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 Introducing New Apple TV Box in April for Holiday Launch, Still Talking With Time Warner Cable
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
While I agree this could be an intentional strategy for this product. Apple probably has a few content providers ready to go but want more. If they can show the world and create excitement amongst consumers it could push providers on the fence over the edge and they could get a deal signed before the release date.
This could also provide developers ample time to create apps for the release date.
All of this would help ensure product success on day 1.
Or just change habits, and watch free 1080i OTA channels. You get local channels, plus NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX all in HD for $0.00/month. And everything else you can probably do something more useful than watching TV. Like reading a book, being with your family, playing board games with kids, getting some exercise, etc......
You can safely forget about a la carte programming. The licensing of cable and broadcast stations is just too big a hairball for even Apple to untangle. Just rationalizing the cable interface would be a significant advance. We pay those monster cable bills and still we get saddled with a selector box out of the tech stone age. Apple can fix that part.
... What is this discussion with Time Warner like?
Apple -
"Hey Time Warner, wanna be able to deliver your content over the internet to millions of Apple TV owners and be able to completely bypass the balkanized cable provider environment and reach all those viewers easily"
Time Warner -
"Ehhhh, we'll think about it"
Apple -
"Hey Time Warner, wanna be able to deliver your content over the internet to millions of Apple TV owners and be able to completely bypass the balkanized cable provider environment and reach all those viewers easily"
Time Warner -
"Ehhhh, we'll think about it"
Interesting choice of words, I couldn't help but notice you made no mention of ditching the Verizon bill, just the boxes. I think you're right, but for perhaps different reasons.
Bingo.
Not excited if it's tied to a cable subscription.
Looks like they're going the "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" route.
Looks like they're going the "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" route.
It also makes it tougher on their competitors, knowing that the 800 lb. gorilla is about to make an appearance in this market. Apple should drop the veil more often.
----------
... What is this discussion with Time Warner like?
Apple -
"Hey Time Warner, wanna be able to deliver your content over the internet to millions of Apple TV owners and be able to completely bypass the balkanized cable provider environment and reach all those viewers easily"
Time Warner -
"Ehhhh, we'll think about it"
Cute, but TWC owns no content. Every one of the channels they carry is under a license agreement. They couldn't decide to push those channels into markets where others already have the license to carry them, unless they really enjoy getting the poop sued out of them.
If there's an app store, there's an SDK. They would want to give developers enough time to learn the SDK and ensure that there are plenty of apps available at launch.
Wonder if people will still want my ATV 2 when this one comes out. Should I sell it now, when I really want to wait until after I can buy this one?
No big deal unless Apple can negotiate directly with TV channels to offer a la carte programming without a cable subscription. If that happens, I'll buy 2-3 of them and bid farewell to my TV bill forever.
Which is why, I think, the nets are reticent to do this. They're likely facing enormous pressure from cable and satellite providers to keep their content as part of larger bundle that they can repackage. This model has been their bread and butter for 30 years and, without it, they don't have much of a ballgame. The more users clamoring that they're prepared to cut the cord, the more disconcerting the idea appears. For the Broadcast nets, it's not been such a threat, as people have always been able to tune and and tune out for the price of a commercial. It's no surprise, then, that they've been the first to adopt an online distribution model, as it's not tremendously different than they one they've been using.
Be that as it may, many execs still claim that they haven't found a way to properly "monazite" streaming. (I think a more likely explanation is that they haven't found a way to monazite it to their liking.) Producers are also very cognizant of how iTunes reduced the likelihood of consumers downloading entire albums, in favor of tracks a la carte. If people are purchasing shows a la carte, Networks run the risk of becoming irrelevant, as consumers can effectively purchase their content directly from the producers, which is essentially how Netflix has set up their model. So while it's working on some levels, there are other areas of the industry that seem to be standing at the gate. I think it's going to take awhile before everyone is on the same page.
Long lead time for an SDK!
There's one other even longer lead time:
Apple announced the iPhone OS 2.0 in October 2007, release a beta SDK in March 2008, and didn't ship it in a product until July 2008.
Thus the rumored long new Apple TV lead time might be for developers.
There's one other even longer lead time:
Apple announced the iPhone OS 2.0 in October 2007, release a beta SDK in March 2008, and didn't ship it in a product until July 2008.
Thus the rumored long new Apple TV lead time might be for developers.
The people at Bloomberg work for Apple?
I didn't think so. If they did, the whole NDA thing would apply. This is a very plausible rumour based on the evidence but it's still a rumour until Apple says it.
MacRumours would be an amazing website for everyone interested in Apple (and related) rumours if MacRumours stopped mixing up rumour and fact. Not sure if this is ignorance or intended.
If the new Apple TV had decent content in Australia one day I'd certainly get one.
i am sure he was talking about the companies announcing upcoming products months before they actually get released instead of announcing them with a release one week later or so and not macrumors
The idea of unveiling a revamped AppleTV so early before actual release would be for the benefit of developers. If the rumour mill is correct and Apple are adding their controllers to the mix, then this could be very interesting indeed.
It can take the average developer approx 6 to 8 months to churn out a decent game so this would give them time for a large range of diverse apps to be developed.
Wonder if they'll allow the like of third party TV streaming apps to be part of the mix. You can already get a number for the iPad/iPhone.
It can take the average developer approx 6 to 8 months to churn out a decent game so this would give them time for a large range of diverse apps to be developed.
Wonder if they'll allow the like of third party TV streaming apps to be part of the mix. You can already get a number for the iPad/iPhone.
Interestingly, my current set-top cable box is a Motorola, a company that is truly ingrained in the cable business having provided converter boxes to multiple providers for years, if not decades.
Google owned the Motorola set-top box business for a short time up until a year ago, when in their infinite wisdom they sold it to Arris for $2.4 billion. Oops?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericsav...motorola-set-top-box-unit-to-arris-for-2-35b/
Google owned the Motorola set-top box business for a short time up until a year ago, when in their infinite wisdom they sold it to Arris for $2.4 billion. Oops?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericsav...motorola-set-top-box-unit-to-arris-for-2-35b/
That would force networks to produce more quality programming that people want to watch. Networks can still make money if they make the content people want more than the other networks. Kudos to Netflix for proving that if you make quality shows, people will come to you without tricks like bundling.
I gotta say that the TimeWarner Cable channel widget sucks on even a Roku 3. I hope Apple can do better than that with their new box. However, without a DVR option I would still have to keep my TWC cable PVR box. Anyway, I'm still waiting for a new AppleTV that can support a PLEX client app and if it does, I might consider buying it. If not, I pass and I'll stick with my Roku 3.
Don't have cable, satellite, or even antenna to get local channels....5 years and counting still don't miss it a single bit. Not worth getting in to terrible content and ridiculous amount of commercials that drove me to ditch all that. Hopefully apple will release something revolutionary not just evolutionary. If not it's ok I can wait another 5 years.
Very early April Fools
Report does not even say what will be new in the new Apple TV none of the rumors we have been hearing.
AppleTV4,1 = April 1st