As advertised, the free app is a mirror of HBO’s existing broadband service: It lets the channel’s subscribers stream a very deep catalog of HBO’s shows and movies, on demand, via both Wi-Fi and wireless networks.

It will also work on Apple’s iPhone and iPod Touch, as well as 20 phones running Google’s Android; it won’t work on tablets running Google’s newest Honeycomb OS, though. (Demo video from BTIG’s Rich Greenfield at the bottom of this post)

The two catches:

• The service is available to most cable customers, with the exception of Time Warner Cable and Cablevision subscribers. Time Warner Cable says it’s working on a deal; Cablevision won’t comment.
• It’s a very deep catalog–1,400 titles, including the complete run of great series like “The Sopranos” and “The Wire”–but it will still have gaps that could frustrate HBO’s most avid users. I’d like to try David Simon’s “Treme” again, for instance, but I can’t get last season’s episodes; just the new ones that started airing last week.

Some of you will bemoan the fact that you have to be a cable subscriber to get this–there’s no broadband-only option, a la Netflix and Hulu Plus. But that’s the point: Parent company Time Warner is completely wedded to the cable industry and wants to build as many incentives as it can to keep you there, too.

Still, this stuff is lightyears ahead of where the cable business was just a couple years ago, where paying subscribers had no way to get these shows except on their TVs, or by buying it again on DVD or iTunes.

And if you really are a dedicated cord-cutter, and a patient one, you may eventually get your way: I can imagine a scenario where HBO does offer this stuff directly to consumers, and if it happens within a few years, I won’t be completely shocked.

If such a deal were to come to fruition it would add a new competitor to the television industry by increasing the degree to which Netflix vies with premium-cable television channels like Time Warner Inc.’s HBO.

The discussions for the series–a political drama called “House of Cards” based on a British miniseries–is part of a growing behind-the-scenes push by Netflix to secure from Hollywood production companies more original shows that will run initially on Netflix’s streaming Internet service, according to a person familiar with Netflix’s plans. Original series like “The Sopranos,” “The Wire” and “True Blood” have been a big part of HBO’s growth over the years.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

The New York-based Internet company said it would “co-develop and co-produce new Web programming initially aimed at AOL’s growing women’s audience” with Endemol.

Endemol makes television shows, such as “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition,” “Big Brother,” “Wipeout” and “Jerseylicious,” as well as Web series “Married On My Space 1 & 2″ and “Coupon Mom.”

AOL is working on several other content partnerships, said sources, to add to its previous ones.

AOL said the first two “built-if-sold”–meaning some big advertiser has to pony up–will be:

“Re-Dressed by America”: An interactive Web series where online users make over subjects facing a life-changing event (high school reunions, first dates, etc.) by voting on their hairstyles, fashion, accessories and more. The series will be featured on Stylelist.com and MyDaily.com.

“Mamá’s Recipe”: U.S. families compete for the best family recipes and share their secrets with the AOL audience. The series will be featured on KitchenDaily and AOL Latino.

Not exactly “The Sopranos,” but there you have it.

Here’s the full press release from AOL:

AOL INC. AND ENDEMOL USA ANNOUNCE WEB PROGRAMMING PRODUCTION PARTNERSHIP

Agreement Further Expands AOL’s Original Video Offerings

New York, NY–January 12. 2011– AOL Inc. (NYSE: AOL) and Endemol USA today announced a production agreement to co-develop and co-produce new Web programming initially aimed at AOL’s growing women’s audience, as well as at the broader AOL audience. The partnership will focus on creating premium, unscripted digital video content that will enhance the user experience by taking advantage of the real time, interactive and community nature of the Web.

“Endemol is a premiere producer of unscripted programming and their expertise in creating unique, interactive, popular shows, combined with AOL’s growing video audience will take digital production to the next level,” said David Eun, President of AOL Media & Studios. “Endemol is the latest in a string of partnerships that serve both the AOL consumers and our advertising partners.”

“We are thrilled to partner with such a successful and global leading company like AOL,” said David Goldberg, Chairman of Endemol North America. “This deal continues our growth as a leader in interactive digital entertainment, and we look forward to creating many genre-defining series with AOL.”

