[Macworld]

Post your comments for Cord-cutting's moment is now, and Apple is missing it here

[gk_brown]

I have two Apple TVs at home and I'm pretty happy with them. However, the fact that they are closed systems is a big limitation. Both Roku and Google TV allow developers to extend the devices with custom apps. Unless Apple provides an SDK for the Apple TV soon, it is going to fall further behind.

[lwdesign]

Apple can never catch a break. Apple, it seems, must be the best at EVERYTHING and if not it's regarded as failing, falling down, out of touch and on its deathbed. I think it's great that Roku has the service it does. It's nice to see other companies stepping up and providing well-rounded, consumer-friendly options. I've been using Macs professionally and personally since 1989. I have an iPod nano and an iPhone 4S but no AppleTV. I'd like to see Apple come out with a TV product but I'm OK if it doesn't, and no, I don't think Apple will fold if someone else delivers a better TV experience. I like Apple products for what they do, not for what I think they should do.

[acmsys]

I've been using aTV's for years now (use 3 at home and one at the office), love the way they work and just basically keep working. I did just recently pick up a Roku to use along side my aTV's for the amazon prime. while Roku has more content the user experience isn't close to the aTV. the unit continually drops the internet connection, the UI is a touch cheesy seems like comparing a old dos program to a graphical interface. (Hard to explain). I use the aTV for Netflix for the reliability issue. I'm hoping Apple will add more content like the Amazon Prime etc., But it's annoying that the Roku can't maintain a WiFi connection reliably (no not going to hardwire the internet to the roku, that would completely destroy the propose of the wireless experience)

I'm not trashing the Roku, just wish it was more reliable.

[VitaminCM]

The big problem with cord cutting is that the people who own the TV service also own the internet connections.
If you cut your TV service they jack up your internet service prices for "not bundling".
So, when you combine:
-Higher Internet fee
-Fees for Video services (Netflix, iTunes, Hulu Plus, etc.)
-Equipment purchase (Roku, Apple TV, etc.)
You wipe out a significant portion of your savings.
Then, throw in no live sports or local news, etc. and it's a lot less palatable.
Cord cutting is a lot more like cord augmenting. The reality is that there are a lot more people who pay for cable and do streaming services.

[gandalf79]

I think a lot of people are still missing the point of the Apple TV. Though it does provide limited content, its primary purpose is to allow you to stream media to your TV from other devices like your iPhone, iPad, and MacBook Pro.

There is nothing stopping content providers from creating apps for these devices with an AirPlay option, and many already do. I have several such apps on my iPad that I regularly watch on my TV. I sometimes think of my iPad as a giant remote, and prefer the touch interface for navigating content.

Could the Apple TV provide more content directly? Sure it could. But for now, that is not its purpose. I suspect the only reason it has any content at all, beyond iTunes, is to make it more appealing to consumers.

[gk_brown]

@gandalf79-

The AirPlay option is nice to have, but I shouldn't be required to purchase *both* an Apple TV and some other device (iPad, iPhone, or iPod Touch) just to get content to my TV.

Apple TV runs iOS as well - there's no reason Apple can't provide an SDK to allow developers to build apps for it directly.

[leicaman]

Paid for by Roku astroturfing.

There are multiple problems with this advertorial for Roku. It ignores the fact you can watch broadcast TV for free, with better quality than compressed online and cable options. Yes, som OTA TV is actually 1080p.

Then there's why Apple is having a hard time of it. He casts it as a lack of real effort by Apple which is nonsense. It's the fact that Apple negotiates with the interest of users as its primary concern. The video industry doesn't like that as sees what the result is when consumers get what they want. ITunes. DRM -free.

[michaelmhughes]

The Apple TV folks are well aware they are slipping behind, and they're not happy about it—of that you can be certain. Apple has been trying to crack the cable/content provider monopolies for some time, but it's not easy. I suspect they will open up the Apple TV to 3rd-party developers, just like they did with iOS, and will cut the same deals Roku cut (maybe not Amazon, but the profits of a bunch of new Prime subscribers might sweeten the deal).

It's just a matter of time. I'm a cord cutter and I love my Apple TV, but I am chomping at the bit for some new content. I also think apps—weather, news, sports, maybe even games—will be what takes the Apple TV over the top. That actually excites me more than the addition of new channels. I often look at my home screen and wish I could have streaming news headlines, a music-responsive screen saver, etc. I can't imagine that is not in the works.

[auribe14]

Your article loses a little steam, though, when you cite Roku's deal with Time Warner.

You only get to stream the TWC channels if you are a TWC customer- so no cord-cutting here.

[joeldermole]

Quote

Your article loses a little steam, though, when you cite Roku's deal with Time Warner. You only get to stream the TWC channels if you are a TWC customer- so no cord-cutting here.

Fair point, and one I should've clarified. I think that in context—the idea that Roku is fighting evermore to expand the content options it provides—the reference makes sense, but you're right that's a little less cord-cuttery.

[MacTechAspen]

Quote

Your article loses a little steam, though, when you cite Roku's deal with Time Warner. You only get to stream the TWC channels if you are a TWC customer- so no cord-cutting here. Fair point, and one I should've clarified. I think that in context—the idea that Roku is fighting evermore to expand the content options it provides—the reference makes sense, but you're right that's a little less cord-cuttery.

I was going to make the same point. It sounds good that Roku is adding content, but is it really, when the content requires you to have a cable account? It isn't adding anything you don't have with the box, it is just changing which device you use for it. As someone else pointed out, Apple has many more choices then you give them credit for, once you add in 3rd party apps. This has long been the Apple way.

[MattDing]

Quote

Your article loses a little steam, though, when you cite Roku's deal with Time Warner. You only get to stream the TWC channels if you are a TWC customer- so no cord-cutting here.

Ditto with HBO Go. It's only available if you subscribe to HBO via cable or satellite. So not only does it require a basic cable subscription like the Time Warner deal but you have to add a premium subscription as well. That's upselling, not cord cutting.

That leaves Amazon instant video as the only thing in this article that Roku offers a cord cutter over AppleTV.

[cphoffman42]

I do think Apple will eventually release an SDK for the Apple TV, but I suspect it won't happen until we have a new (fourth generation?) Apple TV. Third party apps means a need for local storage, beyond the meagre 8gb or so built in to the device now and not user-accessible. But, Apple has made clear it doesn't like hard drive based storage, especially for iOS devices, so we're immediately looking at a dramatically more expensive Apple TV—more in line with the original model. I suspect this is the real reason why Apple has pushed Airplay—it's a way to make apps indirectly available for the Apple TV, without raising its price above $100. Of course, Airplay isn't ideal for everything, and its support in OS X is quite lackluster.