AT&T to Offer Internet TV on Apple TV?

[atszyman]

Precisely. Its funny how much difficulty people have letting go of old paradigms, isn't it? IPTV essentially will move the DVR functionality to the server side. Events (e.g., sports) can be streamed "live" over the internet, and simultaneously stored on the server for later viewing on-demand.

The other intriguing potential of IPTV is that it can free us from the monopoly/ duopoly of our local cable/ sat providers. Imagine being able to select content from dozens or hundreds of providers around the world! You no longer would be limited to what the cable or sat provider chooses to carry, and you could potentially pay only for what you actually watch.

IPTV can do what you're talking about but from what I've seen, they currently just provide another alternative for a subscription to a "package" of channels that is an alternative to satellite or cable and your still tied to region of service and available connection technology so it's not any more portable than my satellite service. This may change eventually, I just don't necessarily see it happening in the near future.

 

[VideoFreek]

But who would provide the hookup at your house? You'd still pay comcast for the data over the coax.

Correct, which is why net neutrality is absolutely crucial, as another poster pointed out. Some other points are that Comcast, Cox, Time-Warner, etc. do have some competition to contend with (Verizon fios for example), and if they attempt to somehow interfere with IPTV, they'll get their butts sued off.

They really are facing a threat here, and I'm sure this issue is occupying their strategists right now.

 

[atszyman]

Ahhh, just like the record companies ripped their content from iTunes since the bulk of their distribution is through retailers and Amazon?

I don't think so. What the networks would looove to do is "monetize" every viewing by charging a per-view fee, and IPTV would enable such a business model. They'd also regain value that is today captured by the cable companies, by adopting essentially a direct-to-consumer model. If consumer acceptance is there, the networks will be all over this, because they'll see the chance to make more money.

But there are still plenty of people who want the physical media for their music and there are too many retailers selling the CDs for one threat to unite them. I can buy CDS from about 50 stores in a 10 mile radius from my house, I can only get one cable provider or the 2 satellite providers which makes them more powerful, recent consolidations in cable providers only makes the few left more powerful.

Cable companies are few and very monopolistic in many regions. A situation where a cable company feels threatened by an a la carte service that would allow people only to get the shows they want for cheaper than the cable subscription could lead to threats of cutting networks from the service and massive losses in ad revenue.

 

[adamcz]

The best imagineable feature for me would be the ability to subscribe to NBA league pass with no extra fees. I currently pay $200 a year for league pass, which I feel is a good deal, but I also have to pay at least $20 a month on top of that to have a cable box and the most basic cable package. You can't get league pass without paying those other fees.

If I could pay $5 a month per channel to subscribe to other channels, that would also be pretty cool. ESPN and TNT for me, three or four channels for my wife, and I'm still paying way less than a standard cable package while getting everything I want.

Get er done Apple!

 

[Object-X]

Don't forget rentals

If you ask me there are only two things stopping the TV from taking off. The first is the lack of HD content. When you can buy HD Movies and TV shows off iTunes that will be huge. The second is how to handle live TV, this could solve the second scenario.

I prefer not having a recorder in the Apple TV, go buy an Elgato device for your Mac and your good to go as far as that is concerned.

I think the lack of a rental service is also preventing wide adoption. Buying movies is ok for some, but I for one don't really want to own and manage all that data for a movie I'll watch maybe once or twice. Add HD 720p rentals and Apple can give Blockbuster and Netflix a run for their money.

 

[VideoFreek]

Cable companies are few and very monopolistic in many regions. A situation where a cable company feels threatened by an a la carte service that would allow people only to get the shows they want for cheaper than the cable subscription could lead to threats of cutting networks from the service and massive losses in ad revenue.

atszyman, concerning your last two posts, I do agree with you that the entrenched interests, particularly "Big Cable," will try to throw up every obstacle they can think of. On the other hand, US and European law does favor competition, so the authorities will tolerate their efforts only to a point. For me, the vision of accessing subscribed or purchased content, from any provider in the world, anywhere in the world, is just too compelling to be ignored. This must be the future. It's just going to take us years to get there.

