Posted on 03/17/2015 7:02:10 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Apple is reportedly working on a plan to launch its own TV service.
A Wall Street Journal report suggests Apple, which already lets users watch television and Netflix shows through its Apple TV device, is working with programmers "to offer a slimmed-down bundle of TV networks this fall."
The Journal cites sources familiar with the talks who say Apple's subscription service may provide "about 25 channels, anchored by broadcasters such as ABC, CBS, and Fox, and would be available on Apple devices such as the Apple TV."
The as-yet-unannounced service would cost $30 to $40 per month, according to The Journal.
Various rumors and speculation suggesting Apple intends to disrupt television have been circulating for a while, but the tech company's plans have so far been vague and somewhat noncommittal.
There has been talk in recent years that Apple might develop its own television hardware, and when that simmered down, the conversation returned to the possibility that Apple might offer precisely the type of streaming service that is apparently being negotiated now.
What is clear, however, is that Apple wants to cater to customers who are giving up on expensive traditional cable subscriptions. That industry has been ripe for disruption for some time, especially as other platforms like Netflix and Amazon build ever-stronger programming that is finally nipping at the heels of legacy media.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
Swordmaker, is that you?
CC
Ripe for disruption, sure. But they start off wrong by bundling channels into the service.
And for that reason, I won’t be using them, either.
There is no way that the "Providers" like CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX , ESPN, TNN etc. are going to sign exclusive agreements with Apple. They are in the drivers seat here and it is the cable companies, DirecTV and Dish who need to be worried.
In any case, this move is long overdue and Apple has the financial clout to make it happen.
But I'm looking forward to watching a stream from Fox News being available on my Roku for $2.99/month. Looking, waiting, looking, waiting ...
Personally in favor of anything that lowers the obscene cable rates!
Don’t forget to ping Swordmaker ... :-) ...
Exactly. That's not what I want.
Sports, sports, it’s all about the ability to watch all our teams....
He has been busy the last couple of days trying to convince Freepers that “biggest” is the same as “First” and that therefore anything iPple does they invent because being biggest makes them first.
Same old same old with him, and I suspect that he is also the guy on the team that always claims credit for everyone else’s work because it is the same mentality.
I don’t want bundled anything. I want to say, “give me this channel, this one, this one. How much does that cost?”
I have no problem with bundles, but I would like to see an ala carte option as well. It will cost more per channel that way, but I have control over what channels I want, and could easily come in at less than the bundle price. Others may find that they want enough channels to make bundles worthwhile.
In other words, give us options.
But that's "watch live or find a way to record it". This type of deal would almost certainly include (based on existing Apple TV offerings) an on-demand library for each channel with back episodes. Not as much use for, say, Fox News or ESPN, but for regular comedies/dramas/etc., it caters to those who are already used to time-shifiting via DVR or on demand services.
Comcast or Apple?
No brainer.
It's just cable by another name. What's killing cable is a-la-carte options and Youtube.
This topic of cutting cable has been discussed on Free Republic a few times. And people have said they cut the cord, no longer have cable, but watch Netflix instead.
I would love an alacarte option. I get so many channels I never watch as part of a bundle.
I find also, as time goes on, I’m watching TV less and less. It seems TV is full of reality shows on which people act like idiots, and “edgy” sitcoms pushing homosexuality and various other immoral and anti-social behaviors and call it entertainment.
It's version 1. Version 1 from Apple is almost always a large-scale proof-of-concept demonstration. Once version 2 rolls around, we'll have a better idea of how well or poorly it's going to work. (Or if really poorly, there won't even be a version 2.)
Anything would be better than Hulu. But it needs to be free.
Totally agree. There's only a handful of network TV shows we watch. The Mrs. insists on Food Network. I like live sports (but I actually have more interest in Fox Sports/NBCSN than ESPN). Other things we just buy from iTunes if they release episodes there the day after broadcast (e.g., Doctor Who) or as a set if they don't (e.g., Game of Thrones).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.