Good news that it's getting away from DirecTV...but very bad news for the ~50% of Smart phone users who have Android OS phones..
The Mets broadcast was an absolute debacle from a technical perspective. No ability to pause or rewind, constant buffering and crashing. Hope they figure out some sort of Android app solution if this deal goes through.
Would have preferred Amazon or Youtube...
PFT Article - (
New Window )
It’s also bars, restaurants, and hotels that get it. And they pay a commercial rate based on their size of patrons. That’s where the real money is made for the NFL.
Quote:
In comment 15670177 BH28 said:
Quote:
Full stop.
So yeah if you have a Chromecast with Google TV you are ok, but as I mentioned before Apple does not seem to have any interest in playing nice with Android.
I would imagine that they'll release something for Android but it wouldn't surprise me if they didn't for years and if they did, it would be a second rate experience on Android phones.
You don't have to watch on your phone. Full stop.
Thanks for telling me how I should consume sports content. Full dickhead. Go back to telling android users that an app for them exists when it doesn't.
What percentage of people do you think watch NFL games primarily on their phones? It's minuscule, I'm certain. The vast majority of people watch games on a TV. And for the majority of them, the primary path to getting Sunday Ticket was via DTV.
Now, with any streaming device, Sunday Ticket will be available, and may come with other improvements (like single-team or a la carte games).
Sorry that you might have to use a mobile browser to continue your already inconvenient viewing experience, although I suspect you probably watch on your TV anyway and you're bitching just to bitch. For all you know, the Sunday Ticket app itself will still be available for non-iOS devices. But feel free to scream at the sky because you're worried about one very specific use case that will impact very few people compared to the improvement that this potentially represents for most others.
So when gatorade is shown he is wrong, instead of saying "oops, my mistake" he says "you can buy a roku"
And a roku still doesnt change the DVR problem with streaming. Directv was a godsend to those of us living outside our home team market. The streaming services may have some form of DVR but they dont offer out of market games. Its the reason that "cutting the cord" never worked for the many of us living outside our home team market
Amazon would raise the price. So would Google/YouTube. What planet are you living on where only Apple is “greedy”? Just call it like it is, your threaten to cancel routine is likely no more. You had to see that coming.
It’s also bars, restaurants, and hotels that get it. And they pay a commercial rate based on their size of patrons. That’s where the real money is made for the NFL.
Thanks - I had no idea this was the case. Always love learning something new!
So when gatorade is shown he is wrong, instead of saying "oops, my mistake" he says "you can buy a roku"
And a roku still doesnt change the DVR problem with streaming. Directv was a godsend to those of us living outside our home team market. The streaming services may have some form of DVR but they dont offer out of market games. Its the reason that "cutting the cord" never worked for the many of us living outside our home team market
There is a sizable number of people who want to watch all the games, although you can still only watch one game in real time per timeslot unless you're flipping back and forth - and if you're doing that, you might as well just watch Redzone. There's also a sizable number of people (maybe not the majority, but a not insignificant amount) who have expressed desire for a single-team option for out-of-market fans. My understanding is that the full-league option would still exist and a stepped-down single-team option would be added.
As for the DVR, if it's anything like any other streaming app (including the existing Sunday Ticket app), replays of each game are available in condensed commercial-free versions every week. I would imagine that some might consider that an upgrade over using a DVR and manually skipping through commercials.
And the reality is that most people will watch the NFL on a television, not a mobile device, particularly those who are likely to pay for Sunday Ticket in the first place. And for those, a streaming device like a Roku will provide access to Apple TV without any Apple hardware being necessary.
I'm perfectly capable of a mea culpa when it's appropriate, but I still haven't seen anything on this thread that isn't just Android fanboys being sad that they might have to fork over some money to Tim Cook.
In certain markets, and for certain users, such as New York City, DirectTV has offered a web based product that bypasses the satellite. I have been using that for almost 20 years. It has worked very well, so for folks bashing it as unworkable or poor, I don't get it because for me it has been sensational.
The interface isn't beautiful but it has been mostly reliable and as I said, it offers the ability to configure one, two, three or four *game monitors* within the one big screen you are watching Sunday Ticket on. You can put any of the games, not blacked out in your area, into any screen and you can activate Red Zone and a fantasy show as well. And to one of your points that, we might as well watch Red Zone, no, this is much friendlier, better and more fun. If I want to watch half of a Ravens game, then flip between three other games, while having them all up, the next quarter, I can do it.