 

[mchristopherson]

I would switch in a second. This is what I want, of course I would have to buy a HD tv and Apple TV... hum... $1400 dollors laters, maybe I will stick with what I have right now.

 

[atszyman]

atszyman, concerning your last two posts, I do agree with you that the entrenched interests, particularly "Big Cable," will try to throw up every obstacle they can think of. On the other hand, US and European law does favor competition, so the authorities will tolerate their efforts only to a point. For me, the vision of accessing subscribed or purchased content, from any provider in the world, anywhere in the world, is just too compelling to be ignored. This must be the future. It's just going to take us years to get there.

I agree that eventually we will get to the point of the content being available whenever/whereever you want as long as you have an internet connection. It only makes sense, and I'd love to see it.

I just don't see it being a good thing for the TV right now. As of right now if they want penetration DVR is probably the biggest selling point they could add. A simple box with a Hard Drive that you're hooking to your TV and you can't manage to get the shows from your current provider (that you are paying) onto it without paying for them again.

With DVR functionality people would not have to change their current viewing habits and the benefits of being able to get their iTunes content to the TV would add to the enticement. The small form factor would also allow for portability of the shows you've recorded so you can take them on the road and watch them elsewhere, and instead of adding a box to their TV it could be a replacement for their current DVR (as long as they don't have it integrated into their cable/satellite box, it does put them up against TiVo and other DVR sellers but they don't have the power to stop Apple like the cable giants would.

 

[tribulation]

Finally. A useful feature for the iTV

This is the only useful thing I have seen for the iTV. I'd never touch the thing without something like this the makes it equivalent to cable tv. Add on the features of the iTV now PLUS that and I would be sold. Otherwise the thing is pointless in my opinion.

 

[tribulation]

Subscription only, or again pointless

I might add to my last post, if it's not a set fee aka: subscription based [1 price for unlimited amount of x channels type of thing], that brings it back to the useless category. If they charge a per feed or per show or per-anything fee, bye bye, no go. I'm not opening up my bank account each time I want to watch some random show, give me a bunch for a set price and you'll have it.

 

[GregA]

I just don't see it being a good thing for the TV right now. As of right now if they want penetration DVR is probably the biggest selling point they could add.

I'd like to see a DVR. I suspect Elgato is working on a little box to sit under an AppleTV that records TV and then shares it to the AppleTV - though I'd prefer integration.

Anyway, yesterday at D, Steve said Bill Gates was good at making deals with people. This may be such an example. And this is a good thing!

IPTV is such a broad term - it's anything to do with TV sent over the internet. We have no idea what they actually mean. Apple could offer AT&T's PPV films via AppleTV (just on AT&T connections, or US-wide?), it could offer the whole cable package live (US-wide?). It could allow PVR capability on the above. Who knows.

ps.
Apple's HD codec allows a low res version to be interlaced with a HD version. Imagine if you could watch any show (lower res) live on any DSL connection (at the quality level your DSL can handle), but if you record the show it will "upgrade" (or "error correct") to full HD quality in the background while you sleep. Apple's HD stuff can NOT do this at present... just wondering about possibilities.

 

[GregA]

i thought that uverse tv needed a decoder box between the network connection and your tube which also includes a hd for tivo like functionality. why would att let an appleTV decode their proprietary packets?

Why wouldn't AT&T want its decoding technology on existing boxes, if it sells its subscription and/or ppvs? (provided it can keep the technology safe).

 

[VideoFreek]

As of right now if they want penetration DVR is probably the biggest selling point they could add. A simple box with a Hard Drive that you're hooking to your TV and you can't manage to get the shows from your current provider (that you are paying) onto it without paying for them again.

