Skip to comments.
Apple is going to launch a TV service this fall that could kill cable
Business Insider ^
| 03/17/2015
| Bryan Logan
Posted on 03/17/2015 7:02:10 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 next last
To: SeekAndFind
'Anchored by' the same old lies and lying.
2
posted on
03/17/2015 7:05:47 AM PDT
by
deadrock
(I is someone else.)
To: SeekAndFind; Swordmaker
Swordmaker, is that you?
CC
3
posted on
03/17/2015 7:06:22 AM PDT
by
Celtic Conservative
(Sufficient unto the day are the troubles therof)
To: SeekAndFind
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.
4
posted on
03/17/2015 7:13:26 AM PDT
by
TheZMan
(Buy more ammo.)
To: SeekAndFind
I think we have all seen this coming for a long time. Personally I'm tired of waiting. But ...
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 ...
5
posted on
03/17/2015 7:14:21 AM PDT
by
InterceptPoint
(>http://rss.cnn.com/rss/cnn_topstories.rss)
To: SeekAndFind
Personally in favor of anything that lowers the obscene cable rates!
6
posted on
03/17/2015 7:14:22 AM PDT
by
donozark
(On the other side of fear lies freedom)
To: SeekAndFind; Swordmaker
Don’t forget to ping Swordmaker ... :-) ...
7
posted on
03/17/2015 7:15:28 AM PDT
by
Star Traveler
(Remember to keep the Messiah of Israel in the One-World Government that we look forward to coming)
To: TheZMan
Ripe for disruption, sure. But they start off wrong by bundling channels into the service.Exactly. That's not what I want.
8
posted on
03/17/2015 7:15:57 AM PDT
by
InterceptPoint
(>http://rss.cnn.com/rss/cnn_topstories.rss)
To: SeekAndFind
Sports, sports, it’s all about the ability to watch all our teams....
9
posted on
03/17/2015 7:16:22 AM PDT
by
Yaelle
To: Celtic Conservative
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.
10
posted on
03/17/2015 7:22:25 AM PDT
by
MrEdd
(Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
To: SeekAndFind
I don’t want bundled anything. I want to say, “give me this channel, this one, this one. How much does that cost?”
To: All
The as-yet-unannounced service would cost $30 to $40 per month, according to The Journal.
That's still too high if they're talking about "slimmed down". I can slim my TV down to $0 if I want the major networks and a few other channels, simply by buying an antenna.
If they truly want to "kill cable", they will need to offer a comparable number of channels to cable/satellite. Or give you a base package for dirt cheap and allow you to add channels a la carte at a buck a piece. The day that happens, we will see the death of cable.
With all of the legal negotiations involved between broadcast companies and providers, I just don't see that happening any time soon.
Like many things with Apple, I think these initial reports about them killing cable are a bit over-hyped.
To: PistolPaknMama
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.
13
posted on
03/17/2015 7:41:29 AM PDT
by
kevkrom
(I'm not an unreasonable man... well, actually, I am. But hear me out anyway.)
To: mmichaels1970
That's still too high if they're talking about "slimmed down". I can slim my TV down to $0 if I want the major networks and a few other channels, simply by buying an antenna. 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.
14
posted on
03/17/2015 7:43:47 AM PDT
by
kevkrom
(I'm not an unreasonable man... well, actually, I am. But hear me out anyway.)
To: SeekAndFind
Comcast or Apple?
No brainer.
15
posted on
03/17/2015 7:45:58 AM PDT
by
null and void
(Obama has received so many Pinocchios Valerie Jarret's secret service code name is Geppetto.)
To: mmichaels1970
"I think these initial reports about them killing cable are a bit over-hyped. "It's just cable by another name. What's killing cable is a-la-carte options and Youtube.
To: moehoward
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.
To: mmichaels1970
Like many things with Apple, I think these initial reports about them killing cable are a bit over-hyped. 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.)
18
posted on
03/17/2015 7:56:24 AM PDT
by
kevkrom
(I'm not an unreasonable man... well, actually, I am. But hear me out anyway.)
To: SeekAndFind
Anything would be better than Hulu. But it needs to be free.
To: Dilbert San Diego
I find also, as time goes on, Im 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. 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).
20
posted on
03/17/2015 7:59:57 AM PDT
by
kevkrom
(I'm not an unreasonable man... well, actually, I am. But hear me out anyway.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson