Time Warner Willing to Cede Control of User Interface in Potential Deals for Apple TV Products

Here's the thing: cable sucks. I don't want to get a "package deal" that includes channels I don't want. This is an industry Apple needs to reform, and it's going to take more than simply making a set-top box.
Instead of working with cable providers, Apple should go straight to the content creators. Offer an AppleTV with live, streaming television channels you can purchase a la cartè. Each channel costs 99¢ per month, or something similar.
They could have iTunes Store integration ("Want to see this program commercial free? Download now.") The ability to watch TV when I want and how I want would break the strangling hold cable providers have on Americans.
While an Apple set-top box would be cool, it would be awesome to see Apple give consumers a totally new format to watching television.

While I agree with all the points you've made, there is that little problem that we still need those cable guys for our HiSpeed internet connections. So even if APPLE came up with some nice, sleek, all-encompassing UI/set-top-box with SIRI, fully integrated with iTunes and coupled with a reasonably priced a-la-carte menu, those cable companies would still have us where they want us with their bandwidth charges. Unfortunately, as things stand now, we are going to pay, either way! :(

Having said that, many people are tired of forking over $50 to $150/month for a couple of hundred channels of which they only watch a fraction. You'd have to be chained to your TV 24/7 to get your money's worth. In the long run, I believe Cable Cos will have to be reasonable. If they are too greedy, the marketplace WILL find a way around them, and they will become irrelevant as far as content distribution is concerned. Just as record companies learned the hard way. At first they had zero interest in changing their business model to digital downloads, but later were decimated when Napster and the like came along.

Change isn't going to come overnight, but I'm optimistic for the future. :)
 
Apple need to just use their $100 billion stash and cut deals directly with content providers. Problem solved.

Not sure why this is so difficult.

legalities. Especially when the cable company basically owns the network and the studio that provides at least a major chunk of that content.

as I've noted before, HBO has 3 of the 4 top torrented shows and yet they continue to post legal downloads like iTunes 2 months after the dvds came out. not to mention that's US only and the prices are a tad ridiculous
 
It sounds like this article is basically describing an Apple version of Google TV. . . which was not really a major market success. ("plug your cable box into our extra set-top box and get your cable company content (which you already had) through our UI!")

Can someone explain why this would be useful? It is of no interest/use to me because I don't pay cable companies for TV at all. And, frankly, the DVR UI's I've experienced with TWC and Dish Network are just fine, so if I WERE paying for cable TV I probably wouldn't spring for the extra Apple UI unless it was no additional cost. Any tangible improvement in having an Apple-designed interface on a TWC DVR is marginal at best.

I set up my system with Apple TV's to completely avoid having to pay a monthly fee for a cable service. Instead, I use EyeTV on my mac to record shows off my OTA antenna and then serve them to my Apple TV's. The ATV is also jailbroken so I can do Hulu (free) and Free Cable streaming of TV shows from the content-providers' web sites.
 
It sounds like this article is basically describing an Apple version of Google TV. . . which was not really a major market success. ("plug your cable box into our extra set-top box and get your cable company content (which you already had) through our UI!")

Can someone explain why this would be useful? It is of no interest/use to me because I don't pay cable companies for TV at all. And, frankly, the DVR UI's I've experienced with TWC and Dish Network are just fine, so if I WERE paying for cable TV I probably wouldn't spring for the extra Apple UI unless it was no additional cost. Any tangible improvement in having an Apple-designed interface on a TWC DVR is marginal at best.

I set up my system with Apple TV's to completely avoid having to pay a monthly fee for a cable service. Instead, I use EyeTV on my mac to record shows off my OTA antenna and then serve them to my Apple TV's. The ATV is also jailbroken so I can do Hulu (free) and Free Cable streaming of TV shows from the content-providers' web sites.

Since you don't have cable service at all at this time, you've probably forgotten how terrible most set-top boxes are. Unresponsive, unreliable, and unintuitive - they can make watching TV a PITA.

I was hoping when AT&T released U-Verse (IPTV over their DSL service) that the AT&T and Apple partnership for the iPhone would turn into an Apple IPTV device. Nope. But if Apple produces a set-top-box for TWC, I'll think very hard about ditching my minimal DTV service and go with TWC.
 
legalities. Especially when the cable company basically owns the network and the studio that provides at least a major chunk of that content.

as I've noted before, HBO has 3 of the 4 top torrented shows and yet they continue to post legal downloads like iTunes 2 months after the dvds came out. not to mention that's US only and the prices are a tad ridiculous

Didn't stop Google from launched their one cable company.
 
Didn't stop Google from launched their one cable company.

if they are a legit cable company then there are laws that actually help them. Laws that stop companies like Time Warner from letting other cable companies have access to Warner owned networks like HBO.

But Apple is not currently considered a cable company. So they are in the position of having to take things on the comgloms terms until they can get leverage.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top