Apple your new "cable" network.

[alfredo]

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/04/apple-goes-where-the-portals-failed-its-the-hardware-stupid/

Six months ago an Apple analyst told me he thought the company’s long-term goal was to become the internet’s cable TV company. I didn’t get it then. I really get it now. Most think of Apple as a computer or consumer electronics company. I think that’s becoming a means to a much bigger end: becoming a giant news, entertainment and communications network with Googillian ambitions.

This could put pressure on cable companies to drop prices or agree to ala carte pricing.

[no limit]

1. There is too much online competition for them to become THE internet cable TV company

but they will probably play a role as one provider. Another decade and I think cable TV will be dead.

[NV Whino]

2. I could get behind ala carte pricing

and eliminate a lot of drivel. Nice photo for the article, too.

[alfredo]

7. I'm all for Apple subjecting the cable companies to strong

competition so they can't fuck us every time the CEO needs a new yacht.

[SoCalDem]

34. The problem with a la carte pricing , is this

Niche programming goes away.. Stuff like Link & FSTV will wither on the vine & die.

Only the programming that is asked for by the LARGEST numbers of people,. will survive

It's annoying to see all the crap loading up each "tier", and most of it all but un-watchable, but if we paid per channel, we would truly be at the mercy of the numbers.

Right now, we can just "delete" the ones we don't want, but if our favorites get dumped completely before we even get a change to choose them, we lose.

[alfredo]

37. Things like that happen on TV now. Most of TV now is

unwatchable in my opinion. But If I could just pick HBO, Sundance, IFC, some sports, news/and entertainment I would do fine. I'm watching over the air TV right now (PBS).

[sui generis]

3. god I hope not

I give you iTunes as a reference. And you may keep it.

[alfredo]

4. iTunes is just a portal to their store. It's a lot better than

their first attempt using the QuickTime player as their "store."

[sui generis]

5. I remember that.

What I don't like about iTunes is the rigid rights management that ends up managing my access to my own music collection. I do buy all my music, and that means when I want to burn a CD with it, I should be able to do so. Yes I have iPods but I'd like to share some of my music with my Palm pre and not have some stupid pissing contest going on.

I don't like continuous updates, system and update sniffers, and SR upgrades that sneak in software that I don't want and must remain vigilant to exclude. iTunes is a bully, and I don't like it. So if that portal is the standard for accessing any "store", I'd be less than thrilled.

[alfredo]

9. I've never had trouble burning a CD of music. It's burning movies

that is restricted. I don't think that was Apple's doing. They probably had to agree to some DRM to get the publishers onboard.

I always burn a back up of my music.

[ShamelessHussy]

10. they used to have DRM on music, too, until recently

if you upgrade to the latest iTunes, it should allow you to update your music library and remove the DRM.

[sui generis]

12. I'll give it a try

I stopped accepting updates after they locked out non iPod equipment in their war with Palm. That and every time I run an update, it fails on the first upgrade, resets my selections (do not update Quicktime) and then updates Quicktime anyway. I'm too busy posting blue prose on DU to have to deal with it. :P

Anyway, I guess I don't have anything to lose at this point.

[alfredo]

14. iTunes is worth it for the podcasts and radio. All Songs Considered

and RollingStone podcasts are really good. The RS video podcast of the Ting Tings gave me a new appreciation for them.

The Tom Jones Podcast was a revelation, same goes for Sam Phillips and Kn'aan.

There's some good lefty radio there too.

[cui bono]

24. I get Countdown and TRMS podcasts.

Great for when I miss them and then I can get clips out of them to save or post.

[alfredo]

30. I will be glad when we can get realtime TV over the

internet without going to Justin TV or other such sites.

[ShamelessHussy]

6. 3 years ago i dumped cable and got an apple TV, and i haven't looked back

It's cheap, it has built in wifi, HD, and is essentially a computer under the hood...
http://www.apple.com/appletv

with a free patch you can upgrade your apple tv to Boxee...
http://www.boxee.tv

that essentially makes it very easy to watch all the online media (TV, MOVIES, SPORTS, ETC), as well as any media on your home computers or NAS drives in your living room.

the best part, no monthly fees for all that content, the only fee is your ISP, and since mine is DSL, it is through my phone company.

note: the boxee software is still beta, but it works very well considering, and they are hoping to have 1.0 out by the end of this year.

[alfredo]

8. If what the article says is true, the ATV will be your

"cable box." So if your spouse wants to watch HGTV, but you want to watch baseball, then you can pick up your iPad, retire to your man cave and enjoy.

[ShamelessHussy]

11. yeah, but who needs cable when you have all this content online?

so it comes down to me paying about $30 a month to my phone company for internet access, or paying a lot more to the cable company for entertainment + extra for www.

I realize it is not for everyone, but I like it... it's kinda like having tivo too, in that you watch the tv shows when you want to, including which episode =)

[alfredo]

13. I only have Airport Express now. I would have to upgrade.

I could buy a Mac Mini and attach it to the TV.

