Apple in Talks With Discovery and Viacom Over Streaming TV Service

[MacRumors]

Discovery and Viacom are in discussions with Apple to be included in its rumored streaming TV service, reports The Wall Street Journal. The partnerships could see mid-tier channels such as Discovery Channel, Animal Planet, TLC, MTV, Comedy Central and Nickelodeon available through the subscription-based service on devices including the iPhone, iPad and Apple TV.

The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this week that Apple is planning to launch a streaming TV service anchored by American networks ABC, CBS and Fox. The rumored service would offer a lightweight package of about 25 channels for between $30 to $40 per month. Apple is expected to announce the service at WWDC in June ahead of a September launch, according to the report.

Rumors of Apple working on a streaming TV service have circulated since at least 2009, when it was reported that CBS and Walt Disney were considering participating in the web-based service. Later reports indicated that Apple had ambitious plans to launch the service in the second half of 2012, but those plans have yet to materialize nearly three years later, likely due to roadblocks with content providers.

Article Link: Apple in Talks With Discovery and Viacom Over Streaming TV Service

 

[Popeye206]

All good... bring them all on!

 

[iapplelove]

Is this what SJ had in mind when he said he cracked the TV category ? Obviously Apple isn't about to start manufacturing TVs but perhaps a TV channel streaming service that cuts out the cable and sat companies and streams directly from the networks themselves ?

I like what's ahead.

 

[lincolntran]

I'll gladly sign up for Apple service so that I can get rid of those fugly stupid decades old UI from those cable/disk companies. It makes me frustrated every time I have to navigate.

 

[Tankmaze]

available through the subscription-based service on devices including the iPhone, iPad and Apple TV.

This is good, and also very interesting. not sure about the pricing though.

 

[FloatingBones]

Will these content providers demand that there be advertisements and that the advertisements can't be fast forwarded? If not, I don't see how the content providers will support this agreement. If playing the ads is mandatory, I don't see how the service will gain widespread acceptance. Apple doesn't allow crapware to be delivered on their computers; why should they allow their streaming services to deliver crappy ads to their customers that must be played?

If playing ads is mandatory on Apple's software, this sounds like a strong argument for jailbroken software.

 

[Waxhead138]

Is this what SJ had in mind when he said he cracked the TV category ? Obviously Apple isn't about to start manufacturing TVs but perhaps a TV channel streaming service that cuts out the cable and sat companies and streams directly from the networks themselves ?

I like what's ahead.

I think he had something *like this* in mind. It's either not materializing the way he would have liked....or is taking much longer to do so.

I had once said to myself that once either HBO or ESPN became the first to offer direct to consumer, the rest would fall like dominoes. Still think ultimately that will happen, but the providers are going to fight it every step of the way. Just wish it would happen faster.

 

[Worf]

People will say this is a useless service without a la carte style ordering, but I disagree. If this comes for $30 a month, with no contract, and an iTV app that syncs with my iPhone, iPad and MBA, I would jump on this in a heartbeat. I suspect many others would do so as well. If they can also improve Apple TV's UI and get better integration with Netflix and HBO Go, that'd be awesome.

 

[iPad Air]

This looks like a great start to the future of TV as we know it. Cable and Satellite box's don't provide an as easy-to-use experience as Apple TV.

 

[keifer.street]

Same Old Bundle BS - You Pay For What You Don't Watch

How is this rumored streaming Apple service (or others like Sling TV) any different from any other cable company or business models of content providers of the past? "But, but, it's a smaller bundle, so it's cheaper!"

So what?! I ask again, how is this model any different than the past? I thought we were on the eve of an industry revolution, not evolution or a re-hashing of the same thing that consumers clearly DON'T want. Smaller bundles is just more of the same, with more limited networks/content providers.

It's the same 'bundle' model cable companies have had for years that they're holding onto with their cold, dead, out of touch, greedy fingers.
I want ala carte channel subscriptions of live/streaming TV, dammit! Let the free market decide which channels are worth paying for! Stop forcing us to pay for channels that nobody wants to watch! It's madness! All TV customers have been begging... literally BEGGING for this for YEARS.

I will only call it a revolution when I get what I want:
1) I want to pay only for what I actually watch
2) I want to be able to watch whatever I want (meaning I can choose from a wide plethora of content providers), not limited to a select few networks
3) I want to watch whenever I want - I want to be able stream it live or stream it later after it airs. I don't want to have to organize my schedule around what show airs at whatever time. That's just stupid. I also don't want to have to remember to record it on my DVR or worry about running out of hard drive space. That's also stupid. Streaming is the way of the future, baby!
4) I want to be able to watch it on any device

In summary, all networks need to be streamable at any time from any device and no more bundling BS.

Now that would be a game-changer. We'd no longer be stuck in 1970.

 

[Elbon]

$30 - $40 per month still seems pretty steep to me. I currently have Netflix (which is $8/month) and TiVo (which costs me nothing since I bought the "lifetime" subscription up front and have long-since broken even on that). So I'd struggle to justify paying up to 5 times as much for content that I don't really need. That's why I "cut the cord" to begin with. If this rumored service is also ad-driven, there's even less incentive to subscribe to it.

