I have cable in my house, just no cable box in my room. So it's still great to watch ESPN or FOX and never have to use a cable box or need a coax cable.
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 TV Updated with CNBC and FOX NOW Channels
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I have cable in my house, just no cable box in my room. So it's still great to watch ESPN or FOX and never have to use a cable box or need a coax cable.
All of it is useless to me, as I don't subscribe any cable company, but the mere fact that there's this much activity on the platform of late makes me cautiously optimistic that there's big things coming down the pipe, and we'll see them soon. 
Yes. Thank you. This needs to happen. I got tired of entering in all these things every time they added a channel, so i just stopped. Maybe if they give the option of one registration or individual.
It's not like the cable companies are looking out for anything but their own interest. They try to screw me, I screw them right back and won't for a second feel bad about it. Hence, I pay TWC $30 and change for their 15/1 bare internet, use somebody's Hulu and Netflix subs, somebody else's HBO GO sub, pay for some shows, and everybody else can pretty much stare greedily at the death grip I have on my wallet.
Bryan please take note:
Content owners OWN all the content you want to see. They will ONLY let you access them in a specific way. Apple has absolutely no power to tell them what to do.... They tried already and they basically told Apple to go kick rocks.
Why would Amazon let them do that when they have their own streaming box?
The problem here is that it simply doesn't make sense for Apple to pay the billions of dollars the content providers want in order to have streaming unless they start up their own subscription based service like Netflix. I don't think that's something that's on Apple's radar at the moment, especially since so much content is already tied up with either Amazon or Netflix. I really don't think it's that the people at Apple are too ~dumb~ to get what people want, it's just probably not worth it at the moment.
The industry just isn't at the point where the cable tv providers feel comfortable allowing access without a cable subscription. Streaming as an industry is still pretty young and these are huge behemoths who don't like change.
Spot on, but one point that I personally disagree with. I currently pay 100 dollars per month (Netherlands) for indeed about 200 channels of which I occasionally watch about 15. I would gladly pay that same amount of money for only those 15 channels if it would rid me of at least 50% of the advertisements and hidden advertising in TV programs.
Many of us aren't looking for cheap TV, but premium TV that is convenient to watch. A 2 hour movie in The Netherlands on one of the commercial channels is cut into 10 pieces with each at least 5 minutes of commercials in between, and if you are unlucky even a newscast of 30 minutes.
We are now in the extreme corner with low quality TV book-ended by hours of nonsense commercials. I see the commercial model and value of advertisements etc, but we have gone to much into that extreme.
We don't have to go all cheap, but I would like to have an option to pay selectively for what I want to watch at a fair price and for that price be rid of product placement programs and commercials. We currently have no option at all than to watch utter crap with crap intermissions about crap.
Cable TV and television networks in general have seen the future of production direct internet video distribution and they are scared to death of it.
From that, they have mocked up many bizarre deals where advertising is sold distributed across a bundle of channels. Thus, selling a la cart breaks the contract of the advertising sold. This forces all of these channels sold together to the end customer.
IMO, it is nothing but the same crap railroads did selling "minimum transport volumes" to keep their rails lines running when the Interstate system came in during the '50s.
And yet they offer Amazon Instant Video on other platforms, including game consoles. So, I don't think they are that serious about forcing people to their streaming box.
Well said, I do not get this people that constantly keep trying to come up with excuses why Amazon Prime can not be on Apple without any proof.
I hear you and that makes sense. If this is a dead-end for Apple, then they need to cut the cord and let it go. Apple has never been a company to hold on to things that don't have a future in them. Hopefully, there is a glimmer of hope for Apple in the TV/Broadcast market.
Bryan
You are joking right? DVD/Blu Ray sales are down just like Movie Theaters, people rather have simpler way for access to movies and TV shows. I can only assume you have not walked into stores like Best Buy because if you do you would notice there is only few isles of DVD/Blu Rays because sales for it are not so great as they use to be.
A very logical, well thought out post. Most will probably ignore and continue to rant.
This would never happen if Steve Jobs was still around he would never take crap from any of this corporate monopolists sadly we got Tim Cook who just wants to play fair.
----------
Okay, than can you explain why Charter Communication does not allow access to HBO Go on Apple TV yet but only through my iPhone? There is no excuse for this when many cable companies allow it.
because they have to wait until they negotiate a new contract with Time Warner
and like time warner cable they are a cable company with no content they own. so they have to get profits by upselling to DVR and higher internet speeds. the opposite of allowing people to stream content from an app
and like time warner cable they are a cable company with no content they own. so they have to get profits by upselling to DVR and higher internet speeds. the opposite of allowing people to stream content from an app
What on earth makes you think I was talking about dvds and blu-rays? I was talking about streaming content in comparison to the model of purchasing cable, which is in the sentence you quoted... Apple already has the purchase market pretty much locked down through iTunes.
Single Sign On?
Am I the only person who thinks apple needs a single sign on for cable providers? Something in icloud that would work on iOS, ATV, OSX
Am I the only person who thinks apple needs a single sign on for cable providers? Something in icloud that would work on iOS, ATV, OSX
right now the content companies share in an average bounty of $35 per account per month before premium channels plus selling ads.
if they sold a la carte they would have to set up billing systems, hire people, pay CC company to process payment or pay apple, etc.
when you figure plain internet is $55 a month, you aren't going to save much buying a la carte. easier to pay an extra $10 or $20 a month and just get more TV than you can watch.
What are you talking about Time Warner having no content of their own? Like Comcast they have many Networks of their own with their own content on it, please do not be a fool now this companies know what they are doing unlike other cable companies that still are just cable companies that do not even cable networks of their own.
Apple TV is primarily a way for consumers, particularly those already in the Apple ecosystem, to watch iTunes product on their TV without having the computer tied up and having to sit next to them as they do. It's a convenience that helps sell Apple product.
Until people come to accept that, they are going to be unhappy with the aTV.
Sorry to burst all of your bubbles.
What makes you think Steve Jobs wasn't trying to do something about this when he was alive?