I'm certainly no expert in this area, but I think this would be way too complicated and costly in that they'd need to find a way to work with OTA broadcast, cable, and satellite. Essentially, they'd need to replicate what Tivo does (with all the attendant cost). AND, bear in mind the TV is a worldwide product--I'm pretty sure the box I bought here in Germany is the same box you buy in the US, save for the power cord. Getting a DVR to work with all terrestrial, cable and satellite systems worldwide is a feat not even Tivo manages (they presently only support the USA and the UK, and if you check out Tivo's UK site to see what a suckfest it is to get their box working with the Sky satellite service, you begin to appreciate the complexity). I just don't think DVR is economically or technically viable for a worldwide product.

 

[EagerDragon]

If they're going to offer TV over the net, why not try to partner with Joost as well?

Well I just stoped by Joost site and they currently do not support the PPC Mac but do support the Intel Mac, so putting it on the Apple tv should not be a big deal.

too bad about the PPC, that is all I have.

 

[EagerDragon]

what kind of box do you need with your service? do you know any of the inner workings of the device, and connections? i.e. ethernet in -> composite-, s-video-, dvi-, out

We are here to discuss rumors, there is a difference between rumors and facts.

Who cares if it is true or not?
The fun is in the discucion of the possibilites and how we would take advantage of it if the rumor was true.

 

[ajhill]

AppleTV - DVD Killer?!?

How about Apple TV cutting into the 26 billion dollar DVD market.

Can anyone say Apple TV streaming HD movie RENTALS (say goodnight Blockbuster, Netflix)!

Here is the story:

Deutsche Bank: Apple TV Will Cannibalize a Good Chunk of the DVD Market
Thursday May 31, 5:16 pm ET

FP Trading Desk submits: Apple Inc. (NasdaqGS: AAPL - News) will cannibalize a good chunk of the US$26-billion DVD player market in the next several years, according to Deutsche Bank. One of the primary drivers of this change will be the availability of YouTube content on Apple TV.

In the long term, the firm thinks Apple is “positioned to introduce a compelling integrated home media infrastructure solution,” while the YouTube addition is expected to increase the appeal of Apple TV to users.

“We expect Apple to continue adding video content (TV, movies, etc) to iTunes/Apple TV further increasing its appeal,” Deutsche Bank said in a note to clients.

The firm has a “buy” rating on the stock, while its US$140 price target represents upside of roughly 15%.



Bigger 160gb HD -> High Definition content is coming soon.
IPTV/Internet Streaming -> Online movie rentals direct to your HDTV. Can you say $.99 movie rental with out waiting for the mail, OR driving to BB to return a movie. (have you seen the price of gas?)

Apple ][ Forvever!

Al

 

[EagerDragon]

In theory, yes. 802.11n is supposed to be able to deliver sustained rates of 100-200 Mbps, peak rates of 540 Mbps and a theoretical top rate of around 600 MBps last I heard. This is either planned or in theory though - the technology is still in its infancy in many respects, so just keep that in mind.

Ok but what about the ISP connection? What is the min needed to support say .... 3 people using this service (different channels) in a household at the same time?

 

[Tara Davis]

Sounds exciting to me. I'd love to cut my cable bill if someone could offer a reasonable replacement.

Here you go!

With a simple roof antenna and EyeTV, I get 17 digital channels (not counting the weather-only channels and space-holders for future programming) from my modest suburb in the midwest.

This season, I PRV'd "House", "Lost" and "Heroes" in high-def, along with tons of sporting events including football every Sunday afternoon. All HD.

Best of all...

... wait for it...

all FREE!!!

The few shows not broadcast, such as Doctor Who and the Sopranos, I am able to grab torr... er... umm... I mean get on DVD from NetFlix. So I'm really not missing out on anything by not having cable.

Paying for TV content is for sucka's.

 

[~Shard~]

Ok but what about the ISP connection? What is the min needed to support say .... 3 people using this service (different channels) in a household at the same time?

In our case right now we're delivering 16 Mbps to the home via ADSL 2+ which supports 3 TVs, one of which can be HD. When we move to VDSL2 this fall we'll be delivering 40 Mbps to the home via dual access which will support 2 high def streams, approximately 5-6 TVs and then your Internet service as well.

Of course if you were currently one of our FFTH trial subscribers you wouldn't have that problem at all.

