Apple Planning to Launch Streaming TV Service Featuring ABC, CBS, Fox and More

[TonyPaco]

It always feels like Apple doesn't go full steam ahead with some of these new ventures. For example.

Time Machine. Only does local backups, doesn't compete with Crashplan, Backblaze etc

iCloud. Took them ages to introduce iCloud Drive, Dropbox were there 2-3 years before this innovation and iCloud still lacks features, no Android version either but they do have a Windows version.

Music Streaming. They bring us iCloud Streaming but it's just streaming you the library of songs you already bought. Doesn't compete with Spotify.

Siri. They innovated with a real speech to text assistant that works but Google leapfrogs them with Google Now and for the past two years Siri has languished. It could really do with having hundreds of new features.

Then finally and the topic of this discussion, TV Streaming. They've had the Apple TV for over 6 or 7 years now and while competitors like Netflix, Amazon and Yahoo are creating original programming Apple is instead chasing the same old network television people are moving away from.

Now of course Netflix and Amazon have Network content. But they don't give you a live feed of the channels that content is from. People don't want that. What people want is the ability to watch the show they enjoy any time they want at their convenience and they don't want to wait 7 days between episodes either.

I really feel like Apple spreads themselves too thin sometimes. They like to talk a lot about focus in their keynotes and how for every 100 ideas there are 99 no's before they get that one great idea.

But the truth is they enter a lot of segments because they have to and not because they want to. They want to sell iPods, iPhones, iPads, Apple TV's and so they had to make a good voice assistant, backup service, cloud service, music store, television and video store etc

I don't feel like their heart is really in these services they are just a means to an end to support the products they are interested in. I really feel something has to change too because if you look at these things, streaming video, streaming music, iCloud etc these are the things that Apple gets criticised on way more than their physical products like the iPhone. This peripheral vision approach to the ecosystems they create around their products just to keep up with the competition isn't working out well enough.

Quu totally, totally gets it.

I remember people wondering why Apple would open an iTunes Music store, only charge 99¢ a song and make barely any profit. Because when you finally plunk down the cashola for an iPod... *boom* Apple makes a buttload of profit.

They are doing this to try to move some sort of hardware product. Apple always, ALWAYS is looking to sell hardware. iPhones are plentiful, as are very, very nice online tutorials and troubleshooting tips made by Apple themselves. Go ahead and try to find anything that nice and user friendly for the weird error message you are getting in your system.log via your OS X Server app...

 

[BigInDallas]

Property Brothers fan I see

Its actually one of my favorite channels. this and the locals for sports

 

[skellener]

I'll wait for the Apple TV with DVR....

Will never, ever happen.

----------

The only thing I see with this new Apple TV package offering is "Commercials, commercials, commercials...". There's no way i am ever going back to watching commercials. Netflix - no commercials. Amazon - no commercials. HBO - no commercials. They are doing it right.

 

[Rogifan]

You are the one who consistently tells people that rumors are just that, rumors. This is a rumor with next to no information to go on. You have next to no concept of what Apple will be introducing, if anything. What I can tell you is that Apple's offering will be fully integrated with iCloud and handoff. You'll be able to view and pickup/leave off on any Apple devices, seamlessly, and potentially watch on iCloud.com as well. No cable service can offer this, and there won't be constant signing in/authorization of the stupid apps that show numerous different cable providers (jk usually it's just direct tv and a couple others, but still offers next to no content).

I'll believe it when I see it. But the price cut on the current TV means something is up.

 

[MarkNY]

I'm curious how Apple can pull this off with the network feeds. FOX, CBS, etc. would be willing to contract with Apple of course, but the local affiliates are going to try to shake everyone down for their cut because of ridiculous laws favoring them.

Right now, live feeds are available in how many markets for the ABC Apple TV app? A handful? And it's not ABC that's the problem.

 

[aerok]

And Canada will probably only get this 5 years later

 

[ThisIsNotMe]

Comcast = 147 channels and nothing to watch

As the channel lineup will be the same, what makes you think that AppleTV will have additional content? If anything, ti will have even less to watch.

 

[Akuratyde]

This is a step in the right direction but they need to figure out a better pricing model. With all of these separate subscriptions the bill adds up real fast.

Currently I'm paying $8/mo for Netflix and $8/mo for Hulu. Add $15/mo for HBO Now, $40/mo for this new service, and I'm at $71/mo. Suddenly it isn't much cheaper than cable and I'm getting less channels.

 

[AdonisSMU]

How do you connect to the internet?

I said cable not cable companies. I don't want all of the channels. I only want a few of them anyway and I want them available on my tablet and smartphone.

 

[lederermc]

No NBC will be a deal-breaker for many people.

Unfortunately, NBC is owned by Comcast and will want to protect their cable franchises. The agreement that allowed Comcast to buy NBC mandated fair access to the other cable/sat. cos. There might be something in the net neutrality rules that allows Apple to gain access via a lawsuit.This story is still unfolding.

 

[ThisIsNotMe]

Let's look at this. This is not the À la carte option that everyone is thinking. This is the EXACT same thing as cable. You are paying for tiers, just like you do now with your cable (basic, advanced, or premium). So, really-- this isn't any different than cable or directTV, except you won't be able to record (NO HDD on AppleTV unit as of now).

What this SHOULD be is true À la carte.
Each channel is $2.00-$3.00/month, no minimums, packages only by channel (ESPN package, Starz Package, etc)
No contracts, pay monthly for what you want.
No "tiers"
No "ads"

This will give me my ESPN, HBO, Showtime, AMC, A&E, and Discovery for $12-$18.00 a month compared to $80-100+ via DirecTV/Cable.

Except in your model each channel would end up costing $10+ each and 1/2 the channels you like would cease to exist.

