No one is entitled to NBC, but i believe it was a grave mistake allowing a cable company to own a broadcast network.
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 Planning to Launch Streaming TV Service Featuring ABC, CBS, Fox and More
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No one is entitled to NBC, but i believe it was a grave mistake allowing a cable company to own a broadcast network.
Cheap a la cart is the cord cutter's dream. The two simple truths above dash it. Basic cable channels rely on a cut of every subscriber's bill whether they watch or not. If a channel is only financed by those who choose it, one of two things will happen: 1) enough people opt in at $5-$15/month that it offsets all the lost bundled subscribers, or 2) channel shuts down.
The big question is whether Apple will do better than SlingTV for on-demand and DVR-like functionality negotiations. If the networks force their content to be viewed live with no pause/rw/ff and no watch later options, it's a step back to the 1990s as far as I'm concerned.
OLED is as dead as plasma. Production costs too high also. It's up to LCD to scale and improve slowly as it has been doing over the years. Besides, plasma is only good in controlled lighting environments. LCD handles glare much better.
$30 - $40 / mth forget about it
Greedy pricks. If you are going to charge the same as cable companies for delivering less content than don't bother. There is no point to cut the cable from one greedy Telco just to get hooked into a walled garden of a greedier tech company. By the time Apple is done nickle and diming you for all their monthly charges (Radio, iTunes Match, TV subscriptions, etc), then you are just going to end up paying Apple the same amount as any other Big Telco company, you've traded one devil for another.
There is one innovation Apple has to work towards above all else, value.
Greedy pricks. If you are going to charge the same as cable companies for delivering less content than don't bother. There is no point to cut the cable from one greedy Telco just to get hooked into a walled garden of a greedier tech company. By the time Apple is done nickle and diming you for all their monthly charges (Radio, iTunes Match, TV subscriptions, etc), then you are just going to end up paying Apple the same amount as any other Big Telco company, you've traded one devil for another.
There is one innovation Apple has to work towards above all else, value.
nutmac
macrumors 603
H.265 (HEVC) is significant, however, as it will reduce file size by about 50%.
And I think 4K is still necessary as many mid- to high-end TVs are now 4K and by next year, I suspect 4K will trickle down to large low-end TVs.
D.T.
macrumors G4
I'm kind of assuming that most channels will offer live + streaming-on-demand like they do now. Your "DVR" is the content providers CDN (even if it has a limited window of availability like many do now, it's still usually several EPs when it's not the entire series).
We're getting all our content via AppleTV and so far, haven't missed anything since it remains available for weeks after the air date. 🙂
We bailed on DirecTV a few months ago, and in addition to the price, getting locked into a contract, pay leases on equipment, the UI/UX using their gear was pretty terrible.
I have a feeling you're going to have to repost this ... several times. 😀
Stella
macrumors G3
Netflix were also rumoured to offer a 4K stream. not sure what is happening with that though.
4K is nice - would be nice for Apple to offer it also. but is a problem for customers who face small bandwidth allocations per month. Not practical for quite a lot of users at the moment.
Last edited:
macduke
macrumors G5
I hope this isn't just for network TV content. I'd like to have access to pick and choose different cable channels. There are only a few I'd subscribe to. I cut the cord in 2010 but might be interested in something like thisespecially if there is a backlog of content that I can stream. I'd probably cancel my Hulu Plus subscription and keep Netflix and this. Hulu has really been pissing me off lately. They started off with a lot of contentbacklogs of TV shows, etc. And usually only two ads. Now they'll launch three ads in a row 3 or 4 times during a show. If I miss an episode of a show from a few weeks ago and want to catch up, I often can't because it's just missing for some reason or they only let you watch the most recent couple episodes. So basically I'm paying $8/mo to watch TV with commercials. Screw that. Bring on the Apple TV packages!
elgrecomac
macrumors 65816
Stella
macrumors G3
This has been happening for the last several years. People want to be able to watch TV when they want to, pay for the channels that are only watched etc ( discussed plenty here ) etc etc.
