What will Dish do about HBO?

[ChadT41]

Which benefited the carrier, AT&T, not the provider Apple, who could have sold a shipload more units if they were available on all carriers.

In the case of HBO Now, the roles of provider and carrier are reversed with Apple carrying the product provided by HBO. But, it is still the carrier benefiting at the expense of the provider.

Yeah. That worked so well for Google+.

They could have initially sold a crap ton more iPhones, but by forcing customers to go to one provider, it was a bigger deal when released to the rest of the providers. It was free publicity.

As far as google+ goes, you read my whole statement towards that, about it beings risky but if you have the appropriate audience it pays out.

Apple is doing now what they have in the past, except this time they are the ones selling the product instead of having their product be sold. I think you are missing the entire point to their marketing strategy that it is initially releasing on Apple, but will be available to other devices in the future.

 

[lparsons21]

The original ATV did come out the year before the 1G Roku. But, as you point out, it was not even a standalone device. You streamed to it from iTunes running on a Mac or PC. It was basically used like an AirPlay device, not unlike a Chromecast is used by Android and Chromebook users.

The ATV2, the real streaming device, wasn't released until 2010. And, like many Apple "innovations" lately, followed not led. (iWatch and iPhone 6 come to mind.)

The 1st gen ATV was very limited, as was the first gen Roku. Neither were setting the world afire!! But the 1st gen was very much a standalone device for some functions. My use back in the day, was mostly to transfer my iTunes movies to that unit and take it with me on trips. Even with the small, I think 40Gb drive, it was very useful. And it did do a few other things, but I don't remember what any more and it shot craps a few years ago.

And yeah, Apple waits until the time is right and then brings out their versions of whatever and make a killing doing it. Gotta suck to be Apple, right??

 

[Foxbat]

The 1st Gen AppleTV was basically a Video iPod. You synced content to it via iTunes and could then watch it pretty much standalone.

I found it ironic that the original AppleTV was an Aluminum package with a white plastic remote and the 2nd/3rd gen ATVs were black plastic boxes with Aluminum remotes. The same remote works on the older MacMinis and iMacs, too.

 

[Tampa8]

I also didn't think it was possible Apple sold more devices than Roku, I was only thinking about the U.S not worldwide.

Looking at the U.S it appears it isn't close. Roku has 46% of all sales, Apple TV 26%. This from about 8 months ago I'm sure it hasn't changed all that much though the article says the gap was widening.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2460778,00.asp

 

[dangue]

I honestly don't understand the pissing contest in this thread. I own an ATV and a Roku, each has different strengths. A three month exclusivity window for HBO is nothing. Comparing it to ATT iPhone exclusivity is ludicrous because of the 1) different time horizons involved; and, 2) unique programming on HBO: it's not like HBO has to worry that a google equivalent will release an android equivalent and that their exclusivity on ATV will cause them to cede market share.

 

[patmurphey]

http://www.wmur.com/money/hbo-now-strikes-first-online-partnership-with-cablevision/31831682

This is probably what would make the most sense, IF, Cablevision offers enough data to enjoy a lot of HBO streaming. Isn't there a cable company that is waiving data limits if you subscribe to their new 4k offering?

Net neutrality is about speed fairness, not data limits, I believe.

 

[harshness]

I said that one of the primary goals of the split was to decouple the current method of delivery, satellite, from the agreements with programmers.

The breakdown comes from your failure to support your assertion that Charlie believed that divestiture would fundamentally change how programmers view DISH as a distributor of content. DIRECTV used to support several third party branded receivers but in the last decade they brought everything under the DIRECTV name. Did that redefine what kind of content distributor DIRECTV would be and/or have a significant impact on their carriage negotiations?

Whether Echostar, Pace, Humax, Arris, Technicolor or anyone else were tightly or loosely coupled, what difference could it make? The hardware contractors don't dictate what the hardware does with the programmer's intellectual property nor does it necessarily limit or expand the scope of what can be done.

 

[DishSubLA]

Well, HBO's exclusive with Apple TV is a real head scratch-er. They probably won't do anything for a while. Just sit back and observe. Don't think Apple is going to jump start their TV with this maneuver.

I think CNET stated that the exclusive was only for a few MONTHS.

 

[KAB]

I think CNET stated that the exclusive was only for a few MONTHS.

Yes, as discussed, three..

 

[Foxbat]

Compare the three month HBO exclusive with DirecTV's exclusive NFL Network package. That deal has lasted, what, fifteen years?