Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple's New Vision for Apple TV 'Less Ambitious' Than Before

levitynyc said:
At this point, Apple should just take Apple TV out back and shoot it.

I own 3 of them and they are really getting long in the tooth. The UI is terrible and slow. Netflix barely works on it anymore.
Click to expand...
No idea what's wrong with your's but mine (5 of them now) all work flawlessly and stream Netflix without any issues. The UI is smooth and easy to use, not sure why yours aren't working right. At least two of mine get daily use.

While you may not like them doesn't mean that they are bad.

As for content that is the providers issue, too many are stuck with being afraid of embracing technology and giving the people what they want. The ability to buy / watch any show at any time without having to subscribe to a gluttony of other crap.
 
Just give me a platform where I can pay a fee for the channels I want. $9.99 a month for discovery, $9.99 a month for AMC
$.99 for a day of TVLand to test the channel out, and if Like it, a $8.99 fee for the month.

This way I'm only paying for the channels I watch.


Edit:

So, let me fix my post. 4.99$ a month per channel! Not 9.99. I was just trying to convey my statement. I now realize 9.99 is steep!
 
Last edited:
EmbraceTheOne said:
Just give me a platform where I can pay a fee for the channels I want. $9.99 a month for discovery, $9.99 a month for AMC
$.99 for a day of TVLand to test the channel out, and if Like it, a $8.99 fee for the month.

This way I'm only paying for the channels I watch.
Click to expand...

I get your point, but dude, your numbers are off. ESPN, the mother of all channels, costs you about $4 per month in a package. So as standalone services, $5 per channel would probably be the ceiling for any given network.
 
jav6454 said:
How is less ambitious good? These media companies need to realize that what the WWF did is the most amazing service ever. More to the point, cable companies need to realize what AT&T, Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile realized, they are just dumb pipes for us.
Click to expand...
What did the WWE I assume you mean? If not then I'm not sure what you mean. And secondly what did they do? Can you explain this so we all know.
 
Last edited:
levitynyc said:
At this point, Apple should just take Apple TV out back and shoot it.

I own 3 of them and they are really getting long in the tooth. The UI is terrible and slow. Netflix barely works on it anymore.
Click to expand...

I had problems with Netflix loading problems for a while, but they all had to do with my internet and network being generally unreliable already. In this case, changing out my modem for a newer one fixed my problems.
 
levitynyc said:
At this point, Apple should just take Apple TV out back and shoot it.

I own 3 of them and they are really getting long in the tooth. The UI is terrible and slow. Netflix barely works on it anymore.

The Roku 3 can do nearly everything the Apple TV can do, plus it has a better remote and it works with Amazon Prime.
Click to expand...

Roku boxes make Apple TV look like a joke, they have apps and games for years now, and a great ui
 
Michael CM1 said:
I get your point, but dude, your numbers are off. ESPN, the mother of all channels, costs you about $4 per month in a package. So as standalone services, $5 per channel would probably be the ceiling for any given network.
Click to expand...


Yeah, I know my numbers are off. Just trying to get the point across! there's a reason why I don't go to school for business! Lol.
5$ a channel is genius. It's just a matter of who gets there first.
 
levitynyc said:
At this point, Apple should just take Apple TV out back and shoot it.

I own 3 of them and they are really getting long in the tooth. The UI is terrible and slow. Netflix barely works on it anymore.

The Roku 3 can do nearly everything the Apple TV can do, plus it has a better remote and it works with Amazon Prime.
Click to expand...

I agree, mostly.

Netflix does work well for me, but its UI is a bit behind other Netflix apps.

ATV simply does not work well with local content. I really don't care for iTunes running somewhere all the time, plus it keeps disconnecting. The codec limitations are often frustrating.

The general UI really needs an update.

Most of the channels Apple rams down my throat are of no interest to me, yet it's a chore to hide them.

I can't get any apps I actually want on ATV. Yes, I can use my iPad, but sometimes it's inconvenient, and it also requires another device, plus the act of pairing, to do something which should be simple.

Simple, remember.

As for being a cable box, I really don't care. If I actually wanted cable, I'd get cable, with a cable box. Why do I need ATV?
 
Last edited:
levitynyc said:
At this point, Apple should just take Apple TV out back and shoot it.

I own 3 of them and they are really getting long in the tooth. The UI is terrible and slow. Netflix barely works on it anymore.

The Roku 3 can do nearly everything the Apple TV can do, plus it has a better remote and it works with Amazon Prime.
Click to expand...

Couldn't disagree more... I use mine, now almost 3 years old, on a daily basis, and it works as well as it ever did - better, actually, since they keep adding more channels to it. It's still a terrific device.