Apple didn't start this, but have contributed via AppleTV already, and maybe will continue to do so through this new service ( depending on what is it ). Though cable companies are beginning to wake up and adapt.
nefan65
macrumors 65816
To some degree you're right. But at least with this model you get the chance to pick what you want. I'd gladly pay the same amount of $$$ if it allowed me to choose what I WANT vs. paying for cable, and getting things I don't want, and can't remove.
Also, this is just a start. In time I can see this expanding and opening up some competition. In 2 - 3 years the landscape could look a lot different.
A MacBook lover
Suspended
I bring mine anywhere. Hotels, family's house, even in my car. I'm rarely not around wifi, and if I'm not - there's always tethering.
Packing a dish in my carry-on isn't convienent, packing an Apple TV is.
You seem to think I actually haven't seen top end sets side by side in my own homes. I have.
As for glare, it is only an issue if you can't control lighting or there are many windows in the room, otherwise, non issue. I've had a dozen family members buy plasma on my own recommendation before they disappeared and they're all very happy they did.
Current LCD or whatever price are not even close to top end plasmas. Very very sad.
DeadSeaMac
macrumors member
Sure 4K is important but it is all about content and Netflix own that space right now - especially at their price point for streaming excellent content.
But until we can purchase channels and or programs "ala cart" through Time Warner (which is my broadband provider), Verizon FiOS, Comcast, etc., etc. these moves by Apple are still small ripples in a very large sea of content.
I might as well reinstall the DVR from Time Warner for that price.
The issue is that whatever plan that resolves in content owners losing money will be a non-starter. I do think that Apple will move forward and get a new Apple TV on the market - no sense waiting for these folks.
An upgraded ATV with A7/A8, gaming capabilities, new UI, new remote control, etc. will do very well as is even if every single content is not available for it.
SmileyBlast!
macrumors 6502a
Out of my ignorance and curiosity; What does the above even mean?
----------
You could say that Apple did start it like they did for the music industry. They unbundled the CD. iTunes let you buy the 1 song you really wanted and not the rest of the crappy songs on the CD. Saving you money.
Now Apple is doing that with TV Content.
Really, 15 years ago... I'm talking about Plasma sets of the last few years. LCD screen of 15 years ago were even more garbage like if they existed at all; do you have a point?
I actually own both a mid range LCD and 2 top end Samsung plasmas (the plasmas and the LCD were the same price). At the same price, the quality of the plasma set is much much better than the same priced LCD/LED Set.
Even low end plasma sets at the end were much better than LCD sets at twice the price. The average LCD is just plain horrible in the reproduction of movement, contrast and viewing angles. The main (only) advantage for the user is the ability of LCDs to be put in a very bright environment (that'S why they don't look so bad in showrooms). The one LCD I have is in a room with 3 large windows.
The reason they stopped making that people like you prefer cheap, with lot of useless "smart" TV gizmos to high quality of the image itself.. So, they couldn't price them high enough (because they were more expensive to produce) to keep their profit margins up. It had nothing to do with the actual quality of the plasmas themselves.
D.T.
macrumors G4
I _think_ he was making a funny about the show Whitney that was on NBC (and cancelled ... for good reason).
Side note: I find Whitney Cummins one painfully unfunny comic and if you're watching Two Broke Girls (she created), you should be ashamed of yourself 😀
What if?
They release a new Apple TV with... a TV tuner and built in OTA antenna, AirPort style. This would get you all those network channels, at least for the majority of folks. The channel numbers you see on OTA stations now are just an illusion, a throw back to the olden days to ease the DTV transition. You could, if you wanted, reinvent the traditional TV tuner and put the stations on the current AppleTV grid everyone seems to tolerate.
It's unlikely but there's nothing stopping a company from making a completely new OTA tuner with a different channel surfing interface and rolling it into some streaming services.
