Apple Pushing Ahead with Plans for Subscription TV Service by Christmas?

noahrobd

macrumors member
Jul 26, 2008
34
0
0
Maybe harder for Apple to negotiate without Steve Jobs. What a shame. The providers either don't understand the brokenness of their system, or don't want to innovate (or both), because their current way makes them money. And they likely care more about their profits than the user experience. Jobs and Apple was (is) obsessed with providing the best possible user-experience above all else.
 

writingdevil

macrumors 6502
Feb 11, 2010
254
32
0
truth be told, i don't think apple would ever get in content providing. They protect themselves from that kind of liability by offering end delivery. It allows them to be flexible as times and content changes. They don't have to retool when content changes. Also by being on the end of this chain, they have control over end price but we all know their content offered, music, movie, apps is all about selling the hardware!
Apple will never get into content, except for in-house work and commercials. Content creators live on the edge of bankruptcy with every project they make. The number of pilots created vs series made is very very low, as is the number of features made vs features returning anything at all above production costs and P&A. It's a verrrry slippery slope. The market, Apple lovers or not, is fickle and each project, fiction or nonfiction is a roll of dice. The streets of Hollywood are awash with well written/produced/acted/distributed projects that didn't make anything near it's investment back. If you use Pixar as an example of how "easy" it is to be successful, you might look into panning for gold. Of course, as they say, everybody has two jobs in life, whatever they do for a living, and being a movie expert or critic.
 

pmz

macrumors 68000
Nov 18, 2009
1,948
0
0
NJ
At the end of the day, its still just a lot of work to deliver you the load of crap thats on TV.
 

blinkin182

macrumors regular
May 3, 2010
195
2
0
Switzerland
I still have a few questions:

1) With the "channel as an app" idea, would it still follow a set schedule? Like for a specify program, would I still have to tune in at an exact time, say 7:00 p.m.? That seems like a really antiquated concept that should die.

I'd really like it more specific than just channels. I really just like buying my individual shows (like I can in iTunes now) and would like that expanded to more sports coverage and HBO.

2) Speaking of HBO, are they going to be able to get HBO on board? That's the biggest thing Apple could do to make this thing successful, in my mind. But, of course, cable companies know this, and so they don't want HBO available to anyone without cable (at least not conveniently).
I agree. I think the industry need to move away from having "channels" and move towards selling "shows", one by one. I've stopped watching tv in the traditional way for a long time. I don't especially care for "talk shows and variety shows" and would rather watch some high quality shows, whenever I want and would be willing to pay a reasonable amount for them.

Talk shows/variety shows could also be function under this model. But i do feel their is an excessive amount of resistance from the "tv industry", as many consumers are starting to prefer watching TV differently, it is a scary time for them.

I mean, the current model is mainly based on generating revenue from subscriptions, and advertising. The advertisers pay more for ads appearing at "prime time" television right?
But today, with services not based on a subscription model, there are "à la carte" programs, whenever you want and ad free, i guess the tv industry really need to get their act together with certainly a diminishing revenue from advertisers and with consumers having a greater choice of how to watch their favorite shows. I think the industry is just confused by this new digital revolution and really don't know which way to go!
 

zephonic

macrumors 65816
Feb 7, 2011
1,150
518
0
greater L.A. area
zephonic.com
Cable companies are firmly stuck in the 20th century and they're gonna pay the price for their backwardness soon.

I think what Apple wants to do is let people pay per channel, and why not?

I'd happily pay for the channels I want, I resent having to pay for crap I don't want, simply because it's a part of the package.

With Verizon I have to pay for 20+ movie channels (that never play anything good) if I want to see the Sundance channel.

To see SpeedTV I pay for ten extra sportschannels I never watch.

It is ridiculous and I do hope Apple finds a way in. If they do it right (and I think they will) I'll be the first one to jump ship.
 

Tminusg

macrumors member
Apr 18, 2011
73
1
0
Visit site
They should just pull the plug on the iphone for whatever provider doesn't wanna play ball lol. Ouch! That'd surely make it happen.
 