It also lets you easily move screens around the open monitors and flip between game audio.
It really works fabulously.
I mainly watch on a large computer monitor (and have the Giants on another TV thru cable) but I can also go HDMI out to a regular TV if I choose to.
Furthermore, while I think it is open mainly to certain markets (like NYC) and certain individuals (military, students), I think it is easy enough to game the system to qualify for an account. I am guessing on that last point as I have qualified as a Manhattan resident.
I think you'll be disappointed if you are expecting the price to be commensurate with the past price levels. As said above, the price was going to go up no matter who won. And it will be worth it.
Excited that Apple won and what they will do with it.
Quote:
We just don't want to get gouged for fewer options, which has been Apple's brand for three decades. I'll happily pay Apple if the product and options are commensurate to their present levels.
I think you'll be disappointed if you are expecting the price to be commensurate with the past price levels. As said above, the price was going to go up no matter who won. And it will be worth it.
Excited that Apple won and what they will do with it.
If Apple can't make a competitively priced product with similar options to what DirectTV was able to do, and I am not saying they can't or won't, I'm just worried about it, then fuck them. It is not honest to say Apple can't make a product as useful and feature-rich as DirectTV. Of course they can. They're one of the 10 best tech companies in the world. They should be able to run circles around a DirectTV offering while still making niche users happy.
Yes it does.
The only games it will black out are local games and nationally televised games in your market. So Thursday night, Monday night, Sunday night and the late afternoon game of the week on Sunday are mostly blacked out.
And you can have eyes on up to 4 to 8 games at once.
the Sunday late afternoon game of the week is not blacked out unless its in your market, just like the early games
Yes, it will suck to have to pay full price. But my concern is about DVR capability, including going backward and forward to see plays again while you are watching
the Sunday late afternoon game of the week is not blacked out unless its in your market, just like the early games
Yes, it will suck to have to pay full price. But my concern is about DVR capability, including going backward and forward to see plays again while you are watching
the late Sunday game is most certainly blacked out if it's on one of the networks in your market. I've been a Sunday Ticket subscriber for almost 20 years.
Not telling you what to do but they are extremely affordable now. And I know you hate everything new but I'd be shocked if you didn't enjoy sports more in 4k over HD. And for all we know there may not even be a price difference to get it (other than your TV purchase).
Quote:
Gatorade is wrong again - Directv has a game mix channel for each sport that shows up to 8 games at once, so you can watch more than one game in each time slot, plenty more than one. And who cares about an app archiving a game to watch some other time. I want to be able to DVR it and watch it when I get home from the beginning, even if its in the 2nd quarter. You know, like its 2022 and not the 1980s with a VCR. Not sure why you keep giving opinions on something you seem to know very little about. Oh wait, you do that for damn near EVERY topic here
the Sunday late afternoon game of the week is not blacked out unless its in your market, just like the early games
Yes, it will suck to have to pay full price. But my concern is about DVR capability, including going backward and forward to see plays again while you are watching
the late Sunday game is most certainly blacked out if it's on one of the networks in your market. I've been a Sunday Ticket subscriber for almost 20 years.
I SAID UNLESS ITS IN YOUR MARKET
Quote:
In comment 15672290 Snablats said:
Quote:
Gatorade is wrong again - Directv has a game mix channel for each sport that shows up to 8 games at once, so you can watch more than one game in each time slot, plenty more than one. And who cares about an app archiving a game to watch some other time. I want to be able to DVR it and watch it when I get home from the beginning, even if its in the 2nd quarter. You know, like its 2022 and not the 1980s with a VCR. Not sure why you keep giving opinions on something you seem to know very little about. Oh wait, you do that for damn near EVERY topic here
the Sunday late afternoon game of the week is not blacked out unless its in your market, just like the early games
Yes, it will suck to have to pay full price. But my concern is about DVR capability, including going backward and forward to see plays again while you are watching
the late Sunday game is most certainly blacked out if it's on one of the networks in your market. I've been a Sunday Ticket subscriber for almost 20 years.
I SAID UNLESS ITS IN YOUR MARKET
you don't have to shout. it seemed like you were correcting my comment and your reply could be interpreted two ways (ie, the game was played in your market Giants/Jets, or the game was distributed in your market on a network.)
