Sidebar Sidebar
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

osx11 said:
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......
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, most content on network TV is garbage. Although a lot of cable has become a wasteland of brainless content (I'm looking at you TLC and "history" channel), there is still good to be found on Science Channel, Discovery, Nat Geo, Military Channel, HBO/Showtime premium content, etc.
 
ipedro said:
This suggests Apple is trying to replicate the AT&T strategy that worked so well to kick off the iPhone. Offer exclusivity of the new AppleTV to Time Warner customers in exchange for Apple getting to sell iTunes movies/tv shows while TimeWarner gets subscriptions for live TV and Internet service.
Click to expand...

That strategy won't work though as cable customers are typically already divided up by geography. TWC is the only cable provider in my area where as if you go to a different part of town it's Comcast. Customers can't switch from Comcast to TWC like they can from Verizon to AT&T.

Maybe Apple is trying to convince TWC to offer a streaming-only cableTV service that would run through the new :apple:TV. That would get around the geographic boundaries, but with a lack Net Neutrality I'm sure people with Comcast or Charter as their ISP would see their streaming TWC service throttled just like Netflix is getting throttled now.
 
apple_iBoy said:
Interesting. It seems that Comcast is buying Time Warner.

I wonder how this shakes things up?
Click to expand...

That is interesting. Wonder if Comcast knew apple had a plan that would have knocked them out so they decided to buy twc before apple got a chance.
 
Yeah, this article was the first thing I thought of when I saw the Comcast news. I'm sure this sets things back a bit. Comcast isn't one for consumer friendly initiatives.
 
I saw this article and got really excited. Just then a New York Times push notification showed up on my phone announcing that Comcast was buying TW. Couldn't I have had a solid minute of enjoying the possibility before it was dashed?
 
ck2875 said:
Yeah, this article was the first thing I thought of when I saw the Comcast news. I'm sure this sets things back a bit. Comcast isn't one for consumer friendly initiatives.
Click to expand...

They also very recently rolled out a brand new set top box/OS of their own, namely the X1 platform:

http://www.comcast.com/x1

I am by no means the biggest Comcast fan, but this interface looks nice. Some cool apps too (Facebook, Pandora, Weather Channel, etc.)
 
Comcast acquiring Time Warner Cable may not kill what Apple had been working on with Time Warner.

If like the Time Warner/Roku deal, Apple simply gives cable subscribers the option of using Apple TV to view live TV channels without a cable box then Apple's deal may still be viable.

Plus, since Comcast and Time Warner don't compete this acquisition may provide broader content distribution across the US.

Makes me wonder if Apple knew, under non-disclosure, that this Comcast deal was likely.
 
ownamac said:
Plus, since Comcast and Time Warner don't compete this acquisition may provide broader content distribution across the US.
Click to expand...

It's true that Comcast and Time Warner (usually) do not compete directly because each company is allowed to be the sole cable provider in a given city/district. In other words, the 2 companies are allocated their own exclusivist fiefdoms.

So the merger will neither "give more choice" or "decrease the choice" of cable providers available to existing customers.
 
Shaun said:
Long delay is most likely if they're planning to release a full blown set-top box for games to take on the PS4 and XBox. That would give the developers time to update their games. Sounds exciting if true.

----------



Why? What would you play on it? There's no 4K content in the iTunes Store and they're not going to go back to discs. Makes no sense.
Click to expand...

I said UI not content.
 
TXCherokee said:
The deal is 'sweet' because there is a huge shift in how content is viewed. The younger generation is not signing up to the cable model and older folks who aren't tied to cable for sporting events, are cutting the cord in record numbers. While the cable providers and channels are not going bankrupt yet, somebody, somewhere has to find a model to reverse the trend now before it's too late. Apple may have that model.
Click to expand...

laurim said:
Ever see those messages that say you might lose channel Y because an agreement can't be reached between your cable provider and a certain channel owner? The current situation is only ideal for the cable providers. Plenty of content creators are looking for alternate ways to deliver their content that makes them more money and more say so.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I believe in the US setting it might make sense, but in Europe there is rich content provided by most providers - I have never seen a message that I cant watch a channel due to an "agreement issue"

For instance my basic subscription contains 120+ channels, of which a good deal are in HD, next to that I have a number of other channels I can add to my subscription (pay-per-view) all being delivered through +150Mbit glass fiber to the home to watch on multiple devices (TV, Computer, Tablet, Phone, etc.).

Interesting to see what Apple will put up as an alternative.
 
iapplelove said:
It means this story was BS from the start
Click to expand...

Not necessarily... take T-Mobile for example... they've been part of possible mergers and being purchased from a few companies and they're still rolling out with their initiatives. Just because the higher ups decide it's time to sell the company doesn't mean that the lower departments knows about it. They will conduct business as usual until the company is actually sold and then they'll decide if the deal is still viable under the new regime.
 
goobot said:
What you seemed to be asking for is hulu with iTunes slection, which by the way wouldn't be a la carte. Second the price of the streaming would go up due to many more networks being involved, last they would have to sign a new deal anyway since they don't have any rights to stream in which goes against the whole ideology of your original post of apple all ready having access to all this stuff.
Click to expand...


No, you misunderstood entirely.

I am saying that what works for me and my family today is a mixture of ad-supported Hulu and high-quality iTunes, but that even if we went 100% high-quality iTunes we'd be paying less than what we were once paying DirecTV.

This was in response to another poster saying that cutting the cord doesn't really save people money because iTunes shows are expensive.

