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.
NBC's Streaming Service 'Peacock' Launching in July With Three Subscription Tiers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Oh yea, can't wait to pay 10 bucks a month to see Lester Holt. 
I am so far in the opposite opinion that I can’t even comprehend where you’re coming from!
I’m in my early 40’s & have literally NEVER paid for cable.
Cinema was my love. Television shows were primarily low-budget/bad acting garbage (with the rare stand out gem, like X-Files or Twin Peaks)... fast forward 20 years & things are now absolutely awesome, imo.
The “television” being offered now has more creativity than standard Hollywood films, by a long shot.
It is absolute role-reversal. The best tales currently being told are on streaming services!
Even when films like Harry Potter were coming out... it took like 10 years to cover the 7 books.
Compare that to something like the Witcher coming out now- 9 episodes, each an hour... all dropping on the same day.
Thats crazy to me. 4 films worth of storyline, no commercials, no wait, no hassle.
Unclear what’s “complicated” about the current state of affairs. No contracts. No commitments. It’s all RIDICULOUSLY simple. Your sig line says you are experienced in tech.... so having like 3-4 sign ins can’t be befuddling you.
If I had to guess: I’d say that you’re making lame excuses to feel vindicated for your sense of entitlement & decision that you don’t think the creators that are making FANTASTIC television right now deserve any money for it from you, whatsoever... you don’t care that they did away with force feeding commercials (like I do!) & want to show support of that far superior business model by subscribing to the services that carry the shows you consider worthwhile- you’d rather make a list of shows that are good, then go pirate them.
Wow. Super cool, Mr. Software Engineer.
I suppose you think it’s fine if you and/or any of your peers created an awesome piece of software, but nobody paid for it? I mean, it’s fine if they enjoy it without paying you, the creator, right? You know “how complicated things are” when it comes to paying to enjoy what others created, so they could make a living!
They have a ton of video services. Amazon, Akamai, Azure. Apple and Netflix rely on Level3. Adobe manages the sign-in and ads on most of the existing network apps already.
I used to pay over $100 for cable back in 2007 when the first AppleTV was released. It had been creeping up because cable providers had a monopoly and people just didn’t want to give up on TV, it was almost an essential service. But looking at what I was paying and what I was getting for it — 200 channels of low quality reality tv and 60% commercials every 10 minutes during a show — and it was at that point that I cut cable cold turkey, even though there wasn’t much downloadable content at that time. I toughed through it, surviving on video podcasts (shout out to Revision3!) and then eventually purchasing TV shows on iTunes.
I dreamed of this day when you could just subscribe to the channels you wanted to watch through AppleTV. Now Apple themselves are a content producer. This is really the Nirvana pioneer cord cutters were looking forward to, and more.
Today, I subscribe to AppleTV+, Disney+, Netflix, Crave and my cable TV provider finally caught up with the times and offers an app only cable service with no need for a tv box. I pay $5 for basic cable just so I can get the news. I also watch YouTube and video podcasts for free. All in, I’m paying something like $30 bucks for more content than I’ll ever be able to watch and I get to choose what I subscribe to. The 2007 AppleTV dream paid off.
Ugh they're shooting the "Saved By The Bell" reboot next to me so annoying.
Sure, they use third party help, but I‘m sure there’s a ton more to it. Not saying that companies aren’t testing the price ceiling; just saying that at least some of the higher-than-expected price seems explainable, considering it’s a switch to a whole new platform and model.
How do you figure? You still can't subscribe just to the channels you want and no one seems to know why.
Personally I have YouTube TV and what I would LOVE is to be able to buy a similar service from Apple that's totally ala carte.
They’re trying to make “Premium” the new “Pro” (or “i”).
“Gretchen, stop trying to make fetch happen! It's not going to happen!”
It wasn't (isn't) about production but rather power via money via viewership. More TV is consumed between 8-10 PM (prime time) than any other time of the day. This directly translates to a larger audience, more money, and more power.
Maybe the sll you can eat model wil fail, and we will start seing subs based on the hours per month you watch, providing the price is right, I could actually go for that, if therevare only a bit of content/service i want to watch. Come to think of it usage based pricing is fair, or they could maybe gave series pases.
I believe that the term channel will soon have about the same cultural relevance as the term flip phone.
Personally, I can’t imagine wanting to watch a channel. I can’t even wrap my head around it.
I like content. I like shows.
I don’t like channels. I can’t imagine instead of thinking: “I want to watch something funny” or “I want to watch something sci-fi”, thinking “I don’t care what I’m watching; as long as I get to see a cbs or nbc logo, I’ll watch whatever!”.
The idea of paying for channels, to me, is exactly the same as throwing your money away on cable- paying for a bunch of garbage you don’t want, & having one or two things you do want.
With Netflix, Amazon Prime, HBO, and Disney+... I can find a good show or movie of any genre, any time I want. I struggle to see why I’d want channels, instead of full streaming services.
Spectrum offers something very close to a la carte service. For $29 I get an app only service that contains all local channels/networks (CBS, ABC, NBC, Fox, CW), some other random channels (CSPAN, MeTV, and a bunch of others), and 10 cable channels of my choice that I can switch out when I want. I have about 30 channels for a buck each.
