Is Apple about to disrupt the TV industry?

[TallManNY]

The new Apple TV will have Siri as the primary control tool. The process for the ordinary consumer will be "Hey Siri, play [TV Shows Name]." The TV show will show up, possibly in more than one service. Consumer will play TV show. What consumer will not know, notice, or care will be what channel the show is on or what network that show is associated with, or what time it aired. Consumers with more money than time will select the ad free version. Consumers with less money than time will select ad version.

Two things will happen. First, the brands associated with the TV show will become more meaningless. It will be less clear what channel the show ever originally ran on. Second, the more wealthy consumers will gravitate to ad free versions, thereby reducing the value of running ads on the other versions as those consumers remaining will be ones having less money to spend. We know the TV ad industry is struggling with reduced viewers. This will probably further reduce the viewers and it will also reduce the economic demographics of the remaining viewers. To make matters worse, this device might be so easy to use that the baby boomers (who are both numerous and in general more wealthy) may start really getting into streaming video instead of watching TV. I'm pretty sure I'm buying one of these for my Mom. I know I'm buying one for myself.

 

[arbogast777]

The whole cross service search thing (including by voice) is already on the Roku. In fact, MY Mom uses it instead of TV. And I guarantee you she will go on using it long after Sept 9th.

If anybody deserves credit for an industry disruption it's them, not Apple.

 

[foobarbazqux]

I don't see Apple disrupting anything, especially when a lot of the AppleTV content requires a cable subscription. If anything, they're still playing catch-up. It's going to take more than universal/voice search (something that's already being done) to disrupt things. I don't see their rumored TV streaming service changing anything either since that service plus the cost of internet, and all the other streaming services you'll wind up paying for, is most likely more expensive then getting a traditional bundled TV/internet package from a cable provider.

 

[2010mini]

No. The TV industry is a juggernaut.

 

[EnesM]

Judging by the latest rumors that 4K wont be supported, highly unlikely. Is it 2007 or something?

 

[TallManNY]

The whole cross service search thing (including by voice) is already on the Roku. In fact, MY Mom uses it instead of TV. And I guarantee you she will go on using it long after Sept 9th.

If anybody deserves credit for an industry disruption it's them, not Apple.

It is only disruption if it gets wide spread adoption. Roku is by all accounts a great device. I've come close to buying one myself many times. But if this Apple TV is slick and then available in the popular Apple Stores all over the country, don't you think the Apple TV will vastly outsell the Roku? Roku might be great tech, but I don't see it vastly impacting the viewing behaviors of the U.S. I suggesting that the new Apple TV might do that.

 

[TallManNY]

Judging by the latest rumors that 4K wont be supported, highly unlikely. Is it 2007 or something?

What does it take to support 4K? The CPU is powerful enough, right? I'm sure I've seen examples of the iPhone 6 being able to play back 4k. The Apple TV version of the A8 will be more powerful than what is in an iPhone. 4K can be sent through an HDMI port. So what is missing from an A8x powered Apple TV to do 4K video output beyond a few lines of code? This is a legitimate question.

 

[Lord Hamsa]

Judging by the latest rumors that 4K wont be supported, highly unlikely. Is it 2007 or something?

Because with everything they're trying to jam into this device in a short amount of time, catering to the 0.01% or less of potential customers who have a 4k display and adequate storage and/or bandwidth to use it on a home network device is the best use of their resources. /sarc

The specs are more than capable of 4K, as far as I can tell. An OS/firmware update in the future, once 4k and the associated ecosystem reaches enough market penetration to make it worth the effort, will likely enable it.

 

[AFEPPL]

Main stream TV vendors have played with voice control before and my panasonic 2013 one is leaps and bounds better than Siri..

Apple need to go simple, less focus on tech headlines or thinness and make the products work again...

 

[thepixelpusher]

The whole cross service search thing (including by voice) is already on the Roku. In fact, MY Mom uses it instead of TV. And I guarantee you she will go on using it long after Sept 9th.

If anybody deserves credit for an industry disruption it's them, not Apple.

No one remembers that the French invented the telephone. Alexander Graham Bell made it famous with better distribution and marketing. No one cares who invented things. It's not a matter of who made it, it's a matter of who does it best and gets it in the hands with better distribution and content. We'll see if the Apple TV does just that or not.

 

[arbogast777]

It is only disruption if it gets wide spread adoption. Roku is by all accounts a great device. I've come close to buying one myself many times. But if this Apple TV is slick and then available in the popular Apple Stores all over the country, don't you think the Apple TV will vastly outsell the Roku? Roku might be great tech, but I don't see it vastly impacting the viewing behaviors of the U.S. I suggesting that the new Apple TV might do that.