 

[TallManNY]

At this price point I see this as being sold as a better viewing experience NOT a cheaper viewing experience. First you will still need unlimited broadband from your cable provider. So no cord cutting there. Second this won't have most live sporting events (no local sports team channel, no ESPN, no TNT), so not a solution for many.

But this might have reduced ads as compared to regular TV. That and the streaming of any shows anytime you want would be the selling point.

 

[jscooper22]

Really annoyed that I got myself stuck in a Verizon contract 'til fall, 2016.

Come to think of it, this is major expansion of separating content from the provider (the whole "cut the cord" thing). Provided Apple doesn't try to lock people in with contracts, or start selling "packages", in which case they'd become just another cable company, this could seriously change the passive entertainment landscape.

 

[Boatboy24]

Really annoyed that I got myself stuck in a Verizon contract 'til fall, 2016.

I obviously don't have a copy of the contract you signed. But in most cases, you just have to have 'service', and you are not required to maintain a certain level of that service. So you may be able to drop down to the absolute, bare minimum with Verizon and still go with if that's a desirable option. Then just drop Verizon altogether when your contract is up.

 

[samcraig]

Will these be live streaming (only) or offer all of their shows "on demand" - because without the ability to use the Apple TV as a DVR, live programming (only) is likely not worth the bundle price.

 

[Four oF NINE]

One way or another, with this, with Sling, and with others not yet on the horizon.. the old cable/satellite stranglehold paradigm is coming down.

 

[xmichaelp]

That's good. Stuff like Comedy Central and Nickolodeon would get a lot of people on board.

They need NBC though for this to be a huge deal.

 

[Mac Fly (film)]

How is this rumored streaming Apple service (or others like Sling TV) any different from any other cable company or business models of content providers of the past? "But, but, it's a smaller bundle, so it's cheaper!"

So what?! I ask again, how is this model any different than the past?

Didn't you just answer your own question? Or at least try to? That and who would you rather deal with Apple or some ass-wipe cable provider? Also, isn't this IPTV where you never have to record shows and can hand pick any previous episode of a show even from years ago and just begin streaming? That's a lot different. Besides, having less of the crap channels is most definitely a feature and especially considering you likely saving money to boot. And if recent history is any indication you'll have no contact either; just subscribe or unsubscribe at any time. All of which ends in a situation that's very different. And you're dealing with Apple software and an impossibly tiny little box FFS! Thank God for that you'll be saying.

 

[whawhat]

Understand nothing is finalized until it's announced but $30-$40/month for limited channels doesn't excite me at all. Paying about $100/month for internet and cable now (internet alone is $70) so if I decide to go w. just internet w. TWC and then apple service they want us to pay about the same for a lot less channels? - granted, I don't watch all the channels but I do watch a ton of soccer and none of those channels will be available on apple.

I always expected apple to start offering apps/games/etc. on apple tv. That would be something to get excited about.

 

[extricated]

A bundle of a few networks, many of which I'm not interested in, for $30-$40 is exactly why I dropped cable over 12 years ago.
This does sound promising, but I'm more a fan of the a la carte model - or something like it. Hoping for good things ...

 

[freediverx]

This is great and all, but it won't amount to much until Apple revamps Apple TV to eliminate the current sluggish interface and replace it with one that lets users more easily access the programming they want.

 

[Small White Car]

Stop forcing us to pay for channels that nobody wants to watch! It's madness! All TV customers have been begging... literally BEGGING for this for YEARS.

I will only call it a revolution when I get what I want:
1) I want to pay only for what I actually watch
2) I want to be able to watch whatever I want (meaning I can choose from a wide plethora of content providers), not limited to a select few networks
3) I want to watch whenever I want - I want to be able stream it live or stream it later after it airs. I don't want to have to organize my schedule around what show airs at whatever time. That's just stupid. I also don't want to have to remember to record it on my DVR or worry about running out of hard drive space. That's also stupid. Streaming is the way of the future, baby!
4) I want to be able to watch it on any device

How many current TV series do you buy on iTunes?

I buy some. Not many, but some. My point is, are you putting your money where your mouth is and SHOWING these corporations what you want or are you just ranting for something that you have no intention of ever buying even if they start doing it for all shows instead of a select few?

Because outside of the selection available, buying shows on iTunes fulfills all of your requests right now.

 

[carjakester]

Apple should be in talks with Apple to make a new Apple TV!

 

[Aluminum213]

Internet bill + Apple TV that will never have nbc or its affiliates bill


Might as well pay for cable

 

[freediverx]

A bundle of a few networks, many of which I'm not interested in, for $30-$40 is exactly why I dropped cable over 12 years ago.
This does sound promising, but I'm more a fan of the a la carte model - or something like it. Hoping for good things ...

Agreed. Most of these channels contain nothing but garbage, which is a key reason why people are watching less television than ever. Discovery Channel, Animal Planet, TLC, and MTV are but a shadow of what they used to be, now containing little more than crap reality shows about rednecks, faux celebrities, ghost hunters, and alien conspiracy nutjobs. Comedy Central might have been nice years ago, but with the departure of Steven Colbert and John Stewart, there won't be much worth watching there.

So what's next for Apple TV... QVC and the Trinity Broadcasting Network?

HBO is the single worthwhile addition.