Quote:
Originally Posted by AsianDivaGirlsWebDude
(Post 19406975)
http://www.thedignifieddevil.com/pin...le-TV-iPad.jpg
Getting the content producers onboard is going to be a challenge since most are already in longterm contracts with the current cable and satellite providers.
I understand that Apple is attempting to do something similar (I've even heard of Siri voice capability as a cool possible feature), since Tim Cook wants to extend Apple's consumer reach to the living room (beyond their current limited-feature set top box offering) - Cook recently said, ?When I go into my living room and turn on the TV, I feel like I have gone backwards in time by 20 to 30 years.?
If anyone can pull off the next (r)evolution in television, I would bet on Apple (although it could be their undoing too)... :2 cents:
:)
ADG
|
Add in the fact that many content producers have no incentive to cut a deal. The article I read said that Comcast (I think it was Comcast at least) pays $5 per subscriber to Disney just for the rights to air their ESPN channels even though only 25% of their customers actually watch those channels. There are also tons of channels that get hardly any viewers, but get a fee just for being on the cable network. If they had to exist based on subscribers they would go out of business.
I wouldn't be shocked to see like a "cable lite" come into existence. This would be something where you got internet and services like Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon, but you also could pay extra and get access to the major channels like the broadcast networks, ESPN, AMC, TNT, Discovery etc. It just wouldn't offer all the smaller boutique stations.
|