The first two built-if-sold series to be produced under the new agreement are:

“Re-Dressed By America”: An interactive web series where online users make over subjects facing a life-changing event (high school reunions, first dates, etc.) by voting on their hairstyles, fashion, accessories and more. The series will be featured on Stylelist.com and MyDaily.com.

“Mamá’s Recipe”: US families compete for the best family recipes and share their secrets with the AOL audience. The series will be featured on KitchenDaily (http://www.kitchendaily.com) and AOL Latino (http://latino.aol.com/).

AOL will promote each Web series throughout the AOL Network focusing on the sites and destinations relevant for each series’ demographic. Every series produced through this partnership will feature enhanced online programming, such as user voting, supplemental video clips and supporting blog content to create deeper user experiences, and opportunities for sponsors to integrate their messaging in creative and highly-engaging ways.

Endemol USA, one of the world’s leading producers of entertainment programming, will leverage its experience producing hit shows such as Emmy-award winning “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition,” “Big Brother,” “Wipeout” and “Jerseylicious,” as well as the hit Web series “Married On My Space 1 & 2″ and “Coupon Mom” to create captivating Web series with AOL.

“You’ve Got…” the video series that debuted with the new AOL.com launch, generated nearly 8 million views in its first month, and featured a diverse guest list including Kelly Ripa, Barack Obama, Matt Damon and the Marines in Afghanistan. For comparison, that puts “You’ve Got…” on-pace with a top 10 Web series. Overall, video views on the new AOL.com rose more than 3X in its first month.

While the final episode of ABC’s “Lost” got all the attention last night, many were dissatisfied with the ending, which seemed to suggest the castaways were all dead the whole time.

Which does make sense for the convoluted television series, since it started with a plane crash.

But here are videos of BoomTown’s favorite TV finales, including my personal fave from HBO’s “Six Feet Under.”

(The image above is the last one from “M.A.S.H.,” by the way, which was one of the most watched, but way too weepy for me.)

Seinfeld (it was about nothing!):

Friends (perfectly simple):

The Sopranos (Tony was whacked!):

The Mary Tyler Moore Show (the classic classy ender):

Six Feet Under (they all die–eventually):

Since BoomTown constantly called the $15 billion valuation of Facebook “insane” when Microsoft (MSFT) forked over $240 million in 2007 and gave Slide’s Max Levchin a very hard time when his widget company got a $550 million valuation a year ago, it’s only fair that I say something equally appropriate about Twitter.

The hot microblogging service just got its very own $250 million valuation, all without a dime of revenue in sight. (I know, Bijan, it’s coming, it’s coming!)

After all, Facebook and Slide got their funding in boom times and here we are hurtling toward a possible Depression: The Sequel, even as Twitter hauls in $35 million more in investments.

But I am torn.

Should it be “WTF?” given that the current economic meltdown really seems to have little impact on Silicon Valley venture capitalists?

I guess they have to put their money somewhere and that’s probably the best choice out there, due to Twitter’s strong growth and, perhaps more importantly, overhyped media mindshare.

Or maybe: “Don’t Stop Believin’!!? I mean, you almost have to admire the appalling suspension of disbelief for Benchmark Capital and IVP to hand over such a sum.

In fact, they are probably right now down at at Il Fornaio in Palo Alto, telling everyone who will listen that Google (GOOG) was founded in the last tech downturn.

Actually, I think the only thing to say is to reference the search giant: “Let’s hope Google has another YouTube moment and decides it must own the start-up pioneering real-time search and status updates no matter the price.”

That’s kind of long, so I will distill it to this Calgon-inspired thought: “Larry and Sergey, take me away!”

Because while I appreciate that Twitter co-founder Biz–I can’t help it, but I laugh every time time I write his name in relation to a company that makes bupkis–Stone underscored that the company was ready to make some money using the new funding, an acquisition by a big, nervous Internet giant is the only way this is going to end well.