[ShamelessHussy]

16. the thing about the mini is that it is more than twice as expensive and it doesn't have all the

digital out ports e.g. HDMI or optical audio, but i guess you could get adapters for it, but if you don't have a mini, and are just looking for a media server the mini may be a better choice.

also, it will work with older base stations as well, though i would recommend getting at least an N router for streaming videos.

t

[alfredo]

21. I was thinking of buying a new mini someday and put

this one with the TV upstairs.

[Bluenorthwest]

15. So you know, what you recommend is called 'stealing my food'

in this house. Shoplifting is a money saver, no doubt about it.

[ShamelessHussy]

17. huh, how do you figure that?

all the content on boxee is ad supported... for just 1 example hulu is supported by at least 5 major networks.

most major networks put their content online these days, and it is NOT STEALING.

[cui bono]

23. You can do that with an xbox or ps3 and lots of other things too.

You can use a variety of pc software like TVersity, Twonky Media etc... (or Windows Media Center.

Plus these days you can access lots of sites using your BD player.

[Joanne98]

18. ala carte YES!

[dem mba]

20. eh, i'm mixed on it

they'll be a lot less high-quality, well-produced niche programming for everyone.

[alfredo]

22. Like what you see on Sundance and IFC?

[cui bono]

28. Huh? Are you saying IFC and Sundance are lesser quality?

Than what?

Anyway, I think the poster you replied to was talking about the digital quality not the content. For example, we now listen to lesser quality music because of mp3s. It was reduced for efficiency and the masses don't even care. Same thing is happening with movies. You can get 1080p picture but I don't think anyone streams 5.1 audio. I can get 5.1 audio via cable. What's the point of having a nice surround system if you can't use it when watching movies? I don't know why they don't use lossless compression for the audio, you'd think they could utilize FLAC somehow. TV I'm fine with it, but for movies it's the theater or rent the disk.

[alfredo]

31. forgot the sarcasm smiley. On cable if I want either

channel, I have to sign up for a bunch of crap I don't want. I can't just order those two channels.

My eyes are bad and I'm hard of hearing. 1080p and top quality audio would be lost on me.

[dem mba]

19. google, apple, microsoft

are all slowly getting into the TV game. and it's the smart move, cable companies are stupid, short-sighted behemoths that have no vision and no ability to innovate anything.

the content-providers like viacom and turner will do alright, but comcast and cablevision, etc are destined to be dumb-pipe companies for eternity unless they get their act together.

[Javaman]

25. Personally, I welcome our new Apple overlords. nt

[SpiralHawk]

26. Hells Bells, JavaDude. You welcome all the Overlords

How about the Underlords? Don't they get no steenkin repect?

[Javaman]

29. I like to hedge my bets.

:rofl:

[Xithras]

27. I certainly hope not.

I'm suddenly reminded of Jobs's recent snotty remark about the Android, commenting on the fact that there are (gasp!) PORN apps available for it. After he pointed that out, he followed up with an "I don't think any of us want to see Apple go in that direction."

So enjoy your family friendly, mass market oriented, Disneyfied, non-political, and heavily censored new Apple TV network. Me? I'll take a pass.

[alfredo]

32. Why should they offer porn when you can get it online

any time you want it?

[Xithras]

33. It's not porn specifically, but the mindset behind it.

Most members of the Android development community saw the comment as hilarious posturing, considering the vast sums of porn available via the iPhone web browser, and didn't give much weight to the comment itself.

The disturbing part, however, is that Apple has repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to invoke censorship in order to protect their image, or to eliminate potential competition. It's a "You're free to say and do whatever you like, so long as we agree with you" situation. You're free to buy into that mindset if you want, but I choose not to.

[alfredo]

36. So if it is available free online, why should Apple risk

a backlash from segments of its customer base?

The XboX, Nintendo, and Playstation controls the content on their machines. Why is it bad when Apple does it?

[Xithras]

39. It's bad when they ALL do it.

As for backlash, there are now more than 8.5 million Android phones in use today, and a couple million of those Android users, like me, are former iPhone users. One of the most common complaints about the iPhone platform in the Android Community Forums is Apple's iron grip on the platform and their unwillingness to allow any sort of controversial apps through. Contrasted with Google's "Freedom For Everyone" position, it's a no-contest comparison for those of us who actually object to corporate control of what we see and hear.

If Apple's intention was to eliminate backlash, they failed miserably. The only difference is that, while the anti-porn fundies protest loudly, those us us who care about having an open and free platform simply protest by taking our dollars elsewhere. Apple's position has already cost them millions of dollars in sales.

As I said, I have no problem with you buying into their mindset, but I choose not to. I didn't like it when I had an iPhone, and I didn't hesitate to dump them when a realistic alternative finally appeared.

[alfredo]

40. There is no prohibition against you surfing to a porn site on Safari or Opera Mini.

Apple just doesn't want to be seen as supporting and profiting from the porn trade through their app store. I'm fine with that. Access to porn was easy before the iPhone/iPad, and continues to be easy for those who desire that sort of thing.

[dorkulon]

35. "Googillian," wow that's a new one.

I would've probably gone with "Googlesque."

[alfredo]

38. Googillian seems more overbearing.

Googlesque seems more like a tendency.