Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
...
It has been well-established that the biggest hurdle to 4K content is the availability of bandwidth. Certainly there are cost savings, but there are actual, real technical hurdles.

Point is, compression won't go away when the issue of "availability of bandwidth" goes away unless CDNs stop billing based on bandwidth.

Your 4K stuff will still be heavily compressed.

Video, MP3s, etc. didn't stop being compressed, or become less compressed, when Dial Up was largely supplanted by broadband.
 
They don't have to. They share board members and have pretty sweet deals between them already.

Today's news on the Disney / Apple "sweet deals" you think exist:

Although Disney Infinity 3.0 launched on the fourth-generation Apple TV last fall, offering a comparable gaming experience to the console versions, Disney eventually abandoned updating the game on Apple's new set-top box, making fans wired into that version of Disney Infinity 3.0 miss important new features.
 
I deal with a lot of audio and video media, as well as advertising in general. If anybody is currently seeing any actual ROI (making more from advertising than what they pay out, and being able to prove that) then it won't be that way for long.

There is nobody I know personally that would be able to name the last x commercials they've seen.

They all own TiVOs and skip commercials, watch from services that provide commercial free, have their routers and firewalls block ads, etc. Even if playing a game on a phone and a video ad comes up, walk away from the phone, get something to drink, whatever, but anything other than watch or look at an ad.

It's just the way things are.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-ineffectiveness-of-video-ads-online-and-on-tv-2016-6

http://www.mirriad.com/news/online-video-and-tv-ads-consistently-reaching-less-than-10-of-viewers/

Which isn't necessarily a good things for consumers. Distributors and content providers are going to look for other ways to fill that revenue stream...which will mean trying to get it from direct customers rather than advertisers.

But you're right. People try everything they can to get around advertising. My 18 year old daughter watches 95% of TV content taped. to skip the ads She streams 95% of her music. She's never bought a DVD or CD. She's heading off to college this fall and when she saw the brochure about cable TV in the dorms, she didn't think she needed it. She will just stream stuff off the channel's website.

Other than buying a movie ticket, she has this perception that all entertainment should just be free and easily available.

It'll be interesting to see how things change as her generation moves into adulthood. They don't want to pay for anything and have zero patience for advertising.
 
I mean the iPhone 5 was released. The 5s introduced TouchID which was big. People went crazy over the 6/6+ and Apple Pay was launched. Say what you want about the Apple Watch but nearly all owners love it. So it's not like nothing happened. Oh, you're talking about the TV? They didn't really start getting serious about the TV until 2-3 years ago. They did release the Apple TV 4, which I and everyone else I know finds fairly useful. Oh, you mean content? I mean now you have apps launched by different networks, although admittedly most still require cable subscriptions, and you have Universal Search. Oh, you mean Apple-negotiated content? Yeah, 2-3 years of negotiations isn't uncommon when trying to do huge deals. Remember that the last time a deal of this scale was attempted, it was with the music industry which was in shambles. The TV market is not.

Pay attention to what's being discussed in the thread and the timeframe of the discussion. Then contribute.
 
Yes, but it was negotiated per-market which has resulted in inconsistent offerings.

No... it's a national service, with 3 tiers. National carriage is national carriage. The price is the same and the offering is identical wherever you are, with one caveat...

Local channels are per-market and come at a 10 dollar premium to the national packages.
 
Last edited:
Which isn't necessarily a good things for consumers. Distributors and content providers are going to look for other ways to fill that revenue stream...which will mean trying to get it from direct customers rather than advertisers.

Yup. The content will become devalued to a degree, and they will need to shift their revenue paradigms.

This is why, in my opinion, TV/Video content will eventually be a la carte. In aggregate, the cost may be a few percent higher per consumer, however... that consumer will be happier and likely more loyal.

I think the concept of a "Network" is in danger long term. They will become what record labels are... labels back and produce content they are betting to be money makers, but they don't push an all or nothing model like the networks currently do.
 
Today's news on the Disney / Apple "sweet deals" you think exist:

Although Disney Infinity 3.0 launched on the fourth-generation Apple TV last fall, offering a comparable gaming experience to the console versions, Disney eventually abandoned updating the game on Apple's new set-top box, making fans wired into that version of Disney Infinity 3.0 miss important new features.
Sweet deals don't include supporting money loosing products.
Disney obviously weighed the costs of maintaining the program and found it to be a losing deal.

Apple still has a lot of Disney video content on ATV platform.
 
