According to a new report from The Wall Street Journal, Apple plans to launch an online TV service this fall with support for “about” 25 channels. According to the report, the service will debut on all of Apple’s iOS devices, ranging from the Apple TV to the iPhone and iPad, and will be announced in June (which is also when the Beats overhaul will debut) and fully released in September of this year. Industry executives said that the service will be priced between $30 and $40 when it launches. Of the 25 channels, the service will be headlined by ABC, CBS and Fox.
“The technology giant is in talks with programmers to offer a slimmed-down bundle of TV networks this fall, according to people familiar with the matter. The service would have about 25 channels, anchored by broadcasters such as ABC, CBS and Fox, and would be available on Apple devices such as the Apple TV, they said.”
But even with those cornerstone channels, some notable ones may be left out. As of right now, Apple is currently not in talks with NBCUniversal due to a rift between Apple and Comcast, an NBCUniversal parent company. NBCUniversal owns the NBC broadcast network and other cable networks like Bravo and USA. Apple has also been in talks with Disney, which should be convenient as CEO Bob Iger is on the Apple Board.
We reported a few weeks ago that Apple is readying a thinner Apple TV box with a new remote control and a redesigned user-interface. It would make sense for Apple to launch the pair of hardware and services products in tandem later this year. A taste of what to expect from the new service will ship in April, which is when Apple’s exclusivity deal with HBO Now will kickoff for $15 per month.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
40 – 50/month @ 25-channels is way too expensive.
Where did 40-50 come from? The article above says 30-40…
The only question I have is: Will it have live TV?
Without that, this is just another attempt at the Netflix/Hulu model.
With live TV ,sports and news particularly, true cable cutting can begin.
That’s what this WSJ is implying. You’re getting the actual channel, but streamed via the Internets (TM).
That is not what they are implying. Though admittedly I have not read the full article on WSJ.com. Please explain if you have…
I’ve been patiently waiting for Apple to announce this for a very long time now, like I’m sure many people have. But I will be very saddened if we learn that Live TV is not part of the package. This will be a huge game-changer if it does though. Huge.
This could be awesome! I’m using Sling TV right now. $20 / month for like 15 live channels including ESPN, Disney, TBS, and AMC. I’m done with conventional subscription cable packages.
Apple just needs to clone Sling TV and Directv can kiss my A$$ goodbye.
So if they clone it (meaning they’re identical), you’d happily pay an extra $15-20 because it’s Apple branded? If Sling TV is what you’re looking for, then why not sign up for it?
oh come on be grown ups and reasonable . im sure if such service announced by apple , apple have enough resources to ensure me as the user to get the best live tv possible . im sure at the time the number of servers which apple incorporated are way more than what an alternative provided such as Sling TV. I put it this way as a consumer who ever gives me a better service and experience i go with them regardless of brand or popularity
Cut cable this past February and subscribed to sling. Along with Netflix, there isn’t a day that has passed where I have missed cable. Sling includes 98 percent of what I watched with cable, and my children have all their kiddie shows.
IMO, this apple pricing is too high. At 40 dollars I can get basic cable.
But can you get basic cable on all of your devices?
With Sling, you get those basic 17 channels on all of your devices. It just depends if those channels are all that you need or not…
I did the same thing, and we got an antenna for over the air. If sling had local channels that would be nice. but we don’t miss directv or the giant bill.
Broadcast networks are all available OTA for free. Been watching and recording HD onto my PVR for years gratis. For $40/month we’d better be talking some significant premium content, not broadcast TV. I’m talking about HBO, Cinemax, Starz, Showtime for starters.
Exactly. Did everyone forget about OTA? Its the best quality also.
Damn, if that fatass Apple TV doesn’t get thinner, I refuse to buy it.
I don’t care how the normal version looks, but they should make a version aimed at hardcore gamers and it should include 2-3TB Storage, and apple designed Controller. These more powerful games could also be streamed to your iOS devices so you could continue playing whilst laying in the other room in bed, as well. They make a more powerful computer aimed at professionals, and they should make a more powerful TV aimed at hardcore gamers. I’m sorry, but anyone that wants to play casual games on a TV has totally lost their mind. Angry Birds or Minecraft on a big screen TV….just sad.
Apple needs to get into hardcore gaming, and virtual reality. Virtual reality has nearly boundless potential, not just for gaming obviously.
Now we know why they added ‘Stand’ reminders on the Watch.. everyone will be sitting on the couch watching TV while scrolling endlessly on Facebook.
I’m sure these streaming services will be available on iCloud.com too, as well as all your devices. Ergo handoff from one to the other, right where you left off. Get home after having been watching something on your iPhone, and at the bottom left of your iPad is the same content right where you left off, for you to swipe up to. In TV there will be a continue playing place from handoff as well.
2-3 TB of storage? Wake up you’re still dreaming.
Hardcore gamers couldn’t give two shits about Apple, and vice versa. There’s no good reason why they should go head-to-head with MS and Sony on that front. If anything, they’ll go after the uber-casual gamers.
