backtop


Print 42 comment(s) - last by Cheesew1z69.. on Mar 4 at 3:39 PM


  (Source: macrumors.com)
Apple is currently in talks with content providers

It seems TV subscription services are all the craze these days, with several companies looking to follow in Netflix's footsteps. Now, it looks like Apple is pushing ahead with plans to start its own service by the end of 2012.

According to the New York Post, Apple is looking to offer television channels as apps across its various devices, such as the iPhone, iPad and iPod touch. Among these devices will also be the Apple TV set-top box and possibly an Apple TV set.

Apple is reportedly in talks with content providers already. However, in typical Apple fashion, it wants to control price and content, but a media executive was quoted saying that the company "wants everything for nothing."

That's not the only issue Apple is having. The tech giant apparently tried to persuade cable companies to use its hardware for their set-top boxes, where Apple can create the interface and collaborate with cable companies to manage bandwidth through TV and broadband. However, the cable companies weren't having it. 

Despite these troubles, Apple is moving forward with its TV subscription service and continues talking with content providers. There are no specific details available at this time, and many questions are up in the air, such as whether Apple will bundle multiple app channels together to create its own cable TV package or just offer them individually to customers.

Apple wants to introduce its new service by Christmas 2012.

Many other companies have attempted to offer cable TV subscriptions in the recent past as well, such as Verizon and Microsoft. However, Microsoft decided to put its TV subscription service on hold due to costs.

Source: MacRumors



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By tayb on 3/2/2012 10:26:33 AM , Rating: 1
Whether you hate Apple or not you have to admit that they have been a heavy player in "unlocking" the music industry. I remember a time when you couldn't burn CDs, buy individual tracks, or purchase DRM-free music of any kind. Apple didn't accomplish any of these things single handed but they were a major player. Netflix has done a lot to offer content whenever you want it but it certainly couldn't hurt me for a big company like Apple to throw its weight around and see what kind of pricing it can secure. If it's cheap, I'll enjoy that.




RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By kleinma on 3/2/12, Rating: 0
RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By tayb on 3/2/12, Rating: 0
RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 3/2/2012 11:25:27 AM , Rating: 5
Revisionist history is such a wonderful thing.

Amazon beat Apple to market when it came to DRM-Free music.


RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By Tony Swash on 3/2/12, Rating: -1
RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 3/2/2012 12:44:09 PM , Rating: 3
And your entire post did not serve to displace my original single fact.

Amazon beat Apple to market with DRM Free Music. I don't care how hard Apply fought or didn't fight, they were a "me too" provider that followed a market trend Amazon set. One could possibly argue that Apple lacks the negotiating position to play hard ball with big media on issues like DRM, however companies like Amazon with a much larger market reach "can".


RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By Tony Swash on 3/2/12, Rating: 0
By Solandri on 3/2/2012 2:56:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I think you have it the wrong way round. Labels, and other content providers, fear the dominance of Apple and the iTunes store (the biggest music retailer in the market) and hence offer less encumbered deals to alternative but smaller music retailers such as Amazon as a way to undermine the dominance of iTunes.

Nope, you have it backwards. Amazon wasn't even the first company offering DRM-free digital music downloads. AFAIK, mp3.com was the first one - you could put a music CD in your drive, their software would create a hashkey from the CD and compare to the hashkey for a genuine CD, and so having verified that you did in fact have a real CD of the music in your possession it would let you download the MP3 version. It and others were sued out of existence by the RIAA.

In the face of DRM-free music distribution, the record labels (initially) eagerly signed up with iTunes because it offered DRM protection of their music. Way back when it first started, the only way to get DRM-free music from iTunes was to buy the DRMed songs, burn it to CD (which would strip out the DRM since CDs have no provision for DRM), and rip the CD. At the time, most people didn't have CD burners or didn't know how to use one if they did have one, and didn't now how to rip songs off a CD. So the record labels didn't see this roundabout process as a major hole in their DRM scheme.

The labels fear iTunes now because it's grown into a juggernaut which threatens to displace them from their former role as overlords of music distribution. Anybody following the industry developments in the 1990s could've told them this would happen. In fact many did, telling them that instead of trying to stop digital distribution, they should create a digital distribution system of their own. Then people would come banging at their doors with fistfulls of money. But they had to do it before someone else did.

