How is this any different than Apple offering iTunes on Windows (since forever)? Same deal with iCloud. The current generation smart TVs are a commodity platform and Apple has no problem pulling content and services revenue from commodities. As others have posted, this frees up Apple to deliver a non-commodity premium hardware platform into this space without resorting to a race to the bottom on price. I’ve been eager for Apple to deliver a HomePod Video, but they could also do a HomePod TV and/or even a HomePod Soundbar that has an HDMI output for feeding video to a TV or monitor.
It seems to me that Apple could just as easily have got into this game by producing a large display with an AppleTV stuck in it, and simultaneously also been in the Apple display market.
Quite frankly, if this is the first evidence of a pivot to a services oriented business model, it has come late. Will be interesting to see if Samsung charges a 30% cut on every movie and TV show it sells to customers using the iTunes app on its TVs...
Quite frankly, if this is the first evidence of a pivot to a services oriented business model, it has come late. Will be interesting to see if Samsung charges a 30% cut on every movie and TV show it sells to customers using the iTunes app on its TVs...
Samsung wouldnt be selling/renting the content, Apple would. Samsung would have no way of knowing what the value of the content streamed through the app was. I assume it is also only music, movies and tv show of the itunes, not the whole TVOS.
It seems to me that Apple could just as easily have got into this game by producing a large display with an AppleTV stuck in it, and simultaneously also been in the Apple display market.
I suppose it’s still not ruled out...
Ideally, this is what I was hoping that Apple would do. Who knows, maybe it's not out of the question yet.
It seems to me that Apple could just as easily have got into this game by producing a large display with an AppleTV stuck in it, and simultaneously also been in the Apple display market.
I suppose it’s still not ruled out...
Why would anyone want a walled-garden TV set?
It's only a walled-garden if you assume that only Apple's services would be offered on it. This could be opened to all 3rd-party (cable, video, music, gaming, etc.) via an API
It seems to me that Apple could just as easily have got into this game by producing a large display with an AppleTV stuck in it, and simultaneously also been in the Apple display market.
I suppose it’s still not ruled out...
Why would anyone want a walled-garden TV set?
In case you were really wondering, it’d be for the same reason that many hundreds of millions of us happily, willingly, contentedly own walled-garden phones, walled-garden tablets, walled-garden computers...
Samsung, like Google, knows that Apple has the best and most lucrative ecosystem in the world. Why wouldn't they want iTunes/AirPlay on their TVs?
So Samsung is worthy of Apple’s services now?
It's important to wait for a technology to mature and be accepted as a standard before licensing and/or deploying it on other platforms. Especially in the case of AirPlay 2. It totally rocks.
In about a year or two, I think Apple may license an AppleTV board/ASIC and tvOS to TV makers. 5G to the homes will becomes widely available and all tv contents will be streamed At this time, tvOS needs a few enhancements and more cable provider support globally for zero sign-on to truly become a standard.
It seems to me that Apple could just as easily have got into this game by producing a large display with an AppleTV stuck in it, and simultaneously also been in the Apple display market.
I suppose it’s still not ruled out...
Why would anyone want a walled-garden TV set?
On the contrary, AppleTV is not a walled garden. It is starting to become the standard STB for cable tv providers globally and it runs all the major streaming platforms. It is also an awesome video conferencing platform. Imagine what tv makers could do with Airplay, FaceTime and tvOS licensed as a bundle. Especially with 5G becoming widely available.
How is this any different than Apple offering iTunes on Windows (since forever)? Same deal with iCloud. The current generation smart TVs are a commodity platform and Apple has no problem pulling content and services revenue from commodities. As others have posted, this frees up Apple to deliver a non-commodity premium hardware platform into this space without resorting to a race to the bottom on price. I’ve been eager for Apple to deliver a HomePod Video, but they could also do a HomePod TV and/or even a HomePod Soundbar that has an HDMI output for feeding video to a TV or monitor.
Apple did iTunes for Windows because most people owned Windows computers and a computer was required to buy music and sync to an iPod. Apple knew people weren’t going to buy a Mac just so they could buy an iPod and purchase music from iTunes. Once iTunes came to Windows iPod sales went crazy. I don’t see this as the same situation at all. And yes, Samsung does make some cheaper TVs but they also make very expensive TVs. I wouldn’t consider Samsung TVs commodities.
To me Apple’s hardware loses its premium status when things unique to it start showing up elsewhere, I get that if Apple wants its video service to really take off it has to be everywhere but it hasn’t even launched yet and no one has any idea if the content is good or not. There’s no real buzz in the industry about any of the rumored shows, nothing to get anybody excited. And all the analysis around it is more along the lines of Apple’s hardware sales are slowing so they need to find other ways to grow revenue. That doesn’t make me want to rush out and sign up for this service.
Apple is just whoring themselves at competitors at this point.
When apple supported Movies Anywhere it removed the need for an Apple TV for many people.
Im shocked but pleased with Apples decision. They need a strong services play.
I remember that. But increase services at the cost of their hardware?
It's not like the AppleTV is struggling or anything. So this move is strange.
