• Your favorite








    , and
  • Apple Working On "New Technology to Deliver Video to Televisions" Says WSJ

    In an interesting report by the Wall Street Journal this morning, the newspaper claims Apple is working on a "new technology to deliver video to televisions, and has been discussing whether to try to launch a subscription TV service."


    Apple changed the music industry, but cable providers, television networks, and movie studios are a whole different bread of suck. Look at what Netflix has had to put up with. Citing "people familiar with the matter," the WSJ builds a convincing case for Apple to enter the television market.

    Mr. Jobs often criticizes, in public and private, the experience of watching TV as clumsy and bad for consumers. But he has said the existing system, where consumers get content from different cable and satellite providers that use different technologies, makes it difficult to innovate. - WSJ
    Apple wants to streamline the cable industry. It makes sense. The current field of cable and satellite providers use varying technologies that create a bevy of problems for consumers when trying to choose what service they want. However, despite the suck, and price gouging and horrible customer service, is the future of an Apple controlled television service something we want?

    Sure Apple would be able to provide true internet TV, possibly allowing us to pay for whatever channels and networks we want to individually with all the pizazz of Apple TV. However, getting network television to succumb to the Apple way is going to be a much more difficult clash, even with the hordes of cash Apple has.

    My biggest worry though, is not the difficulties Apple will face in securing this type of system, my fears lie in the actual possibility of Apple succeeding at their task. The innovation will be awesome, but if they control the cable industry like they do the music industry, consumers might lose out. The lack of competition in the market place will be even greater, and knowing Apple they're not one for creating open markets for other companies to offer like minded services and survive. Videos and TV show subscriptions aren't exactly cheap on iTunes, and I can't imagine subscribing to the networks you want in an Apple pay-for-play cable atmosphere will be much better.

    Then again, Apple could do what they did with the music industry and make the cable companies and networks bow to their demands and create a cheaper, easier, and more effective way to deliver high quality entertainment to the masses.

    It's all rumor right now, but this rumor is one to watch. Cable companies and television networks are officially on notice.

    Source: WSJ
    This article was originally published in forum thread: Apple Working On "New Technology to Deliver Video to Televisions" Says WSJ started by Phillip Swanson View original post
    Comments 6 Comments
    1. whereswaldo's Avatar
      whereswaldo -
      I'm fine right now with digital cable and a DVR, because there's no other option that's not extremely expensive (buying everything you watch off itunes)
    1. Poseidon79's Avatar
      Poseidon79 -
      Between Hulu Plus and Netflix I get 90% of the content I want. The ONLY reason I keep cable is for sports.
    1. bigboyz's Avatar
      bigboyz -
      Competition is good..Monopolies are what we don't want. If Apple makes far superior products or technology, competitors need to step it up! Plain and simple..no need to fear Apple..do you FEAR the iPhone or iPad? Just silly really. I'm tired of paying for 150 channels that i could care less to view. I want to pay only for the content i desire..can't wait to see what happens with this..
    1. z6joker9's Avatar
      z6joker9 -
      Apple better hurry... Microsoft has a hefty head-start in this area. XBox has a big installed base and through it, MS already has a subscription service setup, pay per use system, social interactivity, and even live sports. Add in things like control via phone (windows phone), kinect, and media center, and Microsoft could easily take the lead here.
    1. baRRy boRRis's Avatar
      baRRy boRRis -
      If there's monthly bills I'm not interested. I have Freesat, and it's great.
    1. 1shuttle1's Avatar
      1shuttle1 -
      I don't see how this will ever benifit the masses. If Apple becomes a viable TV source, won't the cable companies charge more for the internet or just limit are data plan. Then hit us with overage charges. I mean we are pretty much unlimited now. In my area most of the internet companies are the same people offering TV in some sort of package deal. I have verizon. Why would they settle for just my internet. I'm sure before to long my internet package would be about what I'm paying now for both. Then on top of that I would have to pay Apple. Doesn't make sence.