But the labels were luddites fearful of change, thinking that if they just tried to stop music from being distributed digitally, it would never happen and things would remain the same. By the time they saw the writing on the wall, it was too late for them to start up an online distribution system from scratch. So when Apple came and offered iTunes with most everything they wanted, they signed up. I think their plan was to use iTunes as a stopgap to stave off illegal filesharing, while they worked on their own digital distribution system (much like Hulu for TV). But iTunes grew and reached critical mass far quicker than they expected.


RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By messele on 3/2/12, Rating: 0
RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By Cheesew1z69 on 3/2/2012 1:24:06 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Let's not paint 'facts' as facts, until we have checked on those 'facts' ok?


quote:
Amazon MP3 is an online music store owned and operated by Amazon.com. Launched in public beta on September 25, 2007,[1] in January 2008 it became the first music store to sell music without digital rights management (DRM) from the four major music labels (EMI, Universal, Warner Music, and Sony BMG), as well as many independents.


Apple didn't do this until 2009...

Really?

I guess you should check your facts before you spout off.


RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By messele on 3/2/2012 2:04:55 PM , Rating: 1
I suggest you read what others have written carefully before you spout off, moron.

Apple sold their first DRM-free tracks in May 2007, Amazon were in September 2007 if you stretch things to extremes and include the beta.

Nobody is talking about who was the first to sell DRM-free from all the major labels (that WAS Amazon) but who was the first to sell anything DRM-free and therefore pioneered the system (that WAS Apple).

My facts are sound, yours are a convenient warping.


RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By Cheesew1z69 on 3/2/2012 2:15:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Nobody is talking about who was the first to sell DRM-free from all the major labels ( that WAS Amazon )


quote:
but who was the first to sell anything DRM-free and therefore pioneered the system ( that WAS Apple )


Amazon did it first , but they didn't pioneer it, Apple did.

Wow...LOL

I guess Apple really does invent everything! ROFL!


RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By messele on 3/2/2012 2:32:09 PM , Rating: 1
Seriously you are thick if you can't understand something that simple. I'm not going to repeat it a third time so your simpleton brain can comprehend but read...it...again...slowly.

Better still follow the link I posted below and stop being a deliberately obstinate cretin.


RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By Cheesew1z69 on 3/2/2012 2:51:48 PM , Rating: 2
Thick...yet, you blindly stick up for Apple in all your posts....

/me face palms...


RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By testerguy on 3/3/2012 4:14:31 AM , Rating: 1
Don't try to explain very basic things to cheesew.

He's the monkey of Dailytech, hasn't got a clue.


RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By Cheesew1z69 on 3/3/2012 8:55:58 AM , Rating: 1
Let's talk about having a clue Apple bitch boy. lol


RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By hexxthalion on 3/4/2012 1:27:08 PM , Rating: 2
just deal with it


By Cheesew1z69 on 3/4/2012 3:39:00 PM , Rating: 2
I noticed you only post in Apple articles defending them too, such a sad pathetic human.


RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By messele on 3/2/2012 2:09:34 PM , Rating: 1
Before any of you Apple-hating idiots come back at me with any of this 'fact' crap save your sweaty finger-tapping...

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/04/02Apple-Un...


RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By Cheesew1z69 on 3/2/2012 2:37:17 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Apple® today announced that EMI Music’s entire digital catalog
Notice in your link it just says EMI? Now...

quote:
Amazon MP3 is an online music store owned and operated by Amazon.com. Launched in public beta on September 25, 2007 ,[1] in January 2008 it became the first music store to sell music without digital rights management (DRM) from the four major music labels (EMI, Universal, Warner Music, and Sony BMG), as well as many independents.


Comes 2009...

quote:
SAN FRANCISCO— January 6, 2009 —Apple® today announced several changes to the iTunes® Store (www.itunes.com). Beginning today, all four major music labels—Universal Music Group, Sony BMG, Warner Music Group and EMI, along with thousands of independent labels, are now offering their music in iTunes Plus , Apple’s DRM-free format with higher-quality 256 kbps AAC encoding for audio quality virtually indistinguishable from the original recordings. iTunes customers can also choose to download their favorite songs from the world’s largest music catalog directly onto their iPhone™ 3G over their 3G network just as they do with Wi-Fi today, for the same price as downloading to their computer. And beginning in April, based on what the music labels charge Apple, songs on iTunes will be available at one of three price points: 69 cents, 99 cents and $1.29, with most albums still priced at $9.99.