Last edited:
You seem to think that Apple was ever a forefront leader of technologies. Why would Apple want to be at the forefront of a technology that isn't used and has significant hurdles to overcome? 4K is not a highly used technology. Hell, 1080p isn't even being delivered consistently OTA/OTI. 4K is not going to be used until the internet gets the capability to deliver it on a mass scale. That won't happen for years, so it makes no sense to support it now, especially since so little content is even being made at that standard. Seriously only a few Netflix, Amazon, and maybe Hulu shows are being distributed at that standard. There's like maybe 20 shows that are being distributed under that standard and all of those are via services that don't hold a userbase really comparable to cable companies and movie studios. And even the 4K that is being delivered is heavily compressed. Why? Because the world - and especially the US - does not have the bandwidth capable to sustain that rate of transmission at a mass scale. When that hurdle is passed, then Apple should adopt 4K. Until then it's useless.

Oh and your 4K device comment? Yeah, there will be no demand if content can't be reliably delivered.

So why does the iPhone 6 shoot 4K video that you cannot watch on the Apple TV?
 
The next tvOS will have single sign on. So, once you sign on into iTunes, I guess all your other app subscriptions is going to be using the itunes password. Hopefully that is how it works and it is seamless. However, people might end up spending a lot of money of these various subscriptions.
 
"...In 2013, Mr. Cue met with Mr. Britt, Time Warner Inc. CEO Jeff Bewkes and other executives in Mr. Britt’s office overlooking Manhattan’s Central Park. Time Warner owns HBO, TNT, CNN and other channels.

Apple’s Mr. Cue arrived 10 minutes late and was wearing jeans, tennis shoes with no socks, and a Hawaiian shirt, says a person familiar with the meeting. The other executives were wearing suits....":rolleyes:

The WSJ article can be read via a link here(if you are lucky)
http://www.osnews.com/story/29322/_Apple_s_negotiating_tactics_sunk_its_long-rumored_TV_service_
 
Really? What has Apple ever done that makes you think if they get a significantly better deal, they will pass it onto customers?

The entire history of the company says they will pocket the entire benefit they negotiate and on top of that mark it up a bit more because Apple is worth the extra cost.

Do you really need to ask? The iTunes music store. Do you know how music was sold -- online or off -- before that?
 
I don't get it. Apple has had no leverage over the content industry for several years now. So, what is the point of repeatedly playing hardball? Its no wonder that Apple execs are shown the door and a middle finger on the way out. If Apple only wants to negotiate on their terms - they should first gain some leverage in the industry - buy a competitor/ create content/ buy content rights whatever...
Which is probably what Apple will ultimately end up doing.

By that time, it might be too late for them to work with Apple even if they wanted to.
 
Yeah, they rely on rate increases to fuel profit growth.... That explains why my cable bill went from $110 to nearly $200 in the past few years for 400 channels, 380 of which I never watch (but have to pay for anyway since they won't sell channels ala carte). I especially love it when someone like Fox or some sports channel makes high demands (I don't watch sports at all). Take all those crappy home shopping channels, all those wacky religious channels, all those propaganda right-wing (Blaze) type channels and FLUSH THEM DOWN THE TOILET WHERE THEY BELONG!

If I could just pay for the channels I actually watch, my cable bill could be half what it is now (probably lower, but I'd be willing to pay more per channel to get rid of all the crap channels). Meanwhile, I do enjoy watching old game shows at my mother's house when I visit (i.e. She has GSN or Game Show Network). It's on my cable listing, but I don't have access to it. I called my cable company and they said it and like 4 other channels I have ZERO interest in are in another "package" for $8 more a month. I'm not paying another $8 a month for ONE channel that shows mostly re-runs of old game shows. I told them take all those home shopping channels and sports channels off my current listing (that would be like 20 channels) and give me that ONE channel I'd rather watch. "Sorry, it doesn't work that way. You have to take the crap we're pooping!" And THAT is why we need someone like Apple to get us true ala carte programming. I'm tired of paying for crap I DON'T watch. And then you have the "torrents are stealing" crowd that has a fit if someone downloads a TV show they missed on the cable they paid for but didn't get to see for whatever reason. How is that not the networks and cable providers "stealing" my money for programming I never see (because you can't watch 24/7 or 400 channels at once, but you still have to pay for them)? Yeah, the grass is only greener on the Corporate side of the pasture and that's because they're always dumping bullcrap on it.