I mean this basically comes down to will Apple TV outsell Roku - and I guess we'll wait and see. I certainly don't think it's a given. I'm sure it will be a fantastic device and I will buy one day one (and I own a Roku), but Roku also has a major advantage in that it is the one service agnostic device out there. It also appeals to Apple AND Android users (95% of the market) whereas Apple TV will really only appeal to those in the Apple ecosystem.

 

[ProjectManager101]

Apple is not going to disrupt anything. The TV industry is sooo complex, is like the oil industry, basically is a mafia. You can come with the best solution but no one is going use it because many interests.

 

[EnesM]

Because with everything they're trying to jam into this device in a short amount of time, catering to the 0.01% or less of potential customers who have a 4k display and adequate storage and/or bandwidth to use it on a home network device is the best use of their resources. /sarc

The specs are more than capable of 4K, as far as I can tell. An OS/firmware update in the future, once 4k and the associated ecosystem reaches enough market penetration to make it worth the effort, will likely enable it.

When Apple introduced Thunderbolt ports in Macbooks, what was the percentage of people with Thunderbolt devices that could make use of those ports? 0.0001%?

 

[keysofanxiety]

Apple haven't disrupted any new industries when it comes to software and services IMO.

Apple Music is just another music streaming service, further saturating the market - and the consumers suffer when offering exclusive artists. No real foresight with the user experience.

iCloud, though somewhat useful if you have nothing but Apple products, doesn't have anywhere near the functionality or usefulness as Dropbox or OneDrive. And the service certainly can be unreliable.

In conclusion I believe if Apple were to go into the TV industry, it would be much the same - just another streaming/subscription service that would really only be preferable to its competitors on price or amount of content, rather than shaping up the TV industry with something truly unique and unheard of.

 

[Lord Hamsa]

When Apple introduced Thunderbolt ports in Macbooks, what was the percentage of people with Thunderbolt devices that could make use of those ports? 0.0001%?

Touche.

There is a difference, though, in that Apple (in conjunction with IBM, IIRC) generally supported Thunderbolt as an upgrade path from USB, to the point of marketing their own Thunderbolt-based peripherals. 4k from a television standpoint isn't something Apple is ready to push for, not just from the availability of displays, but from the storage and bandwidth issues involved in moving files of those sizes effectively for streaming. With all the other major changes rumored to be be coming to the ATV, I just don't see how supporting a technology in the ATV that they're not ready to support from the iTunes store yet is a good use of resources.

I do think it will eventually come as an OS and/or firmware update to the 4th-generation devices, once Apple is ready to support it across the board. Time and resources, though.

 

[EnesM]

Touche.

There is a difference, though, in that Apple (in conjunction with IBM, IIRC) generally supported Thunderbolt as an upgrade path from USB, to the point of marketing their own Thunderbolt-based peripherals. 4k from a television standpoint isn't something Apple is ready to push for, not just from the availability of displays, but from the storage and bandwidth issues involved in moving files of those sizes effectively for streaming. With all the other major changes rumored to be be coming to the ATV, I just don't see how supporting a technology in the ATV that they're not ready to support from the iTunes store yet is a good use of resources.

I do think it will eventually come as an OS and/or firmware update to the 4th-generation devices, once Apple is ready to support it across the board. Time and resources, though.

You are partly right, but AppleTV already offers services like Netflix which support 4K on other devices. Storage and bandwidth is borne by Netflix in this case, right? They could at least provide 4K 3rd party streaming, iTunes can follow later

 

[Uofmtiger]

whereas Apple TV will really only appeal to those in the Apple ecosystem.

That has been the case, for the most part, with the older AppleTVs. However, the app store should open it up to be more agnostic. I guess we will have to see just what adding the app store means.

If it isn't 4k, I think the main reason will be that they want to be able to sell us a 4k version in year or two. Also, they may have wanted to sell it for less than $200 and adding 4k licensing may have eaten into their margins (this is the same company still putting 16GB in expensive phones).

The trend is already toward more cable cutting and with services like SlingTV and the service Apple is rumored to be bringing out will only push that movement forward. If you meant a disruption to companies like Comcast, I believe content from the internet will still need a way to get it to your home, so they can always jack up those individual internet fees and offer TV bundles for less money to keep a lot of people on board (which is what they are already doing). AT&T just bought Directv, so we will see what they have planned to keep people using all of their services, as well.

 

[bohbot16]

I think we're likely getting the TiVo for the cord cutting age: an improved interface to the existing world of streaming TV. The Apple TV 3 is frustrating in that you need to dig into each service and find what's available and what's in each queue. One of the important service-related things that Apple has added in the past few years is the ability to easily sign up for Netflix, Hulu, HBO, Showtime, etc right from the Apple TV interface and bill through your existing iTunes account. For the Apple TV 4 I'm hoping that they use the iOS 9 improvements with Siri and Proactive to build a layer above all of these services with unified search and a unified watch queue. Add to that a very easy way to add and remove content sources tied to a single account. This isn't a completely new invention, it's just building a better interface and integrating it into the Apple ecosystem well.