 

[rjlawrencejr]

Why in the world would anyone pay for ABC, CBS and Fox when a cheap HDTV antenna can pick those up for free. I really don't get this. Then again, it IS just a rumor.

You don't even need a special HDTV antenna. Any TV will pick up the signal.

 

[ThisIsNotMe]

I have about 8 shows on 3 channels that I watch, but until then torrenting or watching online is more efficient and convenient.

Because intellectual property theft is such a moral thing to do. Pathetic.

 

[rjlawrencejr]

This is a step in the right direction but they need to figure out a better pricing model. With all of these separate subscriptions the bill adds up real fast.

Currently I'm paying $8/mo for Netflix and $8/mo for Hulu. Add $15/mo for HBO Now, $40/mo for this new service, and I'm at $71/mo. Suddenly it isn't much cheaper than cable and I'm getting less channels.

The only slight advantage is you get a library of shows and you do get to see what you want to see when you want to see it. But yes, dollar-wise it can begin to add up quickly.

 

[bac1989]

For many, “cord cutting” is a myth.

As long as cable giants like Time Warner & Comcast continue to control the broadband internet distribution systems, there will never be a true “cutting of the cord”. Too many communities in the US have only ONE option for broadband access and cable TV service. I dropped my TW cable television service years ago, only to see my internet only access price steadily increase from $45 to just over $65/mo. Now if I add an Apple TV monthly subscription(s) to my overpriced internet access, it will cost about as much, if not more than a regular cable TV/Internet package and I actually will end up with less content.

Cable Companies will NEVER die, they will just become Broadband Access Companies with the ability to charge more and more with little to no competition in the marketplace.

Apple needs its own content distribution system/network.

 

[ThisIsNotMe]

Who wants to bet that Comcast will block the service because of further study on impact on their network?

Lets hope so.

A minority of users should be disproportionally impacting the network and driving costs through the roof. That or implementation of $/GB pricing model.

----------

You know what Apple should do IMO? Go through with this, but then buy YouTube from Google from ~$10-50bn dollars. With all the content there surely they could provide an even greater TV experience.

Yeah. A billion videos of people getting hit in the balls and fake prank videos is sure a great experience.

 

[wunnspeed]

European market too?

I'd love to see something like this show up on the European Apple TV as we kind of get screwed on the options here.

 

[rjlawrencejr]

Yes this will be a change in that you can officially get TV on your iPad but really it's not the evolution that I need if it doesn't offer a la carte packages. $30 to $40 for very basic cable? Same ol', same ol'.

I want to build my own cable package with the channels that I actually watch and pay a fair price for each channel, not pay for a bunch of channels that I never watch.

I hear you. The unfortunate part is one company owns multiple cable networks. Let's say you only wanted TV Land, well TV Land is own by Viacom which owns the other Nickelodeon channels and MTV, VH1, BET, etc. Once the digital universe began back in the 90s new cable channels began to spring up because it was cheap to add another and use it as a new revenue source. So getting the entertainment companies to let go of that will be difficult indeed.

 

[TallManNY]

Netflix is creating their own original shows. So yes, it is possible to pay less and still get original shows.

You need to offer what the customer wants and they'll buy it + more revenue.

TV revenue ( including advertising ) is dropping and will keep dropping. The end of the traditional cable package is slowing coming to an end.

People no longer want to spend $80 on 100 channels of crap they'll never watch.

Right, offer the customer what they want and get better revenue. But every discussion of ala cart buying always has someone explaining how they spend $100 per month now but that the industry is going to completely change so that THEY get all the channels they want but they only spend $20 per month. And they don't have to watch any ads. Sure the whole TV industry could get squeezed and made more efficient. But if you want something incredible like the Game of Thrones, then HBO has to make a huge amount of money.

Netflix is probably not a sustainable business because it (A) relies on a super high stock price (which it uses to pay its employees), (B) doesn't make the money to justify the stock price, and (C) needs the cable companies to build out the infrastructure that allows all the streaming. So basically Netflix needs the cable companies to gouge their customers, so that the infrastructure can exist so that Netflix can use it for really cheap to deliver its service for a cheap monthly fee. No investment in fast internet by someone other than Netflix, then no ability for Netflix to push the dramatically greater number of pixels it needs to move to justify the stock price. Stock price starts to drop and employees need either (A) more cash salaries, or (B) they leave.

 

[ThisIsNotMe]

No idea if this would ever work but it would be cool to have no cable and be able to watch TV shows a-la carte for say .25 cents a piece...of course that would have to include commercials also.

They already have that. Its called iTunes.

----------

Please don't make it limited to Apple devices.

Why? LOL.

----------

Perfect example of why Comcast's purchase of NBC should not have received regulatory approval. NBC may soon be a very exclusive network.

And? What makes you entitled to NBC?

 

[rhett7660]

WSJ reporting that the service will stream 4K to upcoming new Apple TV!!! H.265 decoding in hardware.

This may be big competition for Netflix.

We'll finally be able to watch something in 4K other than the same GoPro videos over and over.

Do you have a link to this!!!!!!? This is outstanding and I hope the WSJ is right on this! Which means the possibility of new hardware is coming also!

 

[ThisIsNotMe]

I'll wait for the Apple TV with DVR....

They already have that, its called iTunes.

 

[GlenK]

I need to figure out what's wrong with my Apple TV. The picture is so dark I don't even use it.

 

[jrswizzle]

I'll wait for the Apple TV with DVR....

Shouldn't be any reason for this - these "channels" would be similar to the apps on your device. Similar to the HBONow channel. You can pick from a listing of episodes to stream.

 

[zea mays]

I love this idea - if the price point and channels are right I'd be on board.