Not sure why everyone feels the need to subscribe to every single new service being offered. I find it easy to ignore all of this new crap. No one needs 'Peacock'. What is it offering that anyone must have? Commercial free television? A back catalog of shows I'll never watch? It's not worth it.
Last edited:
Welcome to 2020, where people are now paying for broadcast networks over the Internet (which they are also paying to access).
These streaming services are going to end up being be so much more expensive and less convenient than cable.
These streaming services are going to end up being be so much more expensive and less convenient than cable.
I'm all for choice but this is insane.
We were discussing ala carte TV way back in the early 2000's but, of course, we never anticipated having to pay a monthly fee for each individual item.
I love the competition, but we're up to .... what ..... 17 streaming services now?
Netflix
Hulu
Amazon Prime
YouTube Red
CBS
Disney
Apple TV
HBO Now
AT&T
ESPN
CrunchyRoll
VRV
Starz
[Peacock]
Not saying that i have to pay for them all.
We were discussing ala carte TV way back in the early 2000's but, of course, we never anticipated having to pay a monthly fee for each individual item.
I love the competition, but we're up to .... what ..... 17 streaming services now?
Netflix
Hulu
Amazon Prime
YouTube Red
CBS
Disney
Apple TV
HBO Now
AT&T
ESPN
CrunchyRoll
VRV
Starz
[Peacock]
Not saying that i have to pay for them all.
Get back to running your dying empire!!!
CEOs of cable companies shouldn’t be wasting time posting on MacRumors.
If you’re not a CEO, desperate to make a case for your CLEARLY inferior and VERY CLEARLY more expensive product.... then, ummmm- I guess you’re just extremely confused??
Cable is garbage. Google & Facebook have taught us that if you are willing to endure ads.... the product is then free! They’re paid for by the ads.
Cable makes the revenue off the ads, but STILL charges you!
They force you to take that which you don’t want; then charge you for it.
Cable/satellite requires professional installation. You need to plan a time to be home to allow a stranger in, to run stuff all throughout your house, drill holes in your roof to mount equipment, or put a pole/stand in your yard. For the pleasure of this process (which you perplexingly consider convenient?), you also get locked into a contract. Typically, 2 years. With HUGE cancellation penalties.
If your provider gets in a battle with content creators or sports conglomerates & quits airing say the one show & one sports team you love- there’s no recourse. You can’t get out of your contract.
This sounds like a miserable experience and “deal” to me. I cannot think of a single LESS CONVENIENT business model for a service or product. It’s absolutely the worst.
On top of that... cable is like $100/month (discounting scammy temporary discounts).
Streaming services are $5-$10.
So....... if I have the top 5 streaming services; I have access to far more television & movies than that cable package, it’s all on-demand, there’s no equipment, there’s no contract, & it’s half the cost.
Welcome to 2020, where people are no longer forced to endure annoying advertising, alongside their home entertainment.
Further- if you enjoy ads or are simply unwilling to pay for a streaming service so you don’t have to be subjected to them... I guess you missed the part where they’re offering a free tier that includes those ads you may miss out on, were you to join the rest of us in this cheaper/better/more convenient paradigm shift?
Not "channels" in the traditional sense with a schedule of programming playing live. Streaming services are the new channels, with their own collection of curated content. You choose which ones to subscribe to. You're no longer forced to subscribe to hundreds of channels if you want just that one. CBS All Access for example doesn't get money to be propped up by the popularity of Disney+ or Netflix in the same way as niche channels do on cable. Just as I had longed for, today I can assemble a slate of my favourite content providers and pay for only those that I watch. If I don't watch Prime Video anymore, I cancel the subscription and maintain the ones I do watch. You couldn't do that in the days of cable monopoly.
I'm old enough to remember when cable television first appeared in my area. It was $6 a month and I thought, "Why would anyone pay for something that's already free?" The promise cable made in that era was there it would be ad-free, plus it would have content you couldn't find on network television. You were paying for the service, so that's how they would make their money. But of course, the lure of even more money was too great to resist, so cable companies started running ads AND charging a monthly fee. To this day, I've never paid for cable (except when my only choice for Internet was a bundled cable package that I never watched). I happily pay for Internet connectivity, since that gives me control over what I view and when I view it. So in concept, I like streaming services. I expect that in several years there will be a shake-out and some services will survive, some will get absorbed and others will disappear. It probably will be the customers that decide their fate, though, not a cable company.
No, because the vast majority of their legacy shows, NBCU didn't actually produce and therefore will never hold the rights to. Case in point: ER was produced by a subsidiary of Fox and will always stay on Hulu. The West Wing was produced by Warner Bros and is headed to HBO's streaming service later this year.
Is there any confirmation that you'll be able to sub to the services through their app and pay via iTunes?
Peacock is US only. NBC's international licensing is a tangled mess. I'm sure they'll transition to the streaming model rather than sign new licensing deals going forward but it may take some time for existing deals to expire.