They release a new Apple TV with... a TV tuner and built in OTA antenna, AirPort style. This would get you all those network channels, at least for the majority of folks. The channel numbers you see on OTA stations now are just an illusion, a throw back to the olden days to ease the DTV transition. You could, if you wanted, reinvent the traditional TV tuner and put the stations on the current AppleTV grid everyone seems to tolerate.
It's unlikely but there's nothing stopping a company from making a completely new OTA tuner with a different channel surfing interface and rolling it into some streaming services.
DVR is Obsolete
For me, the most important part is the delivery method. I cannot stand the commercials. I would gladly pay more to not have to deal with them.
I have an apple tv, cable subscription with DVR, netflix, hulu, HboGo, Amazon Prime, showtime anytime, etc. My wife and I generally go to Netflix first, then HBO go, then Showtime, then Amazon Prime for our content. This is because these options are commercial free. The constant barrage of AD's is ridiculous and unnecessary. I get it, people will say you can just fast forward on the DVR, but why should I have to do that. It makes what you are watching less enjoyable. If you went to a movie theater and decided to cut ads in every 30 mins (even it there were a guy up in the projection room fast forwarding through them) you would be outraged.
The way they deliver the content will be key. If they want to charge more to deliver ad free content, you will have me on board. But if it is similar to Hulu Plus with forced Ads its a no-go.
For me, the most important part is the delivery method. I cannot stand the commercials. I would gladly pay more to not have to deal with them.
I have an apple tv, cable subscription with DVR, netflix, hulu, HboGo, Amazon Prime, showtime anytime, etc. My wife and I generally go to Netflix first, then HBO go, then Showtime, then Amazon Prime for our content. This is because these options are commercial free. The constant barrage of AD's is ridiculous and unnecessary. I get it, people will say you can just fast forward on the DVR, but why should I have to do that. It makes what you are watching less enjoyable. If you went to a movie theater and decided to cut ads in every 30 mins (even it there were a guy up in the projection room fast forwarding through them) you would be outraged.
The way they deliver the content will be key. If they want to charge more to deliver ad free content, you will have me on board. But if it is similar to Hulu Plus with forced Ads its a no-go.
skellener
macrumors 68000
Netflix 4K is up and running. you need a 4K TV with Netflix to see it. Same goes for Amazon. We did one of the pilots for them in 4K. Works fine as long as you have the hardware and bandwidth. I find it completely unnecessary though. It really doesn't add much to the viewing experience. Everything is a tiny bit sharper. A tiny bit. Big deal. I'd rather see better shows in HD rather than crappy shows in 4K. They need to put money into better content which both services are in fact doing. Broadcast will fill the lowest common denominator everytime.
This package from Apple for AppleTV is a little too little too late and too expensive. Many people have since moved on from cable and broadcast. There's a whole internet out there to view. Plus you can get commercial free services from Netlfix, Amazon and HBO. Why would you ever go back to cable and broadcast with commercials? Channels are dead. Content is king. Doesn't matter who is making it if it's good.
CrazyForApple
macrumors 6502a
AppleScruff1
macrumors G4
TV is a field Apple has struggled with for years. It's a very challenging and daunting task to literally force their way in. Steve Jobs much overexposed comment that he "cracked it" has been romantasized and perhaps even misconstrued by the hero worshippers hoping for one final "next big thing".
Those who live very healthy fun active lives don't place a high value on the time sink, health damaging "TV" which in many ways is a relic from the 70's. Most active vibrant people I know have already cut the cord as I have.
For those with a strong love of TV, this may work out well if it survives its initial test. No where is public acceptance more important to insure success than in the TV broadcast industry.
Those who live very healthy fun active lives don't place a high value on the time sink, health damaging "TV" which in many ways is a relic from the 70's. Most active vibrant people I know have already cut the cord as I have.
For those with a strong love of TV, this may work out well if it survives its initial test. No where is public acceptance more important to insure success than in the TV broadcast industry.