In his post, ironically titled “Opportunity Knocks,” Stone noted, “We are now positioned extremely well to support the accelerating growth of our service, further enable the robust ecosystem sprouting up around Twitter, and yes, to begin building revenue-generating products.”

That would be nice, because right now, there’s no Biz like no biz.

And not to sound like a skunk at this Silicon Valley garden party, but Twitter might want to start doing that sooner than later.

I know, I know, I am such a bummer with all this talk of things not just growing to the sky in a world without end.

But as Facebook–valuation now officially $3.7 billion, although probably more if it were to be sold–has found out, the delta between dreamy funding and revenue reality can be quite huge.

And, by that, I am not saying it can’t be done, I am simply saying: Do it.

Until then, here is a lovely Calgon commercial and also a video of that amazing last scene in the finale of “The Sopranos” with the Journey song playing until it is abruptly cut off (I say Tony was shot in the head by the guy in the bathroom, but please weigh in):

After all, Garlinghouse’s infamous “Peanut Butter Manifesto” was the key ur-moment that one could point to as the one in which the curtains were pulled back at the troubled Internet company to reveal, well, a very sticky mess.

Garlinghouse (pictured here), who ran communications and communities for Yahoo (YHOO), is set to be replaced in part by Scott Dietzen, who was the president and CTO of Zimbra (and before that CTO of BEA Systems). Yahoo bought the highly innovative open-source email startup last fall for $350 million.

(By the way, Dietzen will get only 50%–communications products and services–of Garlinghouse’s job, while Front Door head Tapan Bhat will get communities.)

But back to Brad and peanut butter: The 2006 internal document, penned by the Yahoo senior vice president, essentially unfairly impugned delicious peanut butter by using it as a metaphor for Yahoo spreading its resources too thinly.

As far as I am concerned, life is all in the spreading–you can go thick with peanut butter, Brad!

In any case, as a memorial to the Garlinghouse era, BoomTown decodes the manifesto:

Brad wrote: Three and half years ago, I enthusiastically joined Yahoo! The magnitude of the opportunity was only matched by the magnitude of the assets. And an amazing team has been responsible for rebuilding Yahoo!

I proudly bleed purple and yellow everyday! And like so many people here, I love this company.

Translation: This is the borderline cultish kissing-up part, before I deliver the coup de nut.

Thus: Blah, blah, blah–love it! Blah, blah, double blah–so profound I think I shall weep!

And the nuclear blah, blah, blah–I pull out the bleeding purple and yellow expression, used way too often at Yahoo, which, when you really think about it, is just gross.

Brad wrote: But all is not well. Last Thursday’s NY Times article was a blessing in the disguise of a painful public flogging. While it lacked accurate details, its conclusions rang true, and thus was a much needed wake-up call. But also a call to action. A clear statement with which I, and far too many Yahoos, agreed. And thankfully a reminder. A reminder that the measure of any person is not in how many times he or she falls down–but rather the spirit and resolve used to get back up. The same is now true of our Company.

It’s time for us to get back up.

Translation: Cue ominous music! Drag out the “Rocky I-VI” cliches (except for V, which sucked)! Order those I’ve-Fallen- and-I-Can’t- Get-Up thingies for the entire company. Also, insult the media, even though that’s exactly where all Yahoo employees get the most up-to-date information about what’s what here.

Brad wrote: I believe we must embrace our problems and challenges and that we must take decisive action. We have the opportunity–in fact the invitation–to send a strong, clear and powerful message to our shareholders and Wall Street, to our advertisers and our partners, to our employees (both current and future), and to our users. They are all begging for a signal that we recognize and understand our problems, and that we are charting a course for fundamental change. Our current course and speed simply will not get us there. Short-term band-aids will not get us there.

It’s time for us to get back up and seize this invitation.

Translation: You realize, of course, this was written in 2006! Um, almost two years ago. And nothing has, well, changed all that much.

Strong, clear and powerful message that we understand our problems and are charting a course for fundamental change?

A cow could fall through the crack that task disappeared into!