Im not watching games on my computer, Im watching on my TV. And, again, I want to walk in during the 2nd quarter and start watching - not wait till the game is over
Also, only aficionados care about 4K. The fact is the digital picture on Directv HD is fantastic. You sound like my audiophile friend who will nitpick every sound when to the rest of us it sounds great
the Sunday late afternoon game of the week is not blacked out unless its in your market, just like the early games
Yes, it will suck to have to pay full price. But my concern is about DVR capability, including going backward and forward to see plays again while you are watching
What makes you think any of the current ST functionality will go away? All I said is that there is some portion of the customer base that only wants a single team, and it would be an enhancement to the offering for those customers to get only that which they want.
As for rewinding, Apple TV handles that just fine, St. Albans.
Quote:
In comment 15672290 Snablats said:
Quote:
Gatorade is wrong again - Directv has a game mix channel for each sport that shows up to 8 games at once, so you can watch more than one game in each time slot, plenty more than one. And who cares about an app archiving a game to watch some other time. I want to be able to DVR it and watch it when I get home from the beginning, even if its in the 2nd quarter. You know, like its 2022 and not the 1980s with a VCR. Not sure why you keep giving opinions on something you seem to know very little about. Oh wait, you do that for damn near EVERY topic here
the Sunday late afternoon game of the week is not blacked out unless its in your market, just like the early games
Yes, it will suck to have to pay full price. But my concern is about DVR capability, including going backward and forward to see plays again while you are watching
the late Sunday game is most certainly blacked out if it's on one of the networks in your market. I've been a Sunday Ticket subscriber for almost 20 years.
I SAID UNLESS ITS IN YOUR MARKET
When you're done with your tantrum, you can actually inform yourself.
Or you can continue to claim that I'm the one who's uninformed, although every regular here who has been here before this decade (unlike you) will tell you that, right or wrong, I've always provided backup for my thoughts.
Quote:
you can pause, rewind and fast forward (to catch up) live games, what's the worry here? And they also archive most games after they are over (blackout still applies I think which is standard) which is cloud stored games (cloud DVR). Its a weird concern, cloud DVR has existed for years.
Im not watching games on my computer, Im watching on my TV. And, again, I want to walk in during the 2nd quarter and start watching - not wait till the game is over
Also, only aficionados care about 4K. The fact is the digital picture on Directv HD is fantastic. You sound like my audiophile friend who will nitpick every sound when to the rest of us it sounds great
What does that have to do with anything? I'm on my phone right now and rewinding yesterday's Yankee game. Works just like DVR should work, so what am I missing here? I did it yesterday for one of the live games as well, backed up to a previous inning to see a HR. It works the same on my phone as it does on my TV.
You are going so far out of your way to bring up problems that don't exist, its pretty ridiculous. So i'm the asshole for wanting 4k? I'd never begrudge someone for thinking better sound is a better experience even though I personally don't need that for sports (love it for movies). But picture quality? Makes a world of difference. Glad you are satisfied with HD, the rest of the world likes 4k.
Quote:
you can pause, rewind and fast forward (to catch up) live games, what's the worry here? And they also archive most games after they are over (blackout still applies I think which is standard) which is cloud stored games (cloud DVR). Its a weird concern, cloud DVR has existed for years.
Im not watching games on my computer, Im watching on my TV. And, again, I want to walk in during the 2nd quarter and start watching - not wait till the game is over
Also, only aficionados care about 4K. The fact is the digital picture on Directv HD is fantastic. You sound like my audiophile friend who will nitpick every sound when to the rest of us it sounds great
You'll most likely be able to do exactly that. My understanding is that there will be a "watch live" button and a "watch from start" button. And you'll have full REV/FF functionality.
But keep crying.
1080p is a fantastic display format. This is undeniable. Personally I can watch football games in 1080p and be very happy and it is true for most people. There was a legitimate debate for many years about whether the human eye could detect the difference between 4K and 2K (2K is a little more rez than 1080p, but not much more). The conventional wisdom now is that, yes, the human eye can detect some difference depending on several factors, including but not limited to, size of the screen, distance from the screen, and the biology of the viewer's eye (eyesight). I am going to assume you are a layperson, please correct me if I am wrong. But the difference you think you are seeing between 1080p and 4K may not be the difference you think you are seeing. Could be a better display? Or other factors. Or maybe you have a 65 inch TV at the right distance and you have excellent eyesight. But it could also be psychological.