 

[The Toon Master]

Ugh, i can't decide if i'm gonna get an apple tv with this and the new 160GB one that could drive current one down in price..

Anybody know estimation on price? I would love to do that on my tv..

 

[whatever]

Well with the addition of YouTube to the tv, it seems more likely now.

No, he said that currently it's more more of a hobby product than a consumer product. Much the way the iPod was.

I personally just ordered my first Apple TV three weeks ago (on a whim I went into a Tweeter and ended up spending over $13,000 or my new system!) and at the last minute ditched the Pioneer Elite DVD player for the Apple TV. And tomorrow I'm ordering the 160GB version and returning the 40GB.

The similaries between the iPod and Apple TV are unbelievable. People are aware of it (like the orginal 5GB iPod) and are very curious about it.

The YouTube announcement is huge and I wouldn't be surprised if Apple releases some very suprising numbers to us next quarter. Remember the kids latched on to the iPod because it allowed them to listen to "free" music, well now Apple TV will allow them to watch "free" video.

I wouldn't be surprised if the "live" TV component is brought to us via AT&T.

 

[whatever]

I agree that eventually we will get to the point of the content being available whenever/whereever you want as long as you have an internet connection. It only makes sense, and I'd love to see it.

I just don't see it being a good thing for the TV right now. As of right now if they want penetration DVR is probably the biggest selling point they could add. A simple box with a Hard Drive that you're hooking to your TV and you can't manage to get the shows from your current provider (that you are paying) onto it without paying for them again.

With DVR functionality people would not have to change their current viewing habits and the benefits of being able to get their iTunes content to the TV would add to the enticement. The small form factor would also allow for portability of the shows you've recorded so you can take them on the road and watch them elsewhere, and instead of adding a box to their TV it could be a replacement for their current DVR (as long as they don't have it integrated into their cable/satellite box, it does put them up against TiVo and other DVR sellers but they don't have the power to stop Apple like the cable giants would.

The Apple TV does not need a DVR in my opinion. Like the iPod, Apple TV's universe revolves around iTunes, which sits on your PC (either Windows Based or Mac).

By not including a DVR in Apple TV, Apple is providing an opportunity to developers. A developer can create an application which does the DVR function for your family and then pass the content on to iTunes which will allow it to be served up on any iTunes enabled computer (with Share on) and any Apple TV in the house.

Can you imagine a house with multiple Apple TV's sharing content from a central place instead of wasting storage space by having it on every device. How about a Dormitory? Imagine that, one computer could be used to serve content for the entire hall (or dorm).

Don't get me wrong, I love my DVR, but if I want to watch content from room to room, it's not easy to do that, unless, I have save my favorite programs on all of the DVRs (and then I have to manage all of them too, I know that sounds easy, but I travel a lot for work, so when I come back I have to delete a lot of crap!).

Now let's take this one step further. By doing this management work on a computer, we would be able to share Planned Program Record Lists with others and maybe even share episodes with others. These are things that a DVR cannot do.

My master plan is to rip all of my DVDs onto Hard Disc and then make them available via Apple TV, creating my own On Demand system.

 

[twoodcc]

seems like a nice idea. would be nice to see this happen

 

[Swift]

That's not all

I just switched from DSL to cable -- much faster -- but I had to sign a contract for a year. Two days later, while cancelling the DSL, I hear that, as of May 1, they've rolled out U-Verse in my area. Fiber optic to the door, 6 Mb/s, and cable TV. Drat!

Now imagine downloading a show at that speed.

 

[williedigital]

The best imagineable feature for me would be the ability to subscribe to NBA league pass with no extra fees. I currently pay $200 a year for league pass, which I feel is a good deal, but I also have to pay at least $20 a month on top of that to have a cable box and the most basic cable package. You can't get league pass without paying those other fees.
Get er done Apple!

This would be ideal for me too. The only thing I even own a TV for is watching the NBA, and would love to just have an extensive nba lineup rather than the paltry televised games on espn, etc.