In some markets such as here in Finland Apple TV is niche product and Samsung Smart TVs dominate market being main way for big screen video consumption for most people. So I think this is smart move for Apple if they want to succeed with their video service.
Posted this elsewhere first, but no one has said I'm crazy yet. Also my first post here. I'm wondering if this decision might be a sign that Apple is finally about to enter into the smart tv market with an actual Apple TV. It’s a given that this has a lot to do with the upcoming subscription services and embracing an overall services-centered model, but I just wonder if this an attempt to reach out to those outside of the Apple ecosystem and prep them for a more ambitious play.
I've read a number of arguments over the years for why Apple shouldn’t/wouldn’t enter into the TV market. Most of them boil down to market saturation and thin profit margins. Apple itself, seems uninterested in entering into new markets unless they feel that they can offer something new, if not unique. Pretty reasonable arguments for yesterday. I’d say that’s about to change and we all knew it was coming. An actual Apple TV would be a fantastic hub (if not one of many) for a services centered Apple. Perhaps better than the iPhone. Plenty of smart TVs offer some form of home automation functionality, music/media streaming, you can plug an xbox or ps4 into any of them, and the historical awful UI of today’s cable boxes/services is now optional thanks to the leverage of cable-cutters.
Imagine an actual Apple TV with a more powerful Siri, that properly integrated HomePod, future HomePod/AirPod products, and Dolby Atmos. It would have to have stunning screen, maybe 8K OLED or Micro LED, with an expanded color gamut. An array of depth-cameras and sensors integrated into a thin bezel could enable new functionality to HomeKit and HealthKit connected devices (maybe even gaming–gasp!), all while protecting your privacy. It could be beautiful and it would cost, of course, but it could be incredibly strategic–a beautiful, big gate to Apple’s walled garden. I can’t believe that Apple will be satisfied with Samsung’s badge on the gate. We’ve already seen them realize this with the Cinema Displays. If I’m a services based Apple that still produces hardware, this has to happen.
Excellent post!
I had somehow missed it before I posted above.
With Apple indicating that they'll be partnering with several TV manufacturers besides Samsung it seems to me less likely that Apple will also do their own set. Instead they'll follow Amazon and Google's path which is the smart move IMO if Mr. Cook really sees services as the way forward.
Samsung, like Google, knows that Apple has the best and most lucrative ecosystem in the world. Why wouldn't they want iTunes/AirPlay on their TVs?
So Samsung is worthy of Apple’s services now?
Why not? Apple brought Apple Music to Android. How is this any different?
Besides, Samsung has failed miserably in their attempt to be like Apple with their own ecosystem, so why not hook up with a profitable one?
It's interesting how Samsung and Google don't seem to really get along. Google seems to screw their business partners more than Samsung. At least Samsung is a good component supplier.
Samsung will also include Google Assistant support alongside Apple's services on those nice new QLED's. Interoperability and inclusiveness is becoming the new normal,
If my memory is not lying the last time I remember an Apple software running a non Apple device was on a Motorola phone and the experience was ... terribile. I think that what distinguish Apple from other companies in the consumer market is the capacity to give a consistent experience through different devices and this unique features comes from the fact that Apple at the really end is the only that product both hardware and software.
I don't know, but my feeling is not positive about this movement.
iTunes on PC.
Unfortunately, that doesn't invalidate his point. iTunes on Windows is a somewhat less than mind-blowingly positive experience...
Especially since they took away app management. Frankly, Windows explorer is a better content manager than iTunes on Windows.
Posted this elsewhere first, but no one has said I'm crazy yet. Also my first post here. I'm wondering if this decision might be a sign that Apple is finally about to enter into the smart tv market with an actual Apple TV. It’s a given that this has a lot to do with the upcoming subscription services and embracing an overall services-centered model, but I just wonder if this an attempt to reach out to those outside of the Apple ecosystem and prep them for a more ambitious play.
I've read a number of arguments over the years for why Apple shouldn’t/wouldn’t enter into the TV market. Most of them boil down to market saturation and thin profit margins. Apple itself, seems uninterested in entering into new markets unless they feel that they can offer something new, if not unique. Pretty reasonable arguments for yesterday. I’d say that’s about to change and we all knew it was coming. An actual Apple TV would be a fantastic hub (if not one of many) for a services centered Apple. Perhaps better than the iPhone. Plenty of smart TVs offer some form of home automation functionality, music/media streaming, you can plug an xbox or ps4 into any of them, and the historical awful UI of today’s cable boxes/services is now optional thanks to the leverage of cable-cutters.
Imagine an actual Apple TV with a more powerful Siri, that properly integrated HomePod, future HomePod/AirPod products, and Dolby Atmos. It would have to have stunning screen, maybe 8K OLED or Micro LED, with an expanded color gamut. An array of depth-cameras and sensors integrated into a thin bezel could enable new functionality to HomeKit and HealthKit connected devices (maybe even gaming–gasp!), all while protecting your privacy. It could be beautiful and it would cost, of course, but it could be incredibly strategic–a beautiful, big gate to Apple’s walled garden. I can’t believe that Apple will be satisfied with Samsung’s badge on the gate. We’ve already seen them realize this with the Cinema Displays. If I’m a services based Apple that still produces hardware, this has to happen.
