Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
CBS CEO Again Says Network Will 'Probably' Reach Streaming TV Deal With Apple
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I personally couldn't care less, frankly.
I don't watch TV anymore. I get my news on the web (yep, I do pay for nytimes.com and a few others) and I stream from Netflix.
All I care about is comprehensive access to apps on my TV, including stuff like Google Photos, Smugmug, Google Music and Put.io. If Apple doesn't do it, someone else will.
I don't watch TV anymore. I get my news on the web (yep, I do pay for nytimes.com and a few others) and I stream from Netflix.
All I care about is comprehensive access to apps on my TV, including stuff like Google Photos, Smugmug, Google Music and Put.io. If Apple doesn't do it, someone else will.
If your TV bill is over $100 chances are you've got a whole bunch of channels. Whatever Apple provides for $30 I guarantee you it won't be all those same channels you have now. You're going to have to give up something. Chances are you could call your cable company right now and chop down your channel package to somewhere around $30 right now.
Really all I want to know is when the Apple TV 4 will be released. Apple has it right, it's all about the Apps. I don't care about all the content deals I care about getting apps on there that I care about. (Plex client, some Kodi client, Google Video, Amazon Prime, Flixster, Netflix, Hulu, Apple's iTunes stores, Airplay, and others)
for TV I care about specific shows, not stations. I'll buy the shows I care about, I don't want to add a monthly bill for content that I may or may not actually care about.
for TV I care about specific shows, not stations. I'll buy the shows I care about, I don't want to add a monthly bill for content that I may or may not actually care about.
What's even worse is that Nickelodeon is not OTA - it's a channel you can only get by paying a cable company. This means some people actually pay for the privilege of having their kids bombarded with commercials. This very nonsense is the primary reason I cut out cable TV from my life. I'm willing to tolerate commercials if the delivery is free, OTA or otherwise. If I'm paying for it, it better be commercial free. The only exception is HBO-style promos that cross-promote other similar HBO content you might be interested in, very briefly, before each show.
Same here. I am flabbergasted at the fact that they are totally silent about release date and when/if we can preorder. It's been years that they've been working on the thing so you'd think they could give us a release date instead of "Late October". I really can't wait for the Apple TV 4, I'm so excited to replace my older one and my Fire TV.
If this were true, then in theory ISPs that provide only internet and don't even sell cable TV would be way more expensive, right? But they aren't (typically those regional ISPs are indeed less expensive). This means if the other providers remove the overhead of cable TV, when we all ditch cable TV packages, their profits will still be high enough.
I think the idea is apps. If you want an OTA tuner, get a network-connected one and watch the content through an app. If you want a cable-card tuner, get a network-connected one and watch the content through an app. If you want CB radio, well there is a network connected tuner for that too. By having an app store, they open a much wider array of possibilities than merely including one type of connector.
I really wish my Roamio OTA TiVo box was a bit snappier and had better app support. It would be, to me, the superior streaming box. Right now you can set up "season passes" across OTA and streaming services but the execution is clunky and the speed that the apps load is equally clunky (although it does take you to the appropriate episode). It also doesn't stream everything so a lot of niche services aren't serviced like SlingTV and WWE, both of which I enjoy and would work well in concert with a streaming box.
I totally agree with you if Apple's service would only include streaming live TV.
But if the service would include past seasons of current shows, it would be tempting. If the service would include all seasons of current and cancelled shows (ones available on iTunes), I think this service would be well worth it.
At this point, it is impossible to say if the service would be good, bad, or ugly, It depends on what the service includes.
A few months ago, there was a thread hinting that this service might be live TV streaming only. If that is the case, I think it will be DoA.
If you want to plan all the TV shows you watch in advance, then a DVR and on-demand are almost the same, as you say. If you ever feel like watching something someone recommended to you, catch up on episodes you missed, or otherwise watch spontaneously, the DVR fails.
But it doesn't. However, most TV's do have an antenna input with a built in antenna, so what's the problem?
That's a good point. I guess being a cable cutter I just lump it all together as a bunch of crap. Anything where I have to sit through a ton of commercials (Hulu has gotten worse over time and I'm considering shutting it down) and can't start the programming when I'm ready frustrates me greatly.
This is something of a regular practice that most of these cable houses do. For instance, even in India - TataSky, Direct TV, Videocon Dish also rip off by counting the repeat channels in both SD and HD versions. And HD premium also holds good in case if you would like subscribe for HD channels! I wish internet based on demand is the only option to end this Hippocratic Cable Companies!
I'll probably buy the ATV 4 because I have the ATV 3 and I wouldn't mind seeing how the apps turn out, I don't need Apples services, I'm pretty sure they haven't cracked it.
antenna is a step backwards. Apple is looking to the future with how a lot of people now consume tv: streaming via apps
I dunno. My city is adding more channels over the air than ever. There is a TON of stuff to watch free of charge and I'm in the 11th or so media market in the country. All I need is some premium supplementation and I'm a TV junkie who never thought I'd be so happy cutting out the cable.
It is to early to tell if this is a break through service or if they "cracked it". It all depends on what is included with the subscription.
I doubt it will be like this, but if the Apple TV service is live TV only, I think it will be DoA.
If the service includes on demand access to old seasons/shows then this service could be great.
Anything in between these options will probably be similar to what cable companies offer now and won't be worth it to most people.
I can't wait to find out what the service will actually include.
Netflix tends to rub shoulders with the network more closely, then what Apple can do.
I am totally willing to pay a small amount for channels that are OTA to get it via the internet. I live in a large metro area, but I don't get perfect reception on every channel. Additionally, it would be much easier to buy several ATVs than multiple antennas + wiring for my house.
Aereo seemed like the perfect thing for me, but alas they lost in court. I was willing to pay a nominal amount (~$10/month) just to have live streaming of what the local stations were sending me for free already. I think local stations were crazy not to embrace this in my case because I already cut the cord and they had a chance to get me their service without paying for bandwidth costs...but I digress...
I realize the stations are all running actuarial models that say a cable subscriber is worth x dollars and they think Apple is offering x-1, but the bigger picture is that networks need to realize Netflix and Hulu and HBO and Amazon are building the future with commercial free original content. If the networks don't join the revolution soon, I wouldn't be surprised to see the headline read "Sunday Night Football Moves to Netflix".
Aereo seemed like the perfect thing for me, but alas they lost in court. I was willing to pay a nominal amount (~$10/month) just to have live streaming of what the local stations were sending me for free already. I think local stations were crazy not to embrace this in my case because I already cut the cord and they had a chance to get me their service without paying for bandwidth costs...but I digress...
I realize the stations are all running actuarial models that say a cable subscriber is worth x dollars and they think Apple is offering x-1, but the bigger picture is that networks need to realize Netflix and Hulu and HBO and Amazon are building the future with commercial free original content. If the networks don't join the revolution soon, I wouldn't be surprised to see the headline read "Sunday Night Football Moves to Netflix".
Last edited:
Maybe someday my city will realize internet should be a public utility. I'll just keep dreaming.