 

[Michael CM1]

Apple has already helped make a dent. A few years ago I would've never considered cutting the cord. But in the past three or so years, Hulu Plus and Netflix have really helped bridge that gap. HBO Now was a huge move that allowed me to dump Netflix and get access to better movies and Game of Thrones.

Not even Sling really has been able to make a massive dent because of the lack of DVR-like features. When I had it you couldn't use that subscription to sign in to Watch ESPN. AMC maybe gave you two back episodes. I still couldn't get access to regional Fox Sports channels or FS1 (where most of the Women's World Cup games were).

I think it's going to take a long time for Apple, Roku, Amazon, etc. to really kick the teeth of the TV industry. The big networks have a huge advantage with the most popular programming and a lot of major sporting events. If you want to watch an NFL game, your options are pretty limited.

A lot of it depends on us taking the lumps as early adopters to show the industry that we want more choices. Another factor is ease of starting and canceling a subscription. Sling was OK but not enough for me outside of when The Walking Dead is on. But the fact that I was able to cancel without jumping through Comcast-style hoops makes me much more likely to jump back in when I like what's offered more. Compare that to Comcast, the best of bad options for my Internet service. As much as I don't lie Google, I'd probably pay $10 more for the same exact service just to stick my middle finger up at Comcast. They jacked me for a lot of late fees thanks to autopay not working. They made me call a completely different line to talk about downgrading my speed, but I could've easily upgraded online.

 

[JAT]

Not at my house. I never get along with automatic or moderated electronics. I don't even like Harmony remotes, I'll roll my own macros, thanks.

 

[mattopotamus]

If it requires a cable subscription, how is it changing anything? Not to mention ads.....at least with a DVR you can skip right through these things. If you are already paying for cable, why would you use the cable app over your DVR?

I mentioned it in another thread, but if the new ATV had the ability to pull in OTA channels, it would be huge. The current rumors do not suggest that at all though.

It would also need to pull in OTA through the current method (antenna, not streaming). I know earlier rumors suggested apple was working on an internet streaming solution for basic cable stations. That would not be good for people with data caps from their ISP. The good thing about OTA antennas is it does not affect your internet usage.

 

[d21mike]

For me the Hulu option without ads is huge. Only $4 more per month and I now have 70-80% of what I use my DVR for. Now I need the rest to fully make the move. Now I have to pay for both or stay with the DVR without Hulu. I will probably pay for both but maybe only 1 DVR instead of two. I should be able to easily reduce enough hardware to pay fir Hulu.

 

[dumastudetto]

If it isn't 4k, I think the main reason will be that they want to be able to sell us a 4k version in year or two. Also, they may have wanted to sell it for less than $200 and adding 4k licensing may have eaten into their margins (this is the same company still putting 16GB in expensive phones).

Isn't 4k licensing on the content? So it would probably just command a higher fee in the iTunes store. I'm unaware there's anything hardware specific they'd need to license, but I'm definitely not an expert in this area.

I tend to agree they won't give 4k away in a future software update (even if they don't need to license some patented technology). It'll be a feature of a later hardware refresh you'll have to buy.

 

[oneMadRssn]

I mentioned it in another thread, but if the new ATV had the ability to pull in OTA channels, it would be huge. The current rumors do not suggest that at all though.

It would also need to pull in OTA through the current method (antenna, not streaming). I know earlier rumors suggested apple was working on an internet streaming solution for basic cable stations. That would not be good for people with data caps from their ISP. The good thing about OTA antennas is it does not affect your internet usage.

Check out Tablo. It's a device that pulls in OTA using an antenna, and saves the recordings to a USB drive. It then streams the recordings to other devices through the router/wifi. There are already native apps for Roku and Amazon. I've been holding out until there is an ATV app store, and then I'm sure Tablo will make an ATV app too. This is as close as it's going to get, if not better than, the ATV having an OTA function.

 

[d21mike]

Check out Tablo. It's a device that pulls in OTA using an antenna, and saves the recordings to a USB drive. It then streams the recordings to other devices through the router/wifi. There are already native apps for Roku and Amazon. I've been holding out until there is an ATV app store, and then I'm sure Tablo will make an ATV app too. This is as close as it's going to get, if not better than, the ATV having an OTA function.

Not aure I am interested in Tablo but for those that do not understand the impact of a ATV App Store needs to review these options. I think many more options available once the App Store is available.