As for what I'd like to see Apple do, I believe I laid that out earlier in this thread. Apple should allow multiple third-party content apps, all of which must (to be allowed into the Apple TV) provide their data for searching and bookmarking and comparison. So, yes, Hulu Plus would be there (if you subscribe to it) with a big $0/ads next to it, as would Amazon with a $1.99 / $35 Season, as would iTunes with a $1.99 / $32 Season, etc.

I don't see why Apple needs to provide a streaming service. There are already a few of those. It should only get in that business if it feels it can compete well and provide a better interface to the content. But, either way, that is a completely separate question from what the AppleTV should do.

----------
IJ Reilly said:
You are asking why Apple might want to take over a big part of the set top box market? Is this a serious question?

Apple only offers a la carte programming from the providers who make their programming available that way, and for the most part, it isn't the same programming sold to the cable providers, or it's an on-demand version of the programming customers are already paying for through their cable subscription (e.g., HBO Go). For a reason.

The reason is they already sell that programming to the cable providers, so they can't double-deal it to someone else in that market without being sued. This is precisely what happened when TWC released their iPad app a couple years back. Even though the app was locked down to a paying cable subscriber and could only be used in their own home, the content providers still demanded more money from TWC. It was a screen they hadn't authorized in their contracts with TWC, and that was what mattered to them.

So obviously, licensing is key to all of this. And that's even before you get into the massive pro sports broadcasting hairball. That one is basically not solvable.
Click to expand...

Honest question here. With the exception of HBO, what other hit shows are not available on iTunes?

Honestly. In the past five years of being without satellite service this has yet to bite us. HBO is an exception with its programming only being available on iTunes etc after it is out on DVD, but are there other major shows which do not already sell their wares on iTunes?

Yes, there are "day after" restrictions (the show that airs tonight at 8PM can't be downloaded by iTunes until tomorrow morning at 5 or 6 ... well before I'd watch it in any case). Is that what you are talking about?

----------
Defender2010 said:
I said UI not content.
Click to expand...

How do 4k TVs deal with thunking between a 4k signal and a 1080p signal?

And, how much does the chip for sending that 4k signal cost?

I think both of these are reasons why Apple is unlikely to support 4k UI until there is a significant market demand for 4k devices. Television sets are much more expensive than add-on boxes like AppleTV; AppleTV can afford to wait until the market moves with the 4k sets before jumping on that particular bandwagon.

That being said, I'm sure it will happen eventually. I just wouldn't hold my breath for it.
 
To make the content deals, Apple has the money to buy

Apple can either buy stock in content companies to influence the deal or make their own content. 147 billion of cash on hand can make A LOT happen!



MacRumors said:
[url=http://cdn.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png]Image[/url]


Apple is planning to introduce a new Apple TV set-top box in April according to Bloomberg, but the report says Apple would not begin selling the box for months. Apple is also in talks with content providers including Time Warner Cable to provide TV shows and other media. The new box is said to include an upgraded processor and a revamped interface. The current Apple TV UI is getting a bit unwieldy as the company has continued to add new content channels over the past year.

Time Warner has been in talks with Apple for well over a year and the company has said it would be willing to give control of the customer-facing user interface over to Apple. Bloomberg reported last July that Apple and Time Warner were close to a deal.

Earlier this week, a reference to new Apple TV hardware was discovered in a recent release of iOS 7 and rumors have suggested that a new Apple TV could see added support for apps and Bluetooth game controllers in the next few months. At the end of January, the Apple TV received new prominence on the Apple Online Store, suggesting the platform could be developing into more than just a "hobby".

The long delay between the introduction of the new Apple TV box and its public launch would be unusual for Apple, which prefers to announce and release products in a short time period. Apple has only had long lead times between announcement and release for major new product releases -- the iPhone debuted six months before it's public launch owing to the unique FCC permitting process for new cell phones, and the iPad was presented more than two months before it first went on sale. The new Mac Pro was previewed six months before its final release as well.

It's possible that Apple will introduce a new App Store platform for the Apple TV, with the delay giving developers time to build new apps for the device.

Article Link: Apple Introducing New Apple TV Box in April for Holiday Launch, Still Talking With Time Warner Cable
Click to expand...
 
jettredmont said:
Honest question here. With the exception of HBO, what other hit shows are not available on iTunes?

Honestly. In the past five years of being without satellite service this has yet to bite us. HBO is an exception with its programming only being available on iTunes etc after it is out on DVD, but are there other major shows which do not already sell their wares on iTunes?

Yes, there are "day after" restrictions (the show that airs tonight at 8PM can't be downloaded by iTunes until tomorrow morning at 5 or 6 ... well before I'd watch it in any case). Is that what you are talking about?
Click to expand...

Hit shows. That kind of narrows it down to a certain kind of programming. News programming is missing, for the most part, especially local news. I'm not a big fan of it except to keep up with disaster stories, but I do kind of want it then. We also watch the PBS NewsHour every night. This programming is now available on the PBS app on AppleTV, but not live, and it's hard to figure out when the evening's broadcast will be available. So that's just inconvenient, at least for now.

The show-stopper is sports. You cannot stream any in-market sports.
 
for month, and be prepared to slip further i say.

Apple is always talking, and never doing when it comes to deals with cable companies.

These two will keep chatting for months :p
 
Have Apple's version of Netflix available only thru the new Apple TV. Let me stream shows from iTunes great selection instead of Netflix's crappy collection of old shows/movies. Charge me more/make me buy a new ATV/I don't care. That would drive up sales big time both for ATV and iTunes.
 
Netflix has plenty of new shows, the latest seasons may be delayed but it is false that they only have old stuff and just because some things are old does not make them crappy. A good movie is a good movie now or 20 years from now
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back