Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Drop the cable requirements!

When the channels stop requiring the cable subscription, I'll buy an Apple TV.

And Amazon Instant Video would a huge plus, as well.
 
Dude, Samsung isn't the first to announce a smartwatch. Plus Apple has never cared about being first. I'd rather Apple take their time and come up with something people will want rather than rushing to beat a competitor to the punch.

You are right

However, Samsung being first does mean that they set the standard.

That is what I am most worried about

When you have spent several thousand dollars in the Apple ecosystem you tend to get a bit defensive when you see things that you think are bad.

So yeah, maybe I overreacted a bit
 
Would be nice if there was some sort of "single sign-on" feature where you log in to your cable provider once at the AppleTV Settings level and then only apps that are supported by your subscription show up.

There should be a way to manually override on an app by app basis if you are "borrowing" a friend's credentials ;), but at least the single sign-on would make it a lot simpler for the ones you actually subscribe to.

Also the AppleTV needs some sort of profile/setup cloning...so that if I go through the trouble of getting one of my AppleTVs set up the way I want (log into certain apps, hide others, etc), it automatically copies over to my other ones. Seems like this could be managed through iCloud.
 
You are right

However, Samsung being first does mean that they set the standard.

That is what I am most worried about

When you have spent several thousand dollars in the Apple ecosystem you tend to get a bit defensive when you see things that you think are bad.

So yeah, maybe I overreacted a bit

Just like how Palm and Blackberry set the standards for smartphones before Apple came in and blew everything else out of the water.

Apple rarely sets the standard, it resets the standard. Which is, arguably, even more important and long-lasting.
 
And STILL no Time Warner

Tim Cook needs to be fired

Not just for letting Roku beat them to it, but because of the big **** up that he allowed to happen today. Moron let Samsung beat them to the market with a SmartWatch.

He's got to go for his incompetence. He is killing Apple!

If I recall Rio beat Apple to market with an MP3 player. Palm beat Apple to market with a smartphone. Pandora beat Apple to market with a customizable Internet radio station (still has them beat for the moment).

I think you confuse being first to market with quality product and insurmountable category killer.

As for Roku, did it every occur to you that since Roku is a less integrated company with weaker corporate power TW saw little harm in letting them have an app where they thought Apple is more of a threat or can be pushed further in negotiations?

Tim Cook has to do whats best for Apple and that's not putting a TW app on AppleTV at any cost assuming TW has a price. I'll be the first to be critical of some of Cook's foul ups, but this isn't necessarily one of them -- we don't know what is going on b/t the two parties right now. But it's TW's ball to be sure.
 
What doesn't make sense to me is that if we have to have cable in order to view some of this content, like the new Disney Channels and HBO, then why would I even bother watching it through the AppleTV over just watching it directly on my TV through the cable box. We're adding an unnecessary middle-man.

Now, if this is all paving the way for allowing us to subscribe to these channels without having to buy cable tv then I'm all for this. I've been saying for years I'd be more than happy to give HBO 20-30 dollars a month to be able to stream their content online. I do watch enough of their content that I can easily justify the cost being 20-30.
 
Those fuel and up bands (and their users) look pretty dumb

watches/time keeping in general are 13th century tech

I really dont care about "smart" watches

or trying to plug headphones into them

#WiresEverywhere
 
I'm less interested in an AppleTV "app store" and more interested in seeing if adding these "authentication required" channels is just a step toward making the same channels(and more to come, I hope) available as direct subscriptions without an associated cable account in the future.

I am thinking the same. Instead of paying $100/month to a cable company to access 500 channels that I don't watch, I would sooner pay, say, $5/month each to subscribe to, I dunno, HBO, Discovery Channel, Food Network, etc. Some channels could command more than others based on their programming demand.

Maybe this is what Steve's big idea was. Everyone could access only and exactly what they want to see, pay for only those channels, and get them streamed directly. Add to that some PVR or on-demand scheduling/streaming, and you've got the perfect way to watch whatever you want, whenever you want.
 
Seeing More Attention going to Apple TV has been great. Still wish it was open to application developers......

It is open to developers via AirPlay.

dual_screen1.png


Don't know why one would want an increase in cost associated with built-in processing power when that processing power is in their iPhone/iPad/iPad Mini already.
 
Last edited:
Something tells me apple is holding back on opening up the apple tv apps to 3rd party due to interface issues. Having to organize and control apps via a TV remote or your iphone isn't exactly the greatest way to interact with a TV.

Whatever Steve Jobs "cracked" before he died they must still be refining (aka motion/voice control).
 
