hide all the pay channels.
This is where apple introduces their touch-screen TV. The joys of interactive on-demand television with the ease of (getting off your couch and walking to the TV and) tapping!
Seriously though, I don't understand why the remote app uses the same clunky four-direction control as the TV remote. The interface would be immediately improved if the remote app just mirrored the Apple TV and mimicked an iPhone screen, and you navigated the same way by tapping whatever 'channel' you want.
People are funny. Don't give them anything, they would complain. Give them something, they would also complain. I wish one day Apple just wipe out the whole AppleTV channels, and offer fees for any channels for $ that you like to subscribe only. But I suspect (definitely), even if that happened, people would surely still find something to complain. "Why I have to pay to see any channels? Why I can't see any channels? Why Apple TV has not contents? Bla bla bla..."
You made a grammar mistake. Fox and credible can not be used in the same sentence.
What is the difference between signing in with your Dish account to stream from a Sling adapter vs signing into your Dish/Direct/Comcast account on the ESPN Apple TV app and streaming?