pat500000
Suspended
I'm talking about ISP.
Apple Working on Digital Television Guide for Apple TV
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
All right. Now THAT is a good rumor. Opening each app to see "what's on" was never "the future" of television. A best-of "on screen guide" would be terrific! I hope this rumor is one that actually pans out.
BlandUsername
macrumors 6502
havenyoung
macrumors 6502
Amazon refused to develop Apple TV app for Prime Video yet their iOS counterpart supports AirPlay (yes, no Chromecast but Airplay), so I have been sticking with that all the time.
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah .
Fix the damn remote, Apple. I can't even begin to scroll through my 3000 movies without getting a thumb cramp, jumping to random menus, and having to start all over again...and again...and again. Why can't I press and hold to scroll quickly, like I did on the old remote (which you clowns also partially disabled, thanks a lot.)
The new AppleTV is simply the most un-Apple-like product they have ever made. So many badly-designed features in one little product...
Fix the damn remote, Apple. I can't even begin to scroll through my 3000 movies without getting a thumb cramp, jumping to random menus, and having to start all over again...and again...and again. Why can't I press and hold to scroll quickly, like I did on the old remote (which you clowns also partially disabled, thanks a lot.)
The new AppleTV is simply the most un-Apple-like product they have ever made. So many badly-designed features in one little product...
CarlJ
Contributor
The idea of offering a "TV network" API, where a network could put an app on the Apple TV (let the app handle administrative details like authorization - presumably authenticate for free if you have the equivalent cable channels, or subscribe in-app for separate service, like what HBO allows), then have the app use some content-provider API to present series/show/episode metadata and availability, along with handles to the actual content to stream, which could run in an Apple-provided centralized front-end app... that could be pretty cool. And a big step up from where they currently go through the cable companies as a middleman, with the customer mostly getting a terrible ancient grid UI of networks and air-times. Apple's front end app could hand off to the actual TV network app if the content was especially tricky (some interactive show) or if the content provider was clinging that tightly to the old ways. In simpler cases, Apple could handle streaming the content (with proper behind-the-scenes authorization) directly in the app, for a fairly seamless experience. Each network could charge what they wanted for their content, and a lot of them would likely quickly find that no, people really don't want all 27 of your filler channels, just the two good ones, thank you very much. But then the individual networks could try smaller bundles to see what works - essentially selling directly to (and competing for) the actual end users, rather than selling to cable companies. All with convenient one-stop billing through Apple (and, yep, Apple would take a cut, and the size of the cut probably has been one of the sticking points for negotiations). It may not be exactly what Steve Jobs had in mind, but it could be a fairly good direction for TV to go.
[doublepost=1470344467][/doublepost]
I hate that too. The difference is, Apple has the opportunity to provide a "show me only what I have access to" toggle (opportunity, not guarantee). Such a thing would make customers happy, and Apple makes money on equipment sales by keeping customers happy, while cable companies want you to see all those things you can't access, as an inducement to pay them more money.
boston04and07
macrumors 68000
After reading this, I can see this idea as actually being something a bit like the News app, but for TV and video, if it's true that users can just play video directly from the "guide" UI without having to manually exit and switch to the app in question. The News app eliminated the need to manually switch between multiple printed news apps, but still gave each "channel" the ability to maintain their own content, look, and feel. I always thought that the general idea behind News could nicely be translated into the dozens of video apps I have on my Apple TV and iPad/iPhone...consolidating many apps that really serve the same fundamental purpose (playing video) into one cleaner and consistent single interface, while also giving the benefits of recommendations. If this guide thing allows seamless playing of content directly from the guide interface itself, it could serve a very similar purpose.
Whatever it is, I hope the Mac isn't left out! I always watch more streaming videos on my 15" MBP than on my iPad mini and like the idea of the same interface on all my devices.
Whatever it is, I hope the Mac isn't left out! I always watch more streaming videos on my 15" MBP than on my iPad mini and like the idea of the same interface on all my devices.
CarlJ
Contributor
It's the last-mile problem then. Cable companies and phone companies own that wire going to everybody's homes. Apple couldn't really compete unless, say, they were to put up a fleet of satellites (or high-flying permanently-on-station planes, like Google has toyed with) to provide wireless connectivity. Then (aside from the immense up-front hardware costs), latency is the problem to solve.
bpeeps
Suspended
Purchase a third party remote or use another app streaming service.
Zirel
Suspended
This.
Until Apple doesn't "fiber up" the US, it's going to be just an hobby.
But they won't go there because, with utilities, people pay too little and complain too much.
I mean, given Apple's new IAP model, if Amazon is still unhappy then they can see themselves out
Sakurambo-kun
macrumors 6502a
A perfectly logical step, but one which I suspect, like Siri universal search, will be essentially US only.
