Apps

That's sort of how I see things.

Live sports, pay-per-view events, premium channels/services (like Hulu+), games that may use an iOS device as a control, streaming apps (ideally) that add support for DLNA or something, and I'm sort of hoping for peripheral support so you can get a special camera and use FaceTime.

 

im hoping in the UK,

Sky, BBC and any others will provide a service similar to that found on the iphone.

Sky Devs, if you read this id pay for the history channel alone!!

fingers crossed for an ATV2 App/Widget store soon

 

I would love to see Apps from all the major UK players....

BBC iPlayer
4OD
ITVplayer
I'm sure that sky would offer the skyplayer app that is also available on iphone and online.

Fingers crossed.

 

This. Except I hope the sky player app is like the Xbox one, very slick and very good quality video

 

That's all fine and great, but at least here is the U.S. you're not likely to be able to get official Apple TV apps for services such as Hulu or the ABC channel (or any other TV network for that matter). Just like on Google TV, these will be blocked by the networks because they have essentially exclusive arrangements with the local over-the-air broadcasters, cable TV and satellite service providers. If Apple (or anyone else) can undo this exclusivity then it would represent a major and groundbreaking change for the entire TV industry. Frankly, I don't expect that to happen anytime soon (eventually, yes, but it may take longer than most of us would like). I think this will also apply to the upcoming AirPlay technology, the video from the Hulu and ABC apps will likely be blocked just as it is today on the iPad's video out port.

In any case, if you exclude TV content I'm not sure what type of apps would actually be useful on the new Apple TV. Games would seem to be an obvious choice, but you'd have to use your iPhone, iPad, or iPod touch as the controller and without tactile feedback I'm not sure those would work very well for anything but the most basic games. Needless to say, if we get apps on the Apple TV we will also get games so that would be a plus no matter how basic or limited.

Beyond those, I guess a weather app would be nice along with some very basic news services (the problem, however, is that you're not likely to want to read long sections of text on the TV, so the existing iPad/iPhone news apps won't directly convert over to the Apple TV).

I guess the Google TV could force Apple's hand in this matter, but I'm not expecting to see anything like an App Store for the Apple TV until sometime next year.

 

Yes apple can get hulu by offering hulu plus. You won't get the free hulu but any device can get Hulu Plus

 

Can you confirm that the video out on the iPad (or any iOS device) works with Hulu Plus? I know that with the free version of Hulu the video outputs are disabled and thus you can't view the content on a TV. Of course, with a regular PC/Mac you CAN output the video from Hulu to a TV by just using an HDMI/DVI cable connected to your PC/Mac. The same is true for the Boxee software, on a Mac/PC you can use the video out to watch the content on a TV. However, it appears that the video outs on all of the iOS devices are disabled for the current Hulu and ABC apps. I don't know why that would change if apps eventually come to the Apple TV (unless the TV networks change their current practices).

I've been debating about getting Hulu Plus (to try it for at least one month). However, I'm pretty sure that they will disable the video outputs on the iPad and that completely negates any benefit I could obtain by paying the $10/month fees.

Okay, this review published in early August says that the video outputs on the iPad ARE disabled for Hulu Plus. Thus, you apparently can't combine Hulu Plus with the iPad to view content on your TV.

http://gigaom.com/apple/ipad-app-faceoff-netflix-vs-hulu-plus/

Note, Netflix on the iPad DOES allow video out, so just as with the new Apple TV you can use an iPad to view Netflix content on a big screen TV.

 

Hummm this is a hard one ... I would really like an app store for TV ... But at the same time ... logic points to the fact that this wont be coming for a while ... maybe even a long while ... I dont see an TV app store until Apple Admits that it is no longer a hobby. Until then i really think that TV is still not a priority for Apple even if Google TV has an app store ...

Until Apple starts to sell millions of Apple TV to the public, they wont open an app store and they wont have the leverage to bargain with TV studios. thats my 2 cents

 

I kind of agree, we may not see an App Store for the Apple TV for a good while.