I routinely, over the last decade, worked with formats in excess of 4K. Most of the industry has. 5K, 6K and 8K. These are formats TV, video and film professionals have to consider and use, for production and for editing. The main reason to use these formats is it allows you to punch in on these resolutions and not lose quality. It is true that generally we are finishing or outputting to 4K. There is also a need to master and output to higher formats when you do effects compositing. I don't know a whole lot about that end of the industry. I remember having to composite to 2K on a project about 20 years ago, which was a standard ILM settled on to do effects compositing for Star Wars movies.
I admit, working with the higher resolutions - 5K, 6K, 8K.. I often think I can tell the difference. I'd bet on it. But 1080p still looks excellent.
Long story short, it is a little strange that one would not buy a football product until it arrived in 4K. I get that you have a 4K TV and you want to watch it on your native resolution, but going from 1080p to 4K adds very little benefit when it comes to just watching games, and it isn't a big enough difference to the human eye to sacrifice basic options for, like the ability to have access to every game. I will say though that 4K does have one benefit over 1080p, as I mentioned before. You can blow up or zoom into shots almost losslessly. There might be a way to implement that where 4K is a definite benefit. But otherwise, no, bumping up to 4K sounds better than it really is to most viewers. 1080p looks great. It still looks great. And most people under most conditions, can't really see a big difference between 4K and 1080p. And I bet if I put you in a lab you would have a hard time telling the difference, most times.
1080p is a fantastic display format. This is undeniable. Personally I can watch football games in 1080p and be very happy and it is true for most people. There was a legitimate debate for many years about whether the human eye could detect the difference between 4K and 2K (2K is a little more rez than 1080p, but not much more). The conventional wisdom now is that, yes, the human eye can detect some difference depending on several factors, including but not limited to, size of the screen, distance from the screen, and the biology of the viewer's eye (eyesight). I am going to assume you are a layperson, please correct me if I am wrong. But the difference you think you are seeing between 1080p and 4K may not be the difference you think you are seeing. Could be a better display? Or other factors. Or maybe you have a 65 inch TV at the right distance and you have excellent eyesight. But it could also be psychological.
I routinely, over the last decade, worked with formats in excess of 4K. Most of the industry has. 5K, 6K and 8K. These are formats TV, video and film professionals have to consider and use, for production and for editing. The main reason to use these formats is it allows you to punch in on these resolutions and not lose quality. It is true that generally we are finishing or outputting to 4K. There is also a need to master and output to higher formats when you do effects compositing. I don't know a whole lot about that end of the industry. I remember having to composite to 2K on a project about 20 years ago, which was a standard ILM settled on to do effects compositing for Star Wars movies.
I admit, working with the higher resolutions - 5K, 6K, 8K.. I often think I can tell the difference. I'd bet on it. But 1080p still looks excellent.
Long story short, it is a little strange that one would not buy a football product until it arrived in 4K. I get that you have a 4K TV and you want to watch it on your native resolution, but going from 1080p to 4K adds very little benefit when it comes to just watching games, and it isn't a big enough difference to the human eye to sacrifice basic options for, like the ability to have access to every game. I will say though that 4K does have one benefit over 1080p, as I mentioned before. You can blow up or zoom into shots almost losslessly. There might be a way to implement that where 4K is a definite benefit. But otherwise, no, bumping up to 4K sounds better than it really is to most viewers. 1080p looks great. It still looks great. And most people under most conditions, can't really see a big difference between 4K and 1080p. And I bet if I put you in a lab you would have a hard time telling the difference, most times.
From a consumer perspective, I can only tell the difference between 4K and 1080P on movies. For sports - since it's a live feed, there's additional noise because of bandwidth latency that can't actually support the signal, so it essentially becomes a 1080P signal more often than not.
I pay extra for 4k whenever I can because its a small charge for a much better experience. Netflix, for example, offers plans with and without it. So does Youtube TV. No idea what Apple will do but there could be two options. If not, I can't imagine the extra charge to 4k will make any real difference to your wallet.
It really does tie the room together...
Quote:
Ok I want to make clear that I have worked in the film/TV industry for 35+ years, mainly in the creative end but I have a lot of technical knowledge from my years as a Producer and an Editor.