Brad wrote: I imagine there’s much discussion amongst the Company’s senior most leadership around the challenges we face. At the risk of being redundant, I wanted to share my take on our current situation and offer a recommended path forward, an attempt to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem.

Translation: No one in senior management is listening to me. I’ll show them Tom-Cruise- Jerry-Maguire style!

Show me the money!

Brad wrote: Recognizing Our Problems

Translation: Help me, help you. Help me, help you.

Brad wrote: We lack a focused, cohesive vision for our company. We want to do everything and be everything–to everyone. We’ve known this for years, talk about it incessantly, but do nothing to fundamentally address it. We are scared to be left out. We are reactive instead of charting an unwavering course. We are separated into silos that far too frequently don’t talk to each other. And when we do talk, it isn’t to collaborate on a clearly focused strategy, but rather to argue and fight about ownership, strategies and tactics.

Our inclination and proclivity to repeatedly hire leaders from outside the company results in disparate visions of what winning looks like–rather than a leadership team rallying around a single cohesive strategy.

Translation: This, of course, is the description of the basic family setup of “The Sopranos.” Except we have no Bada-Bing.

I so wish we had a Bada-Bing at Yahoo, instead of that not-Google cafeteria.

In fact, I wish we had Tony Soprano running the place, except I personally think he got shot during that annoying “Don’t Stop Believin’” ending (see video below!).

Brad wrote: I’ve heard our strategy described as spreading peanut butter across the myriad opportunities that continue to evolve in the online world. The result: a thin layer of investment spread across everything we do and thus we focus on nothing in particular.

I hate peanut butter. We all should.

Translation: I hate peanut butter. We all should.

That is, those of us whose parents did not know how to make a proper sandwich.

Brad wrote: We lack clarity of ownership and accountability. The most painful manifestation of this is the massive redundancy that exists throughout the organization. We now operate in an organizational structure–admittedly created with the best of intentions–that has become overly bureaucratic. For far too many employees, there is another person with dramatically similar and overlapping responsibilities. This slows us down and burdens the company with unnecessary costs.

Translation: Again, this was two years ago. Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.

That’s French for peanut butter.

Brad wrote: Equally problematic, at what point in the organization does someone really OWN the success of their product or service or feature? Product, marketing, engineering, corporate strategy, financial operations…there are so many people in charge (or believe that they are in charge) that it’s not clear if anyone is in charge. This forces decisions to be pushed up–rather than down. It forces decisions by committee or consensus and discourages the innovators from breaking the mold…thinking outside the box.

There’s a reason why a centerfielder and a left fielder have clear areas of ownership. Pursuing the same ball repeatedly results in either collisions or dropped balls. Knowing that someone else is pursuing the ball and hoping to avoid that collision–we have become timid in our pursuit. Again, the ball drops.

Translation: It is like Al Haig gone wild at Yahoo–I’m in charge here!

And then right onto the business-as-a-baseball game cliche, as we are like “The Bad News Bears” at Yahoo. Except we could use a drunk coach like Walter Matthau right about now.

Brad wrote: We lack decisiveness. Combine a lack of focus with unclear ownership, and the result is that decisions are either not made or are made when it is already too late. Without a clear and focused vision, and without complete clarity of ownership, we lack a macro perspective to guide our decisions and visibility into who should make those decisions. We are repeatedly stymied by challenging and hairy decisions. We are held hostage by our analysis paralysis.

Translation: Yahoo Held Hostage! This is an eerie precursor to CEO Jerry Yang’s 100-day No Sacred Cow Vision Quest, isn’t it?

Brad wrote: We end up with competing (or redundant) initiatives and synergistic opportunities living in the different silos of our company.

• Global strategy from BU vs. Global strategy from Int’l

Translation: There can be only one! Although one is the loneliest number, which is why we have two of everything.

Brad wrote: We have lost our passion to win. Far too many employees are “phoning” it in, lacking the passion and commitment to be a part of the solution. We sit idly by while–at all levels–employees are enabled to “hang around.” Where is the accountability? Moreover, our compensation systems don’t align to our overall success. Weak performers that have been around for years are rewarded. And many of our top performers aren’t adequately recognized for their efforts.

