Apple Tv Update’s

September 2, 2010 by Post Team 

Apple Tv Update’s, The new Apple TV will fail, like the previous one did. It is not Apple’s fault. It seems that the TV and movie studios do not want anyone to disrupt their existing business, and this is a battle that even Apple can not win.

Apple’s new box is smaller and cheaper than before, but that does not solve the core problem. The problem with TV is that Apple has always been too expensive to look at things in the gadget, and not enough things to see.

Let’s take Apple and May, HD, “the first installment of” films. First, it is not release. This refers to films that are still in theaters, now that would be a game changer. Rather, these are the same films can be rented from Blockbuster and Netflix and Redbox soon after, and often for less.

Then there are the TV shows for 99 cents. That sounds cheap, but each program can add up to 24 and a season-and you can not view any of these episodes a second time without having to pay again. While that may be much cheaper than cable if it is confined to a limited number of television programs, I do not think it is cheaper enough to make a real difference.

Apple dodged a paradigm shift by neglecting to enter applications for the Apple TV. Applications, especially games, may have been “seeing things” in the Apple TV that has been completely independent from the income of the television industry. No one has made “TV applications” very well yet, and Apple could have shown the way. The Apple TV may also have become the Apple TV system of play. Nope.

I am not referring to the initial list of television programs. Without CBS, NBC, and many cable channels, it’s like you’re in the woods with an antenna Janky.

By eliminating onboard storage, Apple is also trying to indicate that they want to see their own long-form content, either ripped from your own DVDs or downloaded through means less salty. Sure, you can hear those things, but that means you have to leave your PC on all the time. Streaming from a PC to a TV has always been a kludge appeal to a niche.

At home, I’m using a solution myself. I used to have an Apple TV, now I have a TiVo connected to an antenna and a tuner that plays live high WDTV Netflix and ripped DVDs. Occasionally, I buy TV episodes on my TiVo Amazon, but that’s not the mainstay of my diet video. If it were, would be living an expensive lifestyle.

Star industryanlyst Michael Gartenberg said on Twitter that Apple TV is more likely to survive than Google because Google TV TV is the goal of “one entry”, ie replacement or become your cable box and Apple TV is on “two input” to replace the DVD player. That may be true, but having more of a chance of success of Google TV does not mean it has a very good opportunity. It could mean that any product, for now, will do well.

In terms of content, which is looking like Apple’s hands are tied. It is obvious that the movie studios and television producers alike are holding the line on price and selection. His business is a very complex mixture of revenue streams to broadcasters, advertising, DVD sales, DVD rentals, theaters, Netflix, and are very uncomfortable with disturbing the apple carts. Although I am disappointed, I can not understand why Apple do not want to fall and the acceleration of the same kind of changes happened to the record labels.

Will you play the same way as we have seen happen to the music industry? After all, Apple started with a very slim catalog on iTunes. Years later, we have large amounts of music at reasonable prices, legal on the Web and an excellent range of free services, streaming music. Time will tell, but I do not see Apple TV as sufficiently different from the previous model to matter much.

On the other hand, I really want to see an iPod nano.

Report to Team

Please feel free to send if you have any questions regarding this post , you can contact on

Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are that of the authors and not necessarily that of U.S.S.POST.


Comments are closed.