However, Apple is selling (or has sold) millions of Apple TVs. In fact, it's quite possible that the original Apple TV was one of the best selling dedicated media players ever (possibly outselling the Roku, PopBox, and the WD TV Live combined). The numbers on the original were never released but analysts were estimating sales in the low millions of units per year over the last eighteen months to two years. Furthermore, the new Apple TV sold 250K units in the first eighteen days (which likely included pre-orders, but still could represent something like three million units in the first year).

One of the reasons it is remaining a "hobby" is that anything under a few million units per year is relatively "small potatoes" in comparison to most of Apple's NEW initiatives (since Apple has already sold over 120 million iOS devices and over 250 million iPods). But perhaps the biggest problem is that the content providers (TV and movie studios) aren't being exactly forthcoming in their licensing terms (which hurts the consumers as much as it apparently pains Apple and Steve Jobs).

Basically, the Apple TV will cease being a "hobby" as soon as Apple is allowed to stream a wide variety of content at competitive prices. The 99 cent TV rentals are at least a little baby step in that direction, but I honestly believe that the per-episode TV cost needs to be even lower than that (one-off rentals will probably stay at around 99 cents, but they need a subscription or season-pass rental model that gets down below that figure). I can see paying an average of 99 cents per episode for the PURCHASE of an entire season of an HD TV show but I can't see paying that much for a rental. Movie rentals also need to come down by a dollar or two. Why should I rent a movie from iTunes when I can get the same content (at better quality) for significantly less at Redbox ($1 DVDs or $1.50 for Blu-ray) or with a relatively cheap Netflix subscription? I know, I'm just preaching to the choir here, but nothing is going to happen with the Apple TV until the content prices become more reasonable.

 

I just wanted to opine about the relative value between Redbox and aTV movie rentals. I use Redbox and love it. The price can't be beat. The only problem is convenience.

That's where iTunes (and OnDemand) come in. Sure, movie rentals costs 4x of Redbox, but you get the movie that you want to see. Not what's in the box when you get to the store.

I still prefer Redbox over iTunes for rentals, because we watch movies seldomly. However, if they got the rental price down to about $2-2.50 for HD, it might be more of an impulse buy.

 

About the apps ... Like some have said before ... I think until we see a dedicated app store for TV ... That Airplay is going to fill the gap for apps ... Apple will likely tell TV studios to tryout Airplay in their apps .. And experience with pricing methods plus they dont have to put in that much money to develop a new app for the TV because they just Re-use the same app for the iphone or ipad and they just add Airplay to it... And after a while when the studios feel comfortable about their content being streamed to a TV ... They will likely open up an app store just for the TV ...

Maybe Airplay is just a steping stone that Apple will use to help the people in charge of the TV studios to see the light about streaming to a TV. Its a cheap and almost risk free way for them, and in these times ... Cheap and risk free is all that the CEO's want to hear.

 

A tryout may not be the issue. I suspect that the bigger problem is that the content creators already have distribution agreements with the over-the-air broadcasters and cable TV and satellite providers that place some restrictions on direct competition (enforced as a matter of practicality, contract, or even through some back-room deals).

So, the issue is what is going to happen to the traditional re-broadcasters once on-demand streaming becomes both inexpensive and widely available. It's a two-way dilemma for these traditional business partners since the content creators are worried about losing the vast revenues that are generated through advertising by the traditional broadcasters and the re-broadcasters themselves are worried about being completely cut out from the distribution process itself. Thus, I am sure that there are factions in both of these groups that are actively working to protect the current distribution models for TV (and in similar fashion, for movies).

Then there is the infrastructure problem here in the U.S. (and elsewhere). I read recently that it was estimated that Netflix alone during peak viewing hours is already racking up something like 20% of all internet traffic in the U.S. Certainly, the ISPs don't like that (since they are often within the group I've termed the traditional re-broadcasters) but there is also the issue of how much on-demand video streaming our current infrastructure can really support.

However, I'm confident that the shift to on-demand streaming will come. It's inevitable, but the change may take longer than many of us would like.

 

There is already one available. (evidence)

I installed it too last night and its pretty neat. A sure sign of good things coming.