No, Apple's licensing of iTunes & AirPlay 2 isn't a 'strategy reversal' in any way

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 74
    k2kw said:
    Notsofast said:

    Ben Thompson is often wrong.  His problem is he looks at the present and then mistakenly believes that there are always a small number of variables that controlled an outcome that he is uniquely able to divine, and then he makes a broad prediction, when in reality there are so many variables that control an outcome. For example, just a short while back he scoffed at Apple ever being a major player with services, saying they were terrible at it and could never compete with Google that was so far ahead.  In reality, Apple was already a major player in Services (the App Store anyone?) and Apple's services will soon hit $50 Billion in revenue.  In the issue at hand, he wrote his article too soon, as more news came out, it turns out that Samsung and others actually experienced greater declines because of China.
    The bulk of Apple’s services come from their cut of IAP as well as what they charge for cloud storage. And I think AppleCare and MFI is thrown in that line item too. Technically you could consider those services but I wouldn’t treat them the same as other companies services, especially software as a service companies.
    That is incorrect. 
    Can you show us a breakdown of Services from Apple?   I've never seen that in their financials.
    Apple doesn’t break it out. But common sense would say the majority is probably IAP and the cut Apple takes. Maybe Apple Music is starting to become a bigger portion. 
  • Reply 62 of 74
    asdasd said:
    Anyone who thinks this isn’t a significant shift in strategy is blind. And stop bringing up iPod. The Mac in the early 2000s was nothing like iOS is today. The only way Apple was going to grow iPod (and iTunes) sales was via Windows. That is absolutely not the case today. Of course if Apple is building something to compete with Netflix/Amazon/HBO then yeah that services needs to be everywhere. But that is a strategy shift.

    The latest episode of Ben Thompson’s excellent podcast explains it well.

    https://exponent.fm/episode-158-a-significant-shift/

    If DED thinks this is the right strategy then that’s what he should be arguing and providing reasons why he thinks it’s the right business move.

    Personally I think it’s a good move by Apple, although am unsure of the benefits to me - can I cast games to the TV? There’s a lot of app specific support like Netflix or YouTube that casts to my LG TV already. 

    I have a feelimg though though that if the analysts and WSJ were demanding that Apple open up then DED would be penning a polemic about why Apple would never do that, if he hasn’t already. 
    Ben Thompson maxes good point on his podcast that it makes sense for Apple to push content as wide as possible, especially content that is not exclusive to Apple. I agree. But I still think it’s an open question as to whether Apple should become a media company in the first place. I see a lot of discussion around distribution strategy but very little on if this is the right overall strategy. I think of Apple as a product company and to me original content seems less like an Apple product and more like Apple has a shit ton of money and this is something they decided to throw it at.
  • Reply 63 of 74
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,591member
    Anyone who thinks this isn’t a significant shift in strategy is blind. And stop bringing up iPod. The Mac in the early 2000s was nothing like iOS is today. The only way Apple was going to grow iPod (and iTunes) sales was via Windows. That is absolutely not the case today. Of course if Apple is building something to compete with Netflix/Amazon/HBO then yeah that services needs to be everywhere. But that is a strategy shift.

    The latest episode of Ben Thompson’s excellent podcast explains it well.

    https://exponent.fm/episode-158-a-significant-shift/

    If DED thinks this is the right strategy then that’s what he should be arguing and providing reasons why he thinks it’s the right business move.

    Yes, this is the same problem you exhibit in most of your posts: you start with something you wish to be correct, then build an argument around it.

    The reason you think it's a strategy shift is because you missed the signs. They have been mostly subtle, but some have been flashing like sirens.

    Case in point: Apple licenses CarPlay to manufacturers. You should remember it, because the last time you claimed that Apple never licenses tech to third parties, you did it in a thread about CarPlay. 

    The other sign you missed, and this is more relevant, is this:  

    http://www.asymco.com/2019/01/07/apples-unit-economics/

    which explains many of the decisions that Apple has taken of late, that on the surface might seem a little bizarre.

    A while back, DED wrote that Apple's future marker of success was shifting from sales of the iPhone, to the expansion and resilience of the ecosystem; this ties in precisely with what Dediu has been talking about with micromobility and unit economics.

    williamlondonbrucemctmay
  • Reply 64 of 74
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,754member
    jbdragon said:
    nano said:
    It seems more like a confirmation that Apple is continuing to shift their strategy.  Apple is not likely to make a standalone TV now.  Yes, Apple Music was on android but further evidence that the shift is happening away from the walled-in strategy with their hardware. 

    On another note, having read Appleinsider for many years. Did WSJ do some sort of harm to AI?  The attacks and defensiveness of some recent AI articles is off-putting. 
    Apple was never going to make a stand alone TV, Why? It was and has always been a silly rumor.  Profit margins on TVs is small.  Few people are going to rush out and replace their perfectly good TV for a over priced Apple TV.  They are also large and take up a lot of space.  Really, what more is it going to do over a Small box that can be added to any TV and at a fraction of the price.

    I've had Airplay on my Yamaha surround sound receiver.   I access icloud on my Windows computers for years.  Really, Apple is doing what they've always done.  Steve Jobs was talking about having FaceTime on Android.  That didn't happen, but it still like to see it.  Let me know when imessage is on other platforms.  That would be nice.  Everyone could be blue bubbles.

    Every time I’m in Best Buy the TV section of the store is the most crowded. Over the holidays I’ve had numerous family members and friends upgrade their non-smart TVs to smart TVs. Smart TVs are incredibly popular. It’s very convenient to have the capabilities built right into the TV with no need to spend additional money on a separate box and separate cables. If Apple ever got into the TV set business it wouldn’t be about making large profits on the TV it would be about using the TV to sell their original content programming service. For now Apple has decided to just give the service to existing TV makers. But I think Apple is great with displays and could probably make a really great TV. Maybe it wouldn’t have iPhone like margins but if it’s there to sell TV subscriptions so what.
    Nope.  Better to NOT integrate the smarts with the big expensive display.  You want to upgrade the smart bits more often than the expensive bits, so it makes sense to keep the streaming/gaming/content bit apart from the big