1080p is a fantastic display format. This is undeniable. Personally I can watch football games in 1080p and be very happy and it is true for most people. There was a legitimate debate for many years about whether the human eye could detect the difference between 4K and 2K (2K is a little more rez than 1080p, but not much more). The conventional wisdom now is that, yes, the human eye can detect some difference depending on several factors, including but not limited to, size of the screen, distance from the screen, and the biology of the viewer's eye (eyesight). I am going to assume you are a layperson, please correct me if I am wrong. But the difference you think you are seeing between 1080p and 4K may not be the difference you think you are seeing. Could be a better display? Or other factors. Or maybe you have a 65 inch TV at the right distance and you have excellent eyesight. But it could also be psychological.
I routinely, over the last decade, worked with formats in excess of 4K. Most of the industry has. 5K, 6K and 8K. These are formats TV, video and film professionals have to consider and use, for production and for editing. The main reason to use these formats is it allows you to punch in on these resolutions and not lose quality. It is true that generally we are finishing or outputting to 4K. There is also a need to master and output to higher formats when you do effects compositing. I don't know a whole lot about that end of the industry. I remember having to composite to 2K on a project about 20 years ago, which was a standard ILM settled on to do effects compositing for Star Wars movies.
I admit, working with the higher resolutions - 5K, 6K, 8K.. I often think I can tell the difference. I'd bet on it. But 1080p still looks excellent.
Long story short, it is a little strange that one would not buy a football product until it arrived in 4K. I get that you have a 4K TV and you want to watch it on your native resolution, but going from 1080p to 4K adds very little benefit when it comes to just watching games, and it isn't a big enough difference to the human eye to sacrifice basic options for, like the ability to have access to every game. I will say though that 4K does have one benefit over 1080p, as I mentioned before. You can blow up or zoom into shots almost losslessly. There might be a way to implement that where 4K is a definite benefit. But otherwise, no, bumping up to 4K sounds better than it really is to most viewers. 1080p looks great. It still looks great. And most people under most conditions, can't really see a big difference between 4K and 1080p. And I bet if I put you in a lab you would have a hard time telling the difference, most times.
From a consumer perspective, I can only tell the difference between 4K and 1080P on movies. For sports - since it's a live feed, there's additional noise because of bandwidth latency that can't actually support the signal, so it essentially becomes a 1080P signal more often than not.
This is a great point that I forgot to hit on. There is all kinds of compression added to these signals. Wasn't there a lot of debate about Netflix compressing their 4K streams? They say it looked the same, but I am sure this was never tested properly. But really why would they. As I said before most people can't really tell much of a difference. If you were going to test this you would have to play from a local 4k source - a 4k player.
And let's not forget that for a long time all sports was broadcast in 720. And it can be hard to tell the difference between 720 and 1080 on most displays.
For movies, I have often watched 480p and 576p compressions of 1080p sources and while I haven't really tested whether I can tell the difference, they look really good. And 480p/576p is basically standard def.
Too much is made of resolution, unless we are talking about a special application that involves zooming into the picture.
I pay extra for 4k whenever I can because its a small charge for a much better experience. Netflix, for example, offers plans with and without it. So does Youtube TV. No idea what Apple will do but there could be two options. If not, I can't imagine the extra charge to 4k will make any real difference to your wallet.
UConn, I'm with you on this.
I do enjoy 4K content. I just only see the difference on programmed content vs. live sports content. The biggest win for me, with regard to 4K content, is our backyard projector - the picture is more prone to noise, and the 4K feed makes it feel like we're in an outdoor movie theatre. But again, that's mostly programmed content that we're watching out there when we put on a movie and get the firepit going.
Other than that, that picture (especially those colors!) speaks to me in soothing, reassuring words.
If it's upscaled to 4k, then it's not the resolution that is making it look better to you, it is the display. And if there is any kind of artifacting or juttering (as you call it) that is not a property of resolution. That is more normally a property of frame rate and/or interlacing.
Other than that, that picture (especially those colors!) speaks to me in soothing, reassuring words.
I'm picturing those RGB bulbs and expecting my grandmother to bring me scraps of prosciutto while she laid out an antipasto platter.
Quote:
In comment 15671844 Producer said:
Quote:
We just don't want to get gouged for fewer options, which has been Apple's brand for three decades. I'll happily pay Apple if the product and options are commensurate to their present levels.
I think you'll be disappointed if you are expecting the price to be commensurate with the past price levels. As said above, the price was going to go up no matter who won. And it will be worth it.
Excited that Apple won and what they will do with it.