Learn one thing early, kids. Life isn't remotely "fair". Whatever you think "justice" is, the Earth is not. And THAT is why the partisan divisions just keep getting wider and wider and wider. People are sick of being taken advantage of and the system is rigged for the 1%, not the 99% and then the 1% tell us to bend over because here it comes again. But you can't really "fix" it because the 1% (crazy as some are) still only really serve the 1%. If Apple ever gets what they want, you'll still be paying through the nose for it (and getting less overall, even if you didn't watch it) because that's just the way it is. Someone has to pay for all those bad TV Shows they make that are total flops and it's not going to be the idiots that made them. No, the consumer gets shafted every time. The government wastes your money and then they cut your benefits and raise your taxes when they shouldn't have been touching that money in the first place for other spending. TV Networks make incredibly dumb shows by hack writers and then raise their asking rate every year anyway and cable and satellite providers agree to the increases and then pass those increases on to you as well. Meanwhile, you still are bombarded with commercials for 10-14 minutes of the 30 the show is supposed to last. Movies are shown edited for "time" and "content" (they even strip frames out which makes the motion choppier looking, but gives them an additional 2-4 minutes of ad time per hour!) and yet a movie still often lasts 2.5-3 hours long because they have so many damn commercials added to them and yet I still get to pay close to $200 a month to watch those shows and movies filled with commercials so they get profit from both directions! (once upon a time cable like digital radio was promoted as being ad-free since over-the-air television was paid for by commercials but then they realized double-dipping was more profitable yet). It's ridiculous.

What can you do about it? Bend over, that's what or just top watching TV. After all, social media (Facebook) has been so good for society. Lots of kids wandering around that think the Earth revolves around their life. News? Who cares. It's all about what I'm doing right now on my Twitter feed!

Yeah, I miss the 1980s. Sure arcades ate your quarters, but you could at least improve your skills and still get out of the house to play video games. There were fewer television stations to watch, but the programming was higher quality because the ad revenue was higher per channel and so ads didn't last as long either. I don't recall the Earth feeling quite as dangerous (as crazy people couldn't get together online worldwide to conspire so it was more limited to smaller regions on the other side of the Earth) and every shooting anywhere on Earth wasn't reported for the sensationalism that drives groups into a crazed frenzy. Fox News and MS-NBC didn't exist back then and that alone would be worth powering up the DeLorean for a trip back IMO (the music was better too and MTV actually showed music videos!). ;)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Aussieiphone
An option is ofcourse to buy a Mac mini, where you a decent signal grab an Elgato eye tv USB or if not just Internet for the majority of tv stations sites or Hulu and couple that with Netflix.

Ofcourse, the only thing missing without the tv signal is live sports. So if you have an Xbox, grab a season pass too...you get the idea.

Plus you have a full Mac - gave up the cable like six years back.
 
Wow. Why do you hang out here ? I just checked your post history and it seems you really have an issue with Apple. All of your post are very negative with a touch of hate towards Apple. You know there is a place for haters/Google fanboys and it is called Google+. You will fit right in with those idiots over there.
So people who critical to Apple are idiots. Amazing assumption there, n00b!
According to my brief research...
  • Apple has over $200 billion in cash
  • ESPN (the most valuable network) is worth $40 billion
  • CBS is worth $31 billion
  • NBC/Universal is worth $12 billion
  • ABC is worth $4 billion
Hey, Apple, just buy them all, make them sign a contract, make AppleTV great, and then you can keep the networks or sell them.
:facepalm: This reminds me of the kids here saying Apple should buy Adobe and make PS OSX exclusive or even better, just shut Adobe down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rjohnstone
:facepalm: This reminds me of the kids here saying Apple should buy Adobe and make PS OSX exclusive or even better, just shut Adobe down.

That's exactly what they did with Logic Pro and frankly, it's getting to be one of the few reasons left to buy a Mac over a PC since Apple has been making OS X slower, buggier and pretending to be an iPhone. Throw in on the hardware side their extremely slow hardware updates, terrible graphics drivers, etc. and I'm finding it harder and harder to contemplate a Mac for my next computer update. Where's the Thunderbolt III driven Macbook Pro with a single cable external hub with a high-powered GPU option? How about a RAID0 Mac Mini (they ditched it with the last update).

I think all Apple cares about anymore is the iPhone and looking for something other than Macs to work on. It's sad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rjohnstone
So for the $30 subscription, Apple is demanding $10 which the option to increase it as they see fit. No wonder they balked.
 
They don't have to. They share board members and have pretty sweet deals between them already.
True... Though with the Apple, Pixar, Disney round robin by the Jobs family, I could certainly see Tim Cook as Darth Vader "The Circle is Complete".
 
The PS Vue app situation puzzles me. They have an iOS app, but not one for AppleTV. They have an Android app, but not one for Sony's own Antroid TVs. But they do support Roku and FireTV boxes. Maybe they'll get around to developing the other apps sometime soon.

I still don't get why Apple can't at least copy what Sony has done with PS Vue. It's a compelling service that would be made even better with Apple's hardware and UI.
From what I hear on the Apple TV developers forums, there's gonna be an Apple TV app for ps vue at the end of 2016. So there's that. I would bet vue is going to expand aggressively to different platforms in the next year much like how Netflix did

And apple? I don't know man. They're too damn picky when it comes to a lot of this stuff. I wouldn't be surprised if this stall in an Apple TV service is entirely their fault because they wouldn't loosen up on some negotiations
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.