As a result, the employees that we really need to stay (leaders, risk-takers, innovators, passionate) become discouraged and leave. Unfortunately many who opt to stay are not the ones who will lead us through the dramatic change that is needed.

Translation: By “phoning” it in, I mean from their cellphones at home. By “hang around,” I mean at the bar near the office.

By employees that we really need to stay (leaders, risk-takers, innovators, passionate) become discouraged and leave, I mean me! Buh-bye, Ash!

Brad wrote: Solving our Problems

Translation: And now I return to Jerry Maguire!–Help me, help you. Help me, help you.

Brad wrote: We have awesome assets. Nearly every media and communications company is painfully jealous of our position. We have the largest audience, they are highly engaged and our brand is synonymous with the Internet.

I don’t pretend there is only one path forward available to us. However, at a minimum, I want to be part of the solution and thus have outlined a plan here that I believe can work. It is my strong belief that we need to act very quickly or risk going further down a slippery slope. The plan here is not perfect; it is, however, FAR better than no action at all.

Translation: More Maguire required! I will not rest until I have you holding a Coke, wearing your own shoe, playing a Sega game *featuring you*, while singing your own song in a new commercial, *starring you*, broadcast during the Super Bowl, in a game that you are winning, and I will not *sleep* until that happens. I’ll give you 15 minutes to call me back.

Brad wrote: There are three pillars to my plan:

I emphatically believe we simply must eliminate the redundancies we have created and the first step in doing this is by restructuring our organization. We can be more efficient with fewer people and we can get more done, more quickly. We need to return more decision-making to a new set of business units and their leadership. But we can’t achieve this with baby-step changes. We need to fundamentally rethink how we organize to win.

Translation: In a peanutshell, let’s be Google (GOOG).

Brad wrote: Independent of specific proposals of what this reorganization should look like, two key principles must be represented:

Kill the redundancies. Align a set of new BU’s so that they are not competing against each other. Search focuses on search. Social media aligns with community and communications. No competing owners for Video, Photos, etc. And Front Page becomes Switzerland. This will be a delicate exercise–decentralization can create inefficiencies, but I believe we can find the right balance.

Translation: Or, maybe we could be Facebook.

Brad wrote: I love Yahoo! I’m proud to admit that I bleed purple and yellow. I’m proud to admit that I shaved a Y in the back of my head.

Translation: More yucky purple and yellow bleeding with a cup full of Britney-Spears-crazy hairstyling on top!

Brad wrote: My motivation for this memo is the adamant belief that, as before, we have a tremendous opportunity ahead. I don’t pretend that I have the only available answers, but we need to get the discussion going; change is needed and it is needed soon. We can be a stronger and faster company–a company with a clearer vision and clearer ownership and clearer accountability.

Catch the balls.

Translation: My motivation for this memo is the adamant belief that it will drive my bosses nuts and someone will surely leak it to the press.

Thus, I wind up with the marathon-not-a-sprint cliche, sprinkle in the get-up one and round the bases with the baseball cliche.

Brad wrote: And stop eating peanut butter.

Translation: Despite my unfair impugning of the peanut-loving work of George Washington Carver, I secretly love peanut butter.

But it once got in my chocolate. Or did my chocolate get in my peanut butter?

In any case, soon to come: The Jelly Memo. That’ll be sweet!

And here is the last minutes of “The Sopranos,” where Tony–and here is an exhaustive and convincing explanation as to why–got whacked:

This morning, Apple’s U.S. iTunes Store began offering six HBO series: “The Wire,” “Flight of the Conchords,” “Sex and the City,” “The Sopranos,” “Rome” and “Deadwood.” The first three are priced at iTunes’ standard rate of $1.99 per episode. The second three are $2.99 each, marking the first time Apple has allowed variable pricing for TV shows in the U.S.

Quite a coup for HBO (TWX), especially given some of the other concessions it was able to win from Apple: HBO programs won’t be offered for purchase on iTunes until they hit the DVD window, and new episodes of series won’t be available until months after their TV premiere.