That said, I'm very disappointed to hear Apple's scaling back on future TV plans. The original concept - cutting the cord to cable companies - would be terrific. I have to believe someone will successfully do it and that it will be the future of TV. I assumed it would be apple, and maybe it still will be, but apparently not yet. Disappointing.
 
Was aTV was DOA?

Looks like it is behaving more like sophisticated DLNA device connecting to TV streaming my iPad/iPhone videos!!! In any case, this device really did not make any sense without additional Hard Disk to store content locally and does not have any outstanding Apple front end products like Apple TV (no one talks about it now a days).
 
If Apple could buy Areo and provide local channels and get BBC America, HGTv, Foodnetwork And bundle in Netflix and Hulu would be enough for me to cut the cord. I'm tired of paying DishNetwork $75 a month for the three channels and locals that I watch.
 
macUser2007 said:
Why do I need ATV?
Click to expand...

If you don't care about iTunes content then you don't.

Last time I checked, my Roku couldn't do anything with my iTunes content.

The bottom line is that Apple is trying to facilitate moves that would assist many of us in cutting the cord. However, the established infrastructure would like to keep forcing people to pay for **** they don't want in a manner of forced subsidy.

Meanwhile the minor streaming players are merely sitting in the cracks and crevices trying to squeak out a position while not rocking the boat.
 
Rad99004 said:
If Apple could buy Areo and provide local channels and get BBC America, HGTv, Foodnetwork And bundle in Netflix and Hulu would be enough for me to cut the cord. I'm tired of paying DishNetwork $75 a month for the three channels and locals that I watch.
Click to expand...

Why Areo? Expensive for what it is and rather pointless on a home device (plus ATV, Roku, etc. already offer many of the OTA networks).

I did cut the cord with Dish at least 5-7 years ago (was paying something like $140 a month for not watching much at all).

I first went through a few HTPCs, which ultimately were not user-friendly enough for my wife.

The problem is that for local content, Apple TV is not all that user-friendly either.

Someone else will come along and change home entertainment, I guess. It may even be Google's Chrome - it sucks now, but Android sucked just as much when it first appeared.
 
dansix said:
If Steve were alive, he would have gotten the deal done. He's probably the only one that could have gotten that deal done though.
Click to expand...

In your fantasy land. The TV industry is not the music industry. And Steve Jobs was not a miracle worker.
 
Don't follow Hulu, please. Just give me A La Carte channels in a very nice format with cloud DVR. Problem solved.
 
There goes Steve's "finally cracked it" vision...

This makes me so mad. How could Apple settle for the Hulu standard!?
 
Not to take anything away from Steve Jobs because he clearly was an outstanding visionary, but to paint him as willing his way to many deals is probably an exaggeration. It's more likely that he was a master of surveying the situation and playing to the other party's incentives.
 
brentsg said:
If you don't care about iTunes content then you don't.

Last time I checked, my Roku couldn't do anything with my iTunes content....
Click to expand...

I don't particularly care about having to run iTunes in the background 24/7. I doubt I am the only one.

I also don't feel I should have to convert all my legacy media just so I can import it to iTunes, which then has to run 24/7, so that I can watch something on my ATV. I did, but I did not like it.

Conversely, your Roku can connect to most NAS boxes without a problem and if you want an iTunes-like server (just better) then you can use Plex with it.

My Apple TVs disconnect periodically from the iTunes server (my Plex server, running on the same machine, does not disconnect). I've seen enough posts about this issue to tell me that it is indeed an issue, but obviously not of enough of a priority to Apple.

brentsg said:
The bottom line is that Apple is trying to facilitate moves that would assist many of us in cutting the cord....
Click to expand...

Really? Did you not catch the part about Time Warner?
 
bacaramac said:
Don't follow Hulu, please. Just give me A La Carte channels in a very nice format with cloud DVR. Problem solved.
Click to expand...

Sounds like that's what Apple wanted to do and the media companies basically gave them the finger. People need to be pissed with the media companies and content providers for not getting with the times.

----------
macUser2007 said:
Really? Did you not catch the part about Time Warner?
Click to expand...
yeah because the media companies won't allow them to facilitate cutting the cord.
 
Apple shouldn't compromise on this to force old media ever to catch up to the rest of us living in 2014.
 
macUser2007 said:
I don't particularly care about having to run iTunes in the background 24/7. I doubt I am the only one.

I also don't feel I should have to convert all my legacy media just so I can import it to iTunes, which then has to run 24/7, so that I can watch something on my ATV. I did, but I did not like it.
Click to expand...

If your legacy media is the issue then why should Apple, or anyone that's not trying to sell you a NAS, care about you?

I actually do run iTunes 24/7, but mostly because it really doesn't have a negative impact. I don't stream anything from iTunes locally.

I can't even think of anything to debate with you. Apple is looking at the future of televised content as it pertains to the traditional business model vs what is possible. You're worried about not having to stick a DVD in a player.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back