Excellent post!
I had somehow missed it before I posted above.
With Apple indicating that they'll be partnering with several TV manufacturers besides Samsung it seems to me less likely that Apple will also do their own set. Instead they'll follow Amazon and Google's path which is the smart move IMO if Mr. Cook really sees services as the way forward.
How much money is Amazon making off original content? People keep talking about growing services revenues. Apple doesn’t break down the components of services revenue but it’s a good bet the majority of it comes from the cut Apple takes on IAP. Secondarily would probably be things like iCloud storage, MFI licensing fees, Apple Care. All of those are tied to hardware. We’ve never heard in the past that iTunes was much of a money making business. Maybe Apple has these grand video plans that will blow everyone out of the water and be hugely profitable but I’m skeptical.
I know Wall Street is obsessed with the services narrative but what good are services (as a stand alone product) for Apple if they’re not very profitable (if at all). Looking at Netflix’s last quarterly earnings filing their net profit was around $400M. And that’s off of a subscriber base of around 137M. What would Apple have to charge for its video service to pull in decent profits?
If my memory is not lying the last time I remember an Apple software running a non Apple device was on a Motorola phone and the experience was ... terribile. I think that what distinguish Apple from other companies in the consumer market is the capacity to give a consistent experience through different devices and this unique features comes from the fact that Apple at the really end is the only that product both hardware and software.
I don't know, but my feeling is not positive about this movement.
iTunes on PC.
Unfortunately, that doesn't invalidate his point. iTunes on Windows is a somewhat less than mind-blowingly positive experience...
Especially since they took away app management. Frankly, Windows explorer is a better content manager than iTunes on Windows.
It will be interested get to see whether Apple is able to regulate the experience, I.e. minimum requirements regarding processor and implementation for AirPlay equipped sets. I know if I were trying to run any Apple TV apps on my Sony 900E, the sluggish processor would make the experience less than optimal. As amazing as the picture on that set is, it’s seriously underpowered, which is one of the reasons I don’t use any built-in apps. The Amazon Prime app actually stutters when doing 4K HDR when I press the volume button, to say nothing of adjusting the picture.
If Apple can update older iPhones to support AirPlay 2, why can't Samsung update its older TVs to support the same spec? The reason is, of course, Apple. They won't let Samsung or anyone else use Airplay without paying a hefty fee for each device sold. How does this help Apple's customers? It doesn't which is the kind of business decision that is driving away buyers and dropping Apple's share price into the toilet.
Apple is just whoring themselves at competitors at this point.
When apple supported Movies Anywhere it removed the need for an Apple TV for many people.
Im shocked but pleased with Apples decision. They need a strong services play.
I remember that. But increase services at the cost of their hardware?
It's not like the AppleTV is struggling or anything. So this move is strange.
Yes, this is one more move to plant their Services business roots even deeper.
Also, I figured the "iTunes" brand was slowly going away, being replaced by generic names, such as Apple TV and Apple Music. so this does surprise me. Maybe this is a precursor to a fuller Apple TV app experience on these alternative brand devices?
Comments
I think Apple is about to make moves in the TV streaming and content market like never before. Stay tuned.
You know, that sort of thing. Perhaps you don’t.
It's important to wait for a technology to mature and be accepted as a standard before licensing and/or deploying it on other platforms.
Especially in the case of AirPlay 2. It totally rocks.
In about a year or two, I think Apple may license an AppleTV board/ASIC and tvOS to TV makers.
5G to the homes will becomes widely available and all tv contents will be streamed
At this time, tvOS needs a few enhancements and more cable provider support globally for zero sign-on to truly become a standard.
On the contrary, AppleTV is not a walled garden. It is starting to become the standard STB for cable tv providers globally and it runs all the major streaming platforms. It is also an awesome video conferencing platform. Imagine what tv makers could do with Airplay, FaceTime and tvOS licensed as a bundle. Especially with 5G becoming widely available.
To me Apple’s hardware loses its premium status when things unique to it start showing up elsewhere, I get that if Apple wants its video service to really take off it has to be everywhere but it hasn’t even launched yet and no one has any idea if the content is good or not. There’s no real buzz in the industry about any of the rumored shows, nothing to get anybody excited. And all the analysis around it is more along the lines of Apple’s hardware sales are slowing so they need to find other ways to grow revenue. That doesn’t make me want to rush out and sign up for this service.
Especially since they took away app management. Frankly, Windows explorer is a better content manager than iTunes on Windows.
I know Wall Street is obsessed with the services narrative but what good are services (as a stand alone product) for Apple if they’re not very profitable (if at all). Looking at Netflix’s last quarterly earnings filing their net profit was around $400M. And that’s off of a subscriber base of around 137M. What would Apple have to charge for its video service to pull in decent profits?
Yes, this is one more move to plant their Services business roots even deeper.
Also, I figured the "iTunes" brand was slowly going away, being replaced by generic names, such as Apple TV and Apple Music. so this does surprise me. Maybe this is a precursor to a fuller Apple TV app experience on these alternative brand devices?