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 Looking for TV Networks to Bear Streaming Costs for Upcoming TV Service
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This kind of stuff isn't in place yet and people think Apple is going to launch/announce it at WWDC? Not likely.
I thought I read somewhere that Apple was building out its own CDN for this purpose? Not that it matters. With Eddie Cue leading the charge, there's a good chance this TV effort will flop. Tim needs to get a clue and replace this guy already.
If rumors are correct, the TV service / new Apple TV will be announced at WWDC but launch September / October to give devs time to develop their apps for the Apple TV.
That or at least the standard Lifetime channel contents is already available on the Apple TV.
Attachments
Watch keynote. 
The part that you're missing is that many of these "channels" require an active cable subscription to watch any content.
Come again?
----------
Doesn't help if you don't have the deals in place with the content owners though. No point having supersonic download if there isn't anything to download.
----------
CDN fees for an OTT platform are one of the largest costs. You want to offload that cost to the person making the direct money from viewing the content - the content owner.
I don't get it either. The pricing is not competitive unless we find out that some of the 25 channels are premium channels that are not included in basic cable packages.
I would be interested in this as I am currently use Hulu/Netflix/Amazon with a trial of Sling TV currently.
However, price is the key here, I really hope they don't price them out of the game. I really like the price point of Sling and the ability to "tack on" programming packages.
Furthermore, and way out of left field, I wish Apple would create like a "catch all" and have ISP comparable to Google Fiber+Streaming Service+Unlimited Cloud for a monthly bundle price.
I really think these consumers need to rethink the "bundle of TV/Phone/Internet and focus it on other areas of the game like Let's give them really fast internet and pipe everything at them from there... Oh yea and lets run all of the cell phones we make call most of the time off that pipeline too.
However, price is the key here, I really hope they don't price them out of the game. I really like the price point of Sling and the ability to "tack on" programming packages.
Furthermore, and way out of left field, I wish Apple would create like a "catch all" and have ISP comparable to Google Fiber+Streaming Service+Unlimited Cloud for a monthly bundle price.
I really think these consumers need to rethink the "bundle of TV/Phone/Internet and focus it on other areas of the game like Let's give them really fast internet and pipe everything at them from there... Oh yea and lets run all of the cell phones we make call most of the time off that pipeline too.
If Apple does not do the streaming, they lose the ability to control the quality of the streams. What if some channel starts degrading the A/V quality to save money or bandwidth?
I cut the cord 5 years ago. I have an antenna and buy access to cable shows I want, usually through iTunes. For $40 I could buy 2 entire seasons of most shows. If I just wanted ESPN I hear sling has a service for $20/month. Apple should just open their platform for any network or production company to sell their product to consumers and take 30%. I don't get this bundling. My internet service costs $55 a month (cheapest tier). If I wanted to pay for TV I could do it through Charter and get a discount on Internet service to boot. If I go with Apple I pay $95 for Internet and a small TV package. Charter will give me that plus a phone for $5 less.
Dumbest line ever, under current law Internet providers are no longer allowed to "penalize Apple's service".
Really, Sling needs competitors to keep them on their toes, but the competitors need to come in at similar or lower price points.
Oh, they'll likely control the whole thing still. They're just wanting the TV networks to foot the bill. It will probably be one of those deals where Apple says to the TV networks something along the lines of:
In order be a content provider to our customers, you agree to the following:
1.) You will deliver your content using the method(s) and CDN(s) that we stipulate who are able to perform to our specifications
2.) You will pay for all costs associated with streaming your content to our customers
If you don't agree to the above terms, you will not be allowed to play in our sandbox.
Are data caps by ISPs really widespread now? I've never encountered anyone who has one.
Can someone with Google Fiber tell me how fast content is delivered? Can you flip through channels?
It bothers me that we're transitioning from an era of wireless free content delivered efficiently and instantaneously from radio towers, to an era of expensive content from fragmented sources delivered over less than stellar internet connections. The freedom to chose what you want to watch and when comes at a cost.
Amusingly, when my 2 year old nephew is frustrated, he'll sometimes say "common netflix". Apparently he heard his mom say that.
It bothers me that we're transitioning from an era of wireless free content delivered efficiently and instantaneously from radio towers, to an era of expensive content from fragmented sources delivered over less than stellar internet connections. The freedom to chose what you want to watch and when comes at a cost.
Amusingly, when my 2 year old nephew is frustrated, he'll sometimes say "common netflix". Apparently he heard his mom say that.
Last edited: