trends

Apple TV: Not Quite An Assault, But . . .

by

Apple TV itself was a bit of a curiosity – at $99 it was an easy-to-purchase curiosity. But it didn't exactly overwhelm the critics.

Well Apple hasn't given up on TV.  Here's a roundup of Apple's upcoming plans, courtesy of the WSJ. There are some skeptics to say the least.

An Apple venture into TV full force would mean economic, cultural, and employment shifts, so of course I'm curious. There's also breathless speculation about how Steve Jobs somehow "finally cracked" the TV problem before his death. Considering the potential impact, progeeks like ourselves need to keep up on this.

However I find myself pretty much in agreement with Philip Elmer-DeWitt. Apple's products are evolutions, so there is nothing new and radical – we'll see an evolution of what's already out there.

I'd actually add I think this is one reason for Apple's success – they deliberately evolve and build on technology where many others start from scratch or throw some new code around the old and declare it done.

Elmer-DeWitt does a pretty good job of summing up the basic idea – the new Apple TV will be the old Apple TV evolved, but I'd add my own thoughts – and their impacts.

  • Apple will do something with TV. They've had their first venture and they can't avoid it. Apple TV: The Sequel is coming.
  • I agree Apple will build on Apple TV, since it's what they do. If you're a developer who wants to work with or on Apple technology in video, study up on it now.
  • Cross-platform integration will be a big feature of theirs, and a big selling point. No one else has this level of potential integration yet – but they'll want to build it. You could help.
  • Apple will rely on brand loyalty and reputation to sell this. That could mean that quality issues may not be the biggest factor affecting sales, which would mean predicting the market is harder.
  • Apple can't fail at this – really just not succeed too well. This gives them leeway, and they may play long game here. They may leave it to others to fail, not to themselves to succeed.
  • It's clear that the future of television is going to be different and unusual controls. I think it's clear that Apple already is focusing on voice commands. The media box battle of the near future will be Neo-Kinect versus Neo-Siri. Microsoft's hackable Kinect was a field day for them, making it popular and helping people learn, An advantage Apple does not have and is unlikely to cultivate.
  • Video is so clearly the future battleground, we can expect all sorts of nasty legal battles. You can be sure all sides in this are already prepping legal teams, and what happens here could have legal impact for years if not decades.
  • How non-big name distribution works in our video future will be important to the efforts of people not affiliated with big (or medium) studios. You need to follow this very carefully if that's you. It's also possible that someone (possibly Google) will see the long-tail potential in the smaller producers and take advantage of that, using small-scale creators as an edge.
  • Timeframe for the next Apple TV? I expect an iteration before next Christmas.
  • I figure Apple is already working on this, so I'm not sure how many employment opportunities it will bring, but I suspect there could be an increase after the next iteration.
  • I think it'll be likely that the future App TV will carry apps, which would be an opportunity for developers, depending on the restrictions.

– Steven Savage

Steve’s Kill Your Cable Adventure #3: Oh, wait

by

For you new readers, and apparently we've gotten a few, I've been engaged in an effort to get away from cable.  I'm not sure I need it, and frankly as this seems to be the future, I figure experiencing it will give me something to share with progeeks – and help me understand what's going on.

We've hit a few snags in our Kill Your Cable Adventure:

  • Diversity of systems.  I know that's a given, but seriously did Netflix have to take Sengoku Basra away for while – so now I can only see it on Hulu on the web?  It seems like you need 2-3 other television alternatives to get what you want.
  • Wait, that's not available.  We're actually waiting for a season of a show that we can't find anywhere to end.  That may sound ridiculous, but hey, you get used to things – and discuss them with friends.
  • What's on what?  In the end it appears that the XBox is going to be our Killbox.  I wouldn't have thought that.  I may change my mind in a few months.
  • Ads when I pay?  Look, Hulu is underrated, it's quite good, but why am I paying for ads?

So we're still on track to do it, but feeling it out is a bit more difficult than expected.  Then again it's live and learn – and my big lesson here is to examine carefully and have everyone in the household look at the impact.

It's on its way, but man is it a weird ride.

Now some further observations:

  • Cable is almost a complete waste if you're single.  The fees ($30-$100 a month depending on what you want) just don't add up with all of the online elements available.
  • Cable may actually be financially viable in a house of 3 or more people with diverse tastes.  This will change over time. 
  • DVR services are less and less needed in an age of all these services.  Once we Kill Cable, we're not going to need TiVO.
  • A lot of services people would have without cable anyway (Netflix or Crunchyroll a prime example).  So oddly, you may have what you need to Kill Your Cable anyway and not know it.
  • Hulu in no way should be having problems.  It's a nice system, it works pretty good, there's a decent selection that could be expanded.  It's issues are a lack of follow-through (oh, and greed).
  • Netflix really shafted itself with it's changes.  As I investigate Kill Your Cable options, Netflix was riding high – but has enough competition and there are enough social changes that they shouldn't have messed with a winning formula.
  • The last writer's strike, stupid reality TV, and other blunders and idiocies have made Kill Your Cable MUCH easier.

The final factor I want to share is the psychological shift I'm experiencing leaving Cable behind.

It's been basically a week and a half since we started this experiment in my house.  I've avoided turning on cable for background noise, tried to watch things online only (with some exceptions as noted), and in short tried to stay away from cable.

I'm starting to ask myself what the big deal is.

Television, as stated previously, is a habit.  Now that I've decided to step away (which was surprisingly easy) it seems kind of useless, a ritual that has lost meaning, a leftover of family nights in front of the television.  What is the point of this habit?

There really isn't one except some vague social rituals of watching shows within a similar timeframe.

Oh I still watch things – things I want to watch, or share with friends.  But this conscious move has made my other viewing habits more conscious.  I am more purposeful with my selections.

If anything I can recommend the Kill Your Cable exercise because it makes you think.

People have options for their video consumption.  This means they have to think and make choices – and it makes them start asking what's going on, why they do these things, what matters.

It gets complicated – especially for those of us working with media and technology.

– Steven Savage

Occupy, Banks, and the Spotlight

by

It's looking like the Occupy Movement has gotten the attention of Bank of America with their new Occupy Your Homes anti-foreclosure protests. What's remarkable is that BofA seems concerned enough to send out a memo – and realizes they're being targeted.

I think they're a bit nervous, and they should be:

  • This rebrands the OWS movement in a way that provides easy messaging and positive image.
  • It calls attention to foreclosure and home issues – and can keep the issues in the news.
  • Anything the bank does backfires.
  • The backfires will call attention to bad banking practices, MERS, etc.
  • Most people aren't too happy with banks.

If this continues (and my guess is it will), then it's going to keep the public eye on banks and their activities past and present. This could lead to deeper investigations (if not just more awareness) of serious problems in the system.

As we all know the banks have a lot of problems still – and frankly I don't think they can stand the scruity and the lawsuits that would follow.  So this shift in tactics could have a lot of effects on the banks and how they're treated.

– Steven Savage