Enough said...


RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By messele on 3/2/12, Rating: 0
RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By yomamafor1 on 3/2/2012 3:01:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Apple were the first to sell DRM-free music.


Proof? Because so far I've seen indicated that Amazon was in fact the first company to push for DRM-free music.

In fact, I started buying from Amazon for my MP3 needs because I no longer have to authorize each computer (up to 5) to play a music that I legally bought.


RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By messele on 3/2/2012 3:05:49 PM , Rating: 2
Proof

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/04/02Apple-Un...

And don't start with all this "oh they didn't sell all their music DRM-free so that doesn't count" nonsense that Cheesedick is spouting.

The first company to sell a single track paid-for but DRM-free legally was the first. That was not Amazon.


RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By Cheesew1z69 on 3/2/2012 3:26:00 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Cheesedick is spouting.
UMADBRO? LOL


By testerguy on 3/3/2012 4:17:31 AM , Rating: 2
I suspect he's finding it a little troubling that you don't understand the difference between:

1 - offering all music DRM free
2 - offering some music DRM free

Two different things.

2 happened first , with Apple

Amazon later did 1.


RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By yomamafor1 on 3/2/2012 1:14:20 PM , Rating: 2
Yawn.

Apple was still using DRM music when AMZ was already offering DRM-free music. That is a fact.

What else is a fact? Amazon launched it's DRM-free music service in 2007. Apple didn't do the same until 2009.

Your "ample evidence" amounts to nothing other than your personal biased speculation and conjecture. It doesn't work in the real world, FYI.


RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By Tony Swash on 3/2/2012 2:38:04 PM , Rating: 2
The simple fact that seems to escape some people around here (their thought processes often crippled by iPhobia) is that neither Apple nor Amazon control the DRM regime pertaining to their respective content libraries, the content owners do. If either Amazon or Apple decides to abandon DRM they can only do that with the permission of the content owners.

iPhobes, flustered by Apple's seemingly never ending success and growth, can only ever read the world through a prism that makes Apple the villain or enemy in every instance. The truth is we should all support Apple and Amazon in fighting DRM and in particular in breaking the ridiculous current system for the distribution of TV content.


RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By Cheesew1z69 on 3/2/2012 2:44:48 PM , Rating: 2
The simple fact....

Amazon MP3 is an online music store owned and operated by Amazon.com. Launched in public beta on September 25, 2007 ,[1] in January 2008 it became the first music store to sell music without digital rights management (DRM) from the four major music labels (EMI, Universal, Warner Music, and Sony BMG), as well as many independents .

But somehow, someway, you will deny this fact.


By testerguy on 3/3/2012 4:21:59 AM , Rating: 2
You need to learn how to read.

Try and spot the difference between these two sentences:

1 - Sell music without digital rights management.
2 - Sell music without digital rights management (DRM) from the four major music labels (EMI, Universal, Warner Music, and Sony BMG)

Can you spot that difference, Dailytech monkey?

To help you out - you are not proving who was the first to sell music without DRM with your fact. This was Apple.


By FITCamaro on 3/2/2012 2:50:57 PM , Rating: 3
Their success and growth is at the end of a gun and fueled largely by complete tools who blindly use Apple products while talking about how evil Microsoft is for being greedy. Irony.


RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By steven975 on 3/2/2012 2:56:42 PM , Rating: 2
Apple wants people locked into their platform. DRM is their everything.

They only wanted DRM-free music because Amazon had it.


RE: I hope Apple pushes hard on pricing
By Tony Swash on 3/2/2012 7:03:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Apple wants people locked into their platform. DRM is their everything.


What an astonishingly silly thing to say. Now if you had said that the iPhone (a business bigger than the whole of Microsoft's business) was their everything, or even that the Mac (a bigger business than the whole of Microsoft's Windows business) was their everything you wouldn't have been right but you might have avoided saying anything so monumentally ridiculous as 'DRM is their everything". iPhobia rots the brain.


By Cheesew1z69 on 3/2/2012 7:12:31 PM , Rating: 1
MS and Apple aren't in the same business so you really should stop comparing them.

quote:
Mac (a bigger business than the whole of Microsoft's Windows business)
LOL

Being Apple's bitch boy rots the brain.


By TakinYourPoints on 3/2/2012 9:18:00 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
They only wanted DRM-free music because Amazon had it.