Can't Stop

macrumors 6502
Dec 22, 2011
341
0
0
The only thing i watch on cable or SAT is sport: Premier League, Euroleague and various champioships and Olympic games.

I hate commercial brakes and when i count tv programmes i'm really interested in number i come up with is less than 10.

America needs to wake up from insane prices for mobile services and television. It doesn't make any sense.

Someone already said that you can get 500 and channels and still there is nothing to watch.

It's a sad, sad truth.
 

Ieo

macrumors 6502
Jun 17, 2009
251
0
0
Honestly, I think Apple should just buy Hulu and work on adding content. The ad system on hulu works and subsidizes the cost of premium content. I'm not getting too worked up about it though, as the infrastructure to deliver all of this streaming content simply isn't a reality here in the U.S. The "Free Market" has decided hoarding profits is far more important than investing in our internet infrastructure and delivering better service.
 

springerj

macrumors member
Jan 29, 2004
73
7
0
Portland, OR
TV sucks

I can't believe how much I hate the US TV system. If I want to watch a movie,there's a million choices from netflix to on-demand TV. I can get local stations over the air; I can get movies on netflix and others; the one thing I can't get without a TV 'provider' is live news like CNN, MSNBC. But there's only one viable choice for fast network access: your friendly local cable troll, who will suck you of everything out of your pocket if given a chance. Give me a good net connection, netflix, and a few live national channels, and charge me less than $100/month, and I'll be ecstatic.
 

Macman45

macrumors G5
Jul 29, 2011
13,196
133
0
Somewhere Back In The Long Ago
It makes sense that Apple wants to get into the content providing area.

A whole, new realm of possible revenue.

Will we see an Apple Studio which produces its own content?

We'll see.
Perfectly reasonable. They also do not need to purchase cable companies to obtain content. Movies, series etc. can be purchased, then bought through the app store...More I think about it, the more I like it...IF the content is of interest..!
 

Rogifan

macrumors Core
Nov 14, 2011
20,561
21,844
0
It makes sense that Apple wants to get into the content providing area.

A whole, new realm of possible revenue.

Will we see an Apple Studio which produces its own content?

We'll see.
Except Tim Cook just said they're not looking to make a lot of money off content, that they make their money in hardware. Bur I'm not sure how they can be competitive in the TV set space.
 

Lucent336

macrumors newbie
Dec 30, 2011
17
0
0
Never payed for cable/satellite

I would LOVE LOVE LOVE to have a la carte channels.

I can see myself getting HBO, Shotime, a few others, to be certain. I'd even be happy having to watch the shows live and be able to back track through the channel's website or app for back episodes I've missed.

For shows I like, I'll go the route I have been; rent or buy DVDs/Blu-Rays or buy from digital distributors.

Example: I'd love to be able to have access to HBO when Game of Thrones S2 comes out. I'll subscribe to the channel if I can get it a la carte. On top of that, there's a strong likelihood I'll buy the season when it's available.
 
Last edited:

ThisIsNotMe

Suspended
Aug 11, 2008
1,843
1,052
0
See Lillyhammer from Netflix for an example as to how to do it right.
Lillyhammer from Netflix is practically unwatchable.
First they have 1/2 the show with subtitles and throw extremely low production on top of that and it is unwatchable. Sure it is a great story but it doesn't come close to even the ********* shows on regular television.
 

HiRez

macrumors 603
Jan 6, 2004
5,796
1,684
0
Western US
Each channel its own app? Ugh, that sounds horrible. I sure hope they have something better than that, more integrated. I don't want to have to quit and launch apps to "switch channels". This is already a PITA on the Apple TV, navigating between Netflix, MLB, NBA, etc. apps.
 

mjtomlin

Guest
Jan 19, 2002
384
0
0
Visit site
I'm glad Apple is trying to tackle TV and cable. ... I hope Apple can change this dynamic the same way they changed the phone-carrier relationship.
They've already begun to change it as far as I'm concerned. I buy the only two shows I'm interested in from iTunes; Simpsons and Fringe. Everything else, I go to the website (or the app) on my iPad/iPhone and AirPlay it to my TV. Every once in a while I'll rent a movie from iTunes as well. Seems to fill the cable void in my life just fine.


I'm going out on a limb here, but there are two things people keep bringing up they'd like to see Apple do, and I just don't see them EVER going there; produce content and provide the connection.
 

rei101

macrumors 6502a
Dec 24, 2011
972
1
0
I work at a TV station...

We manage 3 cable channels and let me tell you... Apple wants the impossible.

We have been in the market for 5 years, and takes one or more years of negotiation to put the signal of one of our channels in certain area and each cable operator works differently.

Not to mention that negotiations are soooooo complicated adn aggressive and soooo many different interest with each cable operator and they are so disorganized and there are so many interest involved.

Apple is dealing with the most dysfunctional market ever. Too many people making decisions per cable operator, too greedy and selfish.

I really would like to see Apple coming up with something. Specially because the Apple TV is not as the iTunes.

iTunes store was a solution for the music piracy and it worked. But Apple TV is not a solution for cable operators, is a solution for Apple only, a totally different approach.
 

entropys

macrumors 6502a
Jan 5, 2007
517
593
0
Brisbane, Australia
I can't see why the content providers/cable companies would ever agree. Their business model is built around charging you for dreck you never watch by bundling it with the stuff you do want to watch.

Apple should give up on the effort and just make it easier to enjoy stuff obtained from other sources, such as channel BT. Let the cable companies disappear up their own cloaca for a while. Eventually the content providers will have to come to a company like apple to save them with a new business model.

And buying a cable company in market x won't solve the problem in market y. This will be a problem that will be repeated in every country.
 

Rogifan

macrumors Core
Nov 14, 2011
20,561
21,844
0
People are dreaming if they think Apple will bring us al a carte TV programming/pricing system. If it was a good business model wouldn't someone like directv already be doing it.
 

Can't Stop

macrumors 6502
Dec 22, 2011
341
0
0
Lillyhammer from Netflix is practically unwatchable.
First they have 1/2 the show with subtitles and throw extremely low production on top of that and it is unwatchable. Sure it is a great story but it doesn't come close to even the ********* shows on regular television.
The ********* shows on regular television are very much unwatchable too, hence the *********.
 

Peace

macrumors Core
Apr 1, 2005
19,457
3,814
0
Space--The ONLY Frontier
We manage 3 cable channels and let me tell you... Apple wants the impossible.

We have been in the market for 5 years, and takes one or more years of negotiation to put the signal of one of our channels in certain area and each cable operator works differently.

Not to mention that negotiations are soooooo complicated adn aggressive and soooo many different interest with each cable operator and they are so disorganized and there are so many interest involved.

Apple is dealing with the most dysfunctional market ever. Too many people making decisions per cable operator, too greedy and selfish.

I really would like to see Apple coming up with something. Specially because the Apple TV is not as the iTunes.

iTunes store was a solution for the music piracy and it worked. But Apple TV is not a solution for cable operators, is a solution for Apple only, a totally different approach.
I can't see why the content providers/cable companies would ever agree. Their business model is built around charging you for dreck you never watch by bundling it with the stuff you do want to watch.

Apple should give up on the effort and just make it easier to enjoy stuff obtained from other sources, such as channel BT. Let the cable companies disappear up their own cloaca for a while. Eventually the content providers will have to come to a company like apple to save them with a new business model.

And buying a cable company in market x won't solve the problem in market y. This will be a problem that will be repeated in every country.
People are dreaming if they think Apple will bring us al a carte TV programming/pricing system. If it was a good business model wouldn't someone like directv already be doing it.
I chose a few random people to quote only to express the real reason Apple or any other company.Google,Netflix,Hulu et.al. Will EVER get ala cart first run prime time video streaming to your television.

It's a very powerful industry and it will never go away.

The advertising industry.
Commercials.
They target certain demographics and change depending on the time of day and content served.