My UK apple TV 4 remains a dust collector and occasional iTunes player. It's tragic that my dedicated streamer is vastly inferior to my games console (PS4) for streaming content.
My UK apple TV 4 remains a dust collector and occasional iTunes player. It's tragic that my dedicated streamer is vastly inferior to my games console (PS4) for streaming content.
sw1tcher
macrumors 604
Their eWorld was a flop.
69Mustang
macrumors 604
So you basically want to ditch cable and sign up for... cable?
OkaaaaayInfrastructure costs, regulation, maintenance and improvements, impact on profit margins... the list goes on and on. The worst one I'll answer under Zirel's quote.
Here is where Apple would have it's biggest hurdle if they decided to go out on their own. They'd really have to go fiber instead of any of the legacy copper or dsl routes. They have the cash to do it. What they don't have is the lobbying muscle to fight cable companies. Ask Google about the impediments cable and telecom puts up trying to dissuade Google Fiber installation. Ask any municipality that wants to run their own hi-speed net work. It's a cluster freak. Cable/internet lobbyist are deeply embedded in Congressional pockets. And unless Apple gets down and dirty....
pat500000
Suspended
Shouldn't apple have the money to start internet service and resolve all those problems that you mentioned?
[doublepost=1470347459][/doublepost]
Perhaps.....
Maybe they can improve?
Sakurambo-kun
macrumors 6502a
Amazon is on pretty much every platform except the apple TV, so something is clearly wrong on Apple's end. Whatever the financials are, only Apple aren't offering Amazon acceptable terms.
Of course it's entirely counter productive for apple, as by keeping Amazon off the platform they make other, superior platforms look even better. Unless you own iTunes content, why would anyone buy any apple TV over a fire TV or a Roku?
The Apple TV is a flop, a total turkey. It offers nothing competing platforms or even smart TVs don't offer, and often much less.
pat500000
Suspended
I don't have apple tv 4..but i have 3rd version. The only reason I find atv useful is because airplay...just airplay.
Amazon is free to put the same version currently available for iDevices on the Apple TV. Apple is not forcing them to support IAP. So what's Amazon's excuse now?
RickInHouston
macrumors 65816
Personally, I think he was lying. He was trying to get under Google's skin. He cracked nothing in regards to tv.
pat500000
Suspended
He probably cracked his tv.....shattered....
After paying $200 for a device that is absolutely crippled by its remote, why should I have to do that? And, FYI, the third-party remotes I have tried all have the same issue - scroll-thru is crippled by the software on the AppleTV itself. Like I said - even Apple's own remote control (the older silver one) cannot perform even a basic scrolling function. That is inexcusable.
As for another streaming app - while I agree that this is perhaps a solution, don't you find it simply astonishing for Apple to have a perfectly functioning symbiosis between a device and its remote...then "improve" it by disabling core, basic functionality and adding other, crippled functions? I mean, why CANT Siri sort through my own library? And, using a third-party app still doesn't fix the other issues with the remote...such as an inability to know which end is up, the ridiculous sensitivity, the refusal to go back a menu level without starting over at the top... I can go on and on.
t'm much more inclined to return this pizza chit and go back to the AppleTV 3 and its perfectly functional, well-designed, simple remote.
Why would you have apps downloaded to your Apple TV that you don't subscribe too?
Zirel
Suspended
That's not even debatable! Fiber is much cheaper than copper.
[doublepost=1470350304][/doublepost]
Had they just kept going with this:
AppleTV wouldn't be a giant joke today. This system was the key to getting their foot in the door early on, but they let that ship sail and now its still just a hobby.
Oh god... can't you understand that TV = masses?
It needs to be simple, inexpensive and dumb.
Nowhere in the world that that thing would pay itself, people aren't going to "upgrade" their sets to ones with that thing, and without that, TV networks would never produce content for that thing.
Juicy Box
macrumors 604
This will probably be a great addition to the ATV4. I can't wait!
My overall experience with the ATV4 so far has been slightly disappointing.
The bugs, and the lack of apps, such as Amazon prime, and decent games, I feel like Apple was blowing smoke up our butts when they said this was a revolutionary device.
The UI on most of what I call the "standard" apps are crappy when compared with the much older ATV3.
But, this sounds like something to look forward to.
My overall experience with the ATV4 so far has been slightly disappointing.
The bugs, and the lack of apps, such as Amazon prime, and decent games, I feel like Apple was blowing smoke up our butts when they said this was a revolutionary device.
The UI on most of what I call the "standard" apps are crappy when compared with the much older ATV3.
But, this sounds like something to look forward to.