You're so right. The bandwidth needed to send a single stream to thousands is far less than sending thousands of unique streams to individuals. Data providers will need to make vast improvements to their infrastructure, which will take many years and be extremely costly.
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 Aims to 'Erase Distinction Between Live and On-Demand' TV Content
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You're so right. The bandwidth needed to send a single stream to thousands is far less than sending thousands of unique streams to individuals. Data providers will need to make vast improvements to their infrastructure, which will take many years and be extremely costly.
Maybe I'll be able to stop using Time Warner's horrible custom firmware (Mystro) after all.
Time Warner, you better not screw up.
Time Warner, you better not screw up.
While I agree with your argument, one wild card is that Apple will control the device and content delivery, unlike now where DVR content is stored locally. Apple can work in concert with cable companies and networks to inject whatever ads they want into the stream. That has the potential to increase the value of ads played back via a DVR. Apple, despite the grumblings of content providers, has shown that they understand the model and will play nice; but want their cut as well.
The real issue is what happens to internet service costs if Apple moves beyond the cable companies and goes directly to the content uproviders and offers up subscription based premium content from say HBO? ISPs, through bandwidth caps, are already gearing up for that fight because they know it is coming, since Apple has no qualms about blowing up a business model to increase their revenue.
netflix already keeps the content inside the ISP's networks, apple does the same thing with akamai. it's not like all the content is streamed from across the country
----------
its like watching trees grow
Cheaper is not my priority. CONVENIENCE and EASE OF USE is.
The movie features of the Apple TV are much nicer than the X-Box, and you can buy iTunes content right inside of the Apple TV, by clicking two buttons.
I'd rather go to Disneyland than Universal Studios. Universal Studios might be cheaper, but it's not the same experience. Same with Apple TV vs XBox. Microsoft is getting better, but not there yet.
I'd love to see Apple pull this off, but somehow I don't think they can (especially in the UK).
Look at how the BBC covered the London 2012 Olympics. On Live TV, on Demand, on iPlayer, on Red Button Interactive services (Sky, FreeView and Cable), in 3D High Definition on the Web and via Mobile. They even had some Super Hi-Vision screenings of some coverage around the UK. Please tell me how Apple can surpass this!
Look at how the BBC covered the London 2012 Olympics. On Live TV, on Demand, on iPlayer, on Red Button Interactive services (Sky, FreeView and Cable), in 3D High Definition on the Web and via Mobile. They even had some Super Hi-Vision screenings of some coverage around the UK. Please tell me how Apple can surpass this!
I don't think is necessarily good-bye. It's like I've always thought - the Apple TV hockey puck will be perfected FIRST, then Apple will make it more convenient and include it WITH a television SECOND.
I know I agree. I think they have more to offer US consumers to be honest.
All I want from an Apple TV would be a beautifully designed TV set (probably not going to happen now), a nice interface which pulls together all on-demand programming. Basically, like BBC's iplayer's site, but it includes all channels.
(I actually don't want to see an end to 'channels'. I think channels provide a kind of editorial oversight. )
So yes, basically like Sky+ menus!! But I'm sure the interface could be improved.
Add FaceTime and that's all I need, I'd be quite happy.
I already linked to this but you basically want YouView. Which you can buy right now
Perhaps they will make both but you don't need the screens. A bit like the displays they sell at the moment.
The set top box could be hidden, like a router, then just communicate with the apple display via airplay. For non-apple displays it would have to be physically plugged in, but at least people have the option.
I admit, this is pretty unlikely, but it could satisfy all camps.
But... If your internet bill goes up by less than the cost of your cable bill, which you'd cut, it's still a win. We have internet cable at $80/month, and satellite at roughly the same. Dropping satellite but getting more control over tv/content via internet, i'd be willing to pay $100/month for internet (assuming it's at least same if not somewhat faster service). $150/month? Technically it's a win, but probably not enough to induce me to switch entirely.
Apple TV
APPLE PLEASE -you can make another few billion dollars by SIMPLY putting a "BOOKMARK" feature in the remote-attached to ads-that either we can look at later or now on our devices like the ipads, phones, desktops.
The advertisers all want us to go further to look at the products right? That's the number one main objective-sales! Help them and CHARGE them-for having the capability and for every click through to their site.
For crap sakes WHY is this SO difficult? Any Apple executives out there with any foresight-hello.
Send me a big check if you do it!
Nick
APPLE PLEASE -you can make another few billion dollars by SIMPLY putting a "BOOKMARK" feature in the remote-attached to ads-that either we can look at later or now on our devices like the ipads, phones, desktops.
The advertisers all want us to go further to look at the products right? That's the number one main objective-sales! Help them and CHARGE them-for having the capability and for every click through to their site.
For crap sakes WHY is this SO difficult? Any Apple executives out there with any foresight-hello.
Send me a big check if you do it!
Nick
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple makes a huge update to the Apple TV Set-Top box and also updates to the Thunderbolt display.
So if you want an Apple TV with your current TV you can do that, but if you want the full package you can get an Apple TV and a 55" Thunderbolt Display.
So if you want an Apple TV with your current TV you can do that, but if you want the full package you can get an Apple TV and a 55" Thunderbolt Display.
Commercials generally last about 8 minutes now. So people feel free to run to the store or go pick something up real quick causing mini-traffic jams. It is an international phenomenon known as "jammin' " .
What networks do you watch where commercials are 8 minutes long??!!!!!
----------
I really don't think the nation en-mass is leaving the house and driving to stores in the small 2-3 minute window of time that a commercial break lasts! This also still doesn't explain how an Apple set top box would prevent such a thing if it did exist!
About 1/4 of USA Public Broadcasting is BBC rebroadcasts. But we do have good programming made in the USA.
The only way for this to really catch on is for it to be available via a completely unlimited bandwidth scenario. Otherwise people will just hit their ISP data caps and be stuck "with no TV" for the rest of the month. ATT only allows 150GB/month. Imagine how quickly you get through that with 3 TVs watching HD content for a month, especially if it is things like kids shows or sports.
I guess what I am saying is Google is already doing what Apple wants to do, but Google has the missing piece in place...the thing that will make or break a service like this is the internet pipe you have going to your home, and Google's Kansas City pilot program solves all of the problems.
I guess what I am saying is Google is already doing what Apple wants to do, but Google has the missing piece in place...the thing that will make or break a service like this is the internet pipe you have going to your home, and Google's Kansas City pilot program solves all of the problems.