If Apple can't make a competitively priced product with similar options to what DirectTV was able to do, and I am not saying they can't or won't, I'm just worried about it, then fuck them. It is not honest to say Apple can't make a product as useful and feature-rich as DirectTV. Of course they can. They're one of the 10 best tech companies in the world. They should be able to run circles around a DirectTV offering while still making niche users happy.
I think Apple will most definitely provide a product just as feature rich (if not more) than DirecTV. I think where we part ways, is the idea I think Sunday Ticket was a loss leader for DirecTV. Apple won't do that, and nor should they.
This is coming from a long time DirecTV subscriber that often called year after year and got the service for free. I just can't stand them anymore (for various reasons, mainly because they try and screw you on your bill all the time). I'm ready to move on and am happy to start paying for NFL service (even if more than $300) if it means no more DirecTV.
Quote:
but does the Sunday Ticket enable you to every NFL game outside your home market?
The only games it will black out are local games and nationally televised games in your market. So Thursday night, Monday night, Sunday night and the late afternoon game of the week on Sunday are mostly blacked out.
And you can have eyes on up to 4 to 8 games at once.
Thanks.
I have a 4K TV as well as a few 1080p sets. And I have two 5K (I think or 6K) monitors, as well as several 1080p monitors. I sample it all.
Whenever I go shopping for a set, I am always amazed how the picture from TVs with the same rez looks completely different from one set to the next. That's a big factor, when we're comparing the subtle difference between 1080p and 4k. The internal electronics on televisions and color processing plays a big role in how we perceive the picture. This last bit is just me commenting on my experience as a consumer.
Quote:
In comment 15672022 IchabodGiant said:
Quote:
In comment 15671844 Producer said:
Quote:
We just don't want to get gouged for fewer options, which has been Apple's brand for three decades. I'll happily pay Apple if the product and options are commensurate to their present levels.
I think you'll be disappointed if you are expecting the price to be commensurate with the past price levels. As said above, the price was going to go up no matter who won. And it will be worth it.
Excited that Apple won and what they will do with it.
If Apple can't make a competitively priced product with similar options to what DirectTV was able to do, and I am not saying they can't or won't, I'm just worried about it, then fuck them. It is not honest to say Apple can't make a product as useful and feature-rich as DirectTV. Of course they can. They're one of the 10 best tech companies in the world. They should be able to run circles around a DirectTV offering while still making niche users happy.
I think Apple will most definitely provide a product just as feature rich (if not more) than DirecTV. I think where we part ways, is the idea I think Sunday Ticket was a loss leader for DirecTV. Apple won't do that, and nor should they.
This is coming from a long time DirecTV subscriber that often called year after year and got the service for free. I just can't stand them anymore (for various reasons, mainly because they try and screw you on your bill all the time). I'm ready to move on and am happy to start paying for NFL service (even if more than $300) if it means no more DirecTV.
This post actually illustrates something that I hadn't considered before. It's not about Apple vs. Android. It's that these bottom feeders are going to have to actually pay for their TV service now.
Quote:
In comment 15672080 Producer said:
Quote:
In comment 15672022 IchabodGiant said:
Quote:
In comment 15671844 Producer said:
Quote:
We just don't want to get gouged for fewer options, which has been Apple's brand for three decades. I'll happily pay Apple if the product and options are commensurate to their present levels.
I think you'll be disappointed if you are expecting the price to be commensurate with the past price levels. As said above, the price was going to go up no matter who won. And it will be worth it.
Excited that Apple won and what they will do with it.
If Apple can't make a competitively priced product with similar options to what DirectTV was able to do, and I am not saying they can't or won't, I'm just worried about it, then fuck them. It is not honest to say Apple can't make a product as useful and feature-rich as DirectTV. Of course they can. They're one of the 10 best tech companies in the world. They should be able to run circles around a DirectTV offering while still making niche users happy.
I think Apple will most definitely provide a product just as feature rich (if not more) than DirecTV. I think where we part ways, is the idea I think Sunday Ticket was a loss leader for DirecTV. Apple won't do that, and nor should they.
This is coming from a long time DirecTV subscriber that often called year after year and got the service for free. I just can't stand them anymore (for various reasons, mainly because they try and screw you on your bill all the time). I'm ready to move on and am happy to start paying for NFL service (even if more than $300) if it means no more DirecTV.
This post actually illustrates something that I hadn't considered before. It's not about Apple vs. Android. It's that these bottom feeders are going to have to actually pay for their TV service now.
Bingo!