Yes, the gaming version would need that storage for console quality games. 2-3TB costs basically nothing anymore. @Robert you have no idea what you’re even saying. They don’t care because there’s nothing to care about…. Lol. How do you not get that? If Apple had an TV with that capability, trust me, they’d care. There is reason to go head to head, they could destroy them, and eat into the massive hardcore gaming business. Casual games are absolute garbage, especially on the TV. If Applemade they own controller, and made an Apple TV which was capable, they could destroy them both, and Nintendo. Because what Apple would have is a box that could truly integrate into all parts, with an App Store, the new content service, and all of the other integration of Apple products. Anyone that doesn’t see this, has no imagination.
I’m more concerned about the weight. Every year I keep thinking they’ll introduce a new, lighter model, but they continue to fail to innovate.
I’m waiting for the SamsungTV with eyes-away feature. I love Samsung useless gimmicky features ;-)
Eyes away: turns on your favourite TV show when you leave the room
Did anyone else notice how many times Cook stressed, “This is only the beginning” when referring to the HBO deal on Apple TV?
Chill Cook always says such crap.
And this is exactly the reason I was so against Comcast buying NBCU. A cable company owning a broadcast network is such a conflict of interest in my mind.
Jim D gave this a ‘nope’. I’d take his word over anyone else’s.
Where’s the tweet?
[QUOTE]Take this news with a lot of salt. The only details come from the always suspicious “people familiar with the matter” and one of the story’s writers is Daisuke Wakabayashi – not exactly an unimpeachable source of accurate Apple news.[/QUOTE]
That is not his ‘nope’.
Never ever trust a person who’s surname sounds like it should be on the bottom of a porcelain coffee cup.
I really wish Apple would sort out the content in other countries as well, the content thats available in the UK is pitiful and as it stands the only reason I have an AppleTV is for the airplay ability and for home sharing my movies from iTunes.
i don’t think it will be a big game changer as it would be just another set top box to watch tv from, yes ok, it streams tv over the internet, but unless it offers something completely different and new (see below), which is where apple as a technology company can do something special, I’m just shifting my subscription from one cable company to apple.
http://m.bbc.com/news/technology-31664948
the question is now, why would they want to produce a TV set when they could produce a headset, especially in light of recent patent applications by apple. But then again would everybody want to put on a headset, just to relax, put their feet up and watch the tv, not sure!!!
IF I can’t REMOVE CLUSTER-FOX on ALL my devices, I want nothing to do with this product.
The Simpsons is on Fox. Fox is not Fox-News. Well not exactly.
What do you use now that has no Fox? Faux Outrage FAUX NEWS Give me more Ed Shultz
Internet $80
Apple TV $40
Netflix $7
Total….the same as having every channel with cable. So I hope this pricing is wrong
Your internet is a rip-off. That’s your problem — lack of broadband competition. The government need to open up that sector for completion. I pay half that for 100 Mb connection in Ireland.
Having cut the cord, I will never again pay for a channel and be forced to watch commercials. You can have one or the other revenue stream. I get networks OTA, and the rest of the holes can be patched with Netflix, Amazon Prime, and online news services. The rare sporting event that isn’t covered is still cheaper if I pay for drinks at the bar to watch it. If apple has something commercial-free I am in, but I would be shocked if they do.
I went cable-free two years ago. Never regretted it. I got Netflix and use OTA for anything else [usually PBS]. I’m not going to pay to have commercials rammed repeatedly down my throat. That’s masochism.
There has to be a DVR or on-demand option for these types of services to take off. Just having live TV available wouldn’t make me dump DirecTV.
Yeah. Since Tivo first came out I’ve never seen anything near as good in smart DVR. It is like resident on-demand viewing where it saves all the stuff I want to watch until I feel like watching it. One “subscribes” to a show, an actor, or a type of thing like figure skating and it gets it all regardless of channel. I do wish Apple would buy Tivo for the basic functionality and then separate from the cable providers.
I do expect the model to change beyond this to a subscription per show basis. Currently Apple charges a little too much for this but I trust it will all work itself out over time.
Pay for something with commercials?
No thank you.
People keep on talking about how they are cutting the cable to save money. I did this four years ago. The problem is that the companies have jacked up the internet prices to compensate.
In the past four years my cost have tripled. The service has degraded over that time as well. I pay for 18 but am lucky to get 1.2 besides the fact the internet is down several times a day. The gateway wifi router is now over 5 years old not keeping up with the latest advances in technology.
I would definitely switch but the problem is that there are NO ALTERNATIVES. Its pretty sad the internet on my iPhone is faster and more reliable than my cable internet.
This will be successful depending on the channels they offer. Also will cable companies go along with it? Will they drop their prices to compete or raise the price of data only service forcing you to buy one of their packages.
if this has 4k support, it’s a fantastic product! if not.. bleh
Will that mean a likely hardware refresh for the Apple TV? There was no update this time around, apart from the drop in price..