This is hilarious given that Apple had DRM free music months before Amazon and negotiated with record labels for it for years beforehand.


By TakinYourPoints on 3/2/2012 3:39:02 PM , Rating: 2
Incorrect, Apple sold DRM free music four months before it was available on Amazon. They were the ones to really put the pressure on music labels to dump DRM because it was obviously a bad idea.

Jobs negotiated with them for years for no DRM, and when that didn't work he wrote an open letter on why DRM needed to go: http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/06/a-letter-from-s...

The math he used explained pretty well that DRM doesn't work. Each iPod can hold thousands of songs, but if you divide the capacity of each iPod sold by the number of tracks sold on iTunes, then it can be concluded that a low single digit percentage of music on iPods actually comes from iTunes. Most of it comes from CDs or other downloads (illegal or otherwise). Clearly DRM doesn't work, and it doesn't work in Apple's favor anyway since they don't really make money off of iTunes (nearly all revenue goes to record labels and the cost of running the service), they make it from selling hardware (iPods, iPhones, etc).

The thing that many people here don't understand is that the terms for DRM with all of these services, be it Apple, Amazon, Netflix, Hulu, Zune, etc etc, doesn't come from any of these tech companies or providers, it comes from the record companies and movie studios. All that tech companies have is leverage for negotiations, and Apple has the most leverage out of any of these companies since they are the largest seller.

This headline says it best: http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/news/2007...

quote:
Edgar Bronfman, Jr., the Warner Music Group chairman, told Goldman Sachs investors in New York last week he was considering removing DRM from Warner's music downloads -- this just months after suggesting Warner would never abandon DRM. He blamed Apple for the apparent change of heart.


By cmdrdredd on 3/3/2012 6:27:14 PM , Rating: 2
I could always burn my own CD. I had tons of them way before Mp3s were popularized.


Apple UI
By bobcpg on 3/2/2012 12:27:23 PM , Rating: 2
Please give me anything other than the crappy UI and features provided by Comcast UI.

Apple would do a way better job at this. Actually any other big-er tech company would do a better job at this than Comcast.




RE: Apple UI
By tng on 3/2/2012 1:32:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Please give me anything other than the crappy UI and features provided by Comcast UI.
Time Warner is just as bad.

At home I dropped Comcast for Direct TV and it was much better, but after a recent change by them to update the looks of the menus, I am far from happy with them anymore, although they are still better than Comcast or Time Warner.


RE: Apple UI
By Solandri on 3/2/2012 3:10:00 PM , Rating: 3
I think this is the real opportunity here (for either AppleTV or GoogleTV or anyone else). It's why people are floating the idea of using your iPad or Android tablet as a remote control for your TV. It's not that these devices are particularly well-suited for controlling your cable box (would you use a tablet to navigate menus on your main computer?). It's that the UIs on cable and satellite boxes are so universally bad that almost anything is an improvement.

The UIs on cable boxes are bad because nearly every cable company has a government-granted monopoly. Except for satellite, there's no competitor people can switch to if the UI sucks. So there's no incentive for cable companies to improve the UI. Satellite + cable creates a duopoly, which means as long as both members implicitly agree not to spend money on improving UI, no improvements to UI happen.

So if Apple or Google or whoever can make a cheap TV tuning box which has a simple, quick, and easy-to-use UI, I think it will sell well. Once you have that, licensing deals with content providers (what sank Google TV) will come naturally, lest they shut themselves out of the huge userbase you've created. As much as I dislike Apple, this is something I can see them pulling off.


The only way Apple can convince Cable providers
By corduroygt on 3/2/2012 12:51:32 PM , Rating: 2
is to buy them, they are NOT going to roll over, since they own the stuff that people want to watch.
Cable providers are huge companies though, even with Apple's ridiculous cash reserves, many shareholders would object to such an acquisition.




By tng on 3/2/2012 1:29:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The only way Apple can convince Cable providers...is to buy them
Well seeing how Netflix got treated by content providers, there are probably many willing providers that are just salivating at the chance to take a large hunk of the $90 Billion that Apple is sitting on.

It will be instructive to see the line Apple would take with the content providers.


Subscribe to Television?
By HoosierEngineer5 on 3/2/2012 2:13:04 PM , Rating: 2
One of these days, Apple will try to charge for rain. And they will be successful. And I thought that was the government's job...




"We’re Apple. We don’t wear suits. We don’t even own suits." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki