The antitheis of Apple TV
Riddle me this: would you pay Apple $30 a month for unlimited access to TV, presumably coinciding with the actual network air time or shortly thereafter? Interesting, non?
PKafka has talked to some industry execs who have been approached by Apple in preparation of just that sort of thing. You pay $30 and get TV – on demand. The Apple TV would ignore the DVR market completely, instead becoming a sort of subscription-based cable TV service.
Kafka notes that there are 65 million iTunes accounts, a nice cohort of folks to suck money from. He can’t confirm any names or networks right now, but it seems this content will be commercial free.
Considering it costs less to totally pirate the heck out of TV, this might not be a viable option for many consumers. However, it’s an interesting proposition.
So will this have every channel I get on cable, allow more than to be played with just itunes, apple tv
Will all the shows I can find on TV be on there if not no game.
It is a great idea, and a good step in the right direction. However, the greed of television stations may not make this option feasible for many years. I guess we will see. I would pay if it included the right amount of programming. DirectTV has exclusive distribution rights for NFL Sunday Ticket (which I pay $300 a year for on top of normal monthly programming charges), clearly a monopoly, because you cannot get it from cable or DishNewtork, this means that networks still control who gets their content and allows them to require additional charges and continue to shaft consumers.
If Apple or any company could do this, I would surely pay $30/month.
If the goal was to pick off the dollars that customers currently allocated towards pay-channels; namely, HBO, Showtime, Starz, etc. it might work if for no other reason than when Tablet comes out you could have a TV anywhere offering to view same content on iPhone, Tablet, Desktop and Apple TV for one price.
I do agree with others, though, that it sets up somewhat of an ALL-or-NONE as to whether same price includes Movies/TV and Music.
Some fodder on this one in my post:
Apple, TV and the Smart, Connected Living Room
http://bit.ly/k4rOf
Check it out, if interested.
Mark
This would be a huge win for Apple. Subscription is clearly the direction the market is going and being able to offer on-demand TV (hopefully commercial free) is huge.
Now if they just offer netflix or their own movie subscription (rentals and blockbuster are toast), it’s the ultimate media center.
This would be a pretty good way to go. Fact of the matter is that TV is subscription based now, and thats how people are used to pay for it. Now if you let them basically have a DVR for every show ever for $30/mo I think a shit load of people would do it. BUT it would have to be set up for LIVE sporting events and even local stuff. Getting the local stuff live would be the difficult part, but totally do able.
It would NEED to replace cable tv. If they are just going to charge $30/mo for old tv shows it will be a big fat failure. They need the live component, particularly with sporting events. If they do that I think the way we watch TV will change VERY quick, and it is really the first option that would be a viable internet based tv service I would PAY for. No fussing with the DVR, its all there for you all the time. Literally watch what you want when you want. Would be perfect and I think they could charge more than $30/mo.
Jim
Hmmm… TV off air: too many commercials, free otherwise, use my PVR.
TV from Apple: too many commercials, must buy Apple hardware, must pay Apple $30 a month, loads of DRM, plus the commercial-skip is likely disabled.
You decide.
I’m happy very happy, this is the end of the cable era. I dont have cable and I still rely on ( LoggTV.com ) for good movies and music. Sorry, I wont pay for TV or Downloads. FTA Satellite is a good option too.
This would be great! I already kicked cable to the curb due to the fact that there prices were/are crazy and I did not need all those chanels. Add to that the fact that I already have an ATV so I am good to go. If if realy is only $30 its a no brainer for me, Bring it on!
Wow did you really knock this potential service because PIRACY is cheaper?
First off, piracy is illegal so how is this even a valid assertion on this site? Secondly not everyone understands how to pirate the “heck” out of TV (not to mention do it cheaply). Finally not everyone wants to steal it when they could access it much more conveniently and at a higher level of quality via a subscription service.
Encoding quality, codec issues, timeliness of availability, complete episode availability and access to reliable sources all make piracy a less complete solution to digital access to TV.
I am not exactly sure if it is within the rights of the average consumer to disseminate OTA broadcasts to the internet. I am guessing that the existence of Hulu and the exclusion of that content from YouTube is proof enough that there is some kind illegality with sharing recorded TV whenever and with whomever you like.