And STILL no Time Warner

Tim Cook needs to be fired

Not just for letting Roku beat them to it, but because of the big **** up that he allowed to happen today. Moron let Samsung beat them to the market with a SmartWatch.

He's got to go for his incompetence. He is killing Apple!

Wow. Really? :rolleyes:

As if he is sitting at his desk doing these things on purpose, like keeping a TW deal from going through. :rolleyes:
 
Seeing More Attention going to Apple TV has been great. Still wish it was open to application developers.....

Apple is clearly viewing this as a TV so any App Store would be limited to viewing apps, not all apps.

But yes I think there is something to having a store and letting us get apps independent of the OS. Ease of app updates as they happen in iOS overall.

----------

I too wish they would open it to user installed apps. The Berlin philharmonic digital concert hall is a real gem and it would be nice to not have to use the iPad app and mirror.

Feedback it. That certainly sounds like a viewing sort of thing thus in their apparent scope
 
I don't have an AppleTV... so I have a question.

How does the Disney Channel work?

Does it show what is being broadcast on the Disney Channel right now?

Or is it a way to select shows on-demand?
 
And yeah, the Disney icons are hideous. And is there some exec at ABC/Disney/ESPN who thinks that they have to tell us to "Watch" each of their apps? Let's see, I am using this on my TV so that I can "Smell" ESPN? Seems like they are wasting a lot of valuable icon real estate.
 
I am thinking the same. Instead of paying $100/month to a cable company to access 500 channels that I don't watch, I would sooner pay, say, $5/month each to subscribe to, I dunno, HBO, Discovery Channel, Food Network, etc. Some channels could command more than others based on their programming demand.

Maybe this is what Steve's big idea was. Everyone could access only and exactly what they want to see, pay for only those channels, and get them streamed directly. Add to that some PVR or on-demand scheduling/streaming, and you've got the perfect way to watch whatever you want, whenever you want.

Channels are the issue not a la cart channel selection.

While I do want to pick what 'channels' i get, I have no interest in watching TV on the networks schedule.

It should be a la cart network selection with their library being 100% on-demand, not live. New episode of Suits comes out? Publishes at the same time as network but AppleTV useres would be able to watch it whenever.

----------

What app is that?

MetalStorm: Wingman
 
What doesn't make sense to me is that if we have to have cable in order to view some of this content, like the new Disney Channels and HBO, then why would I even bother watching it through the AppleTV over just watching it directly on my TV through the cable box. We're adding an unnecessary middle-man.

Now, if this is all paving the way for allowing us to subscribe to these channels without having to buy cable tv then I'm all for this. I've been saying for years I'd be more than happy to give HBO 20-30 dollars a month to be able to stream their content online. I do watch enough of their content that I can easily justify the cost being 20-30.

I couldn't agree more. I have Dish Network and access to all those channels in my subscription. Why would I want to watch them on ATV????:confused:
 
It should be forbidden to write 'WATCH' on channel icons.

Unless,

Down the road there is an other icon for Disney that opens up some type of application or interactive content that isn't simply watching shows.

Wishful thinking on my part likely. Not so much for Disney, but for other providers / or types of interactive applications.
 
They need a channel store. I don't want most of these.

I want The Blaze, Amazon and maybe a few others. They would all code for the Apple TV if development was opened up since they already have content on the other iOS devices.
 
Not just for letting Roku beat them to it, but because of the big **** up that he allowed to happen today. Moron let Samsung beat them to the market with a SmartWatch.

1. Not a fact Apple is actively working on a watch right now
2. First to market isn't the same as best
3. They confirmed they are showing it on the 4th. Not the same as releasing it, which could be ages away
 
I'm in the uk and can't see these channels, speaking specifically about the Disney ones, if we had those on atv I could look at getting rid of cable! (Kids watch that it's the sole argument I hear for keeping cable)
 
So many double consonants in that title. :p

On topic, this makes me very happy! I've been saying for too long that the AppleTV has a huge amount of unused potential and could really be the next big thing.
 
You are right

However, Samsung being first does mean that they set the standard.

That is what I am most worried about

When you have spent several thousand dollars in the Apple ecosystem you tend to get a bit defensive when you see things that you think are bad.

So yeah, maybe I overreacted a bit

" Samsung being first does mean that they set the standard."

You know how pointless your comment is right?
 
Still no TWIT (twit.tv) channel? I'd love to be able to watch TWIT live without having to AirPlay from my iPad...

Smithsonian will be nice, if it doesn't require a subscription... I have Dish for my TV, and they had Smithsonian for a while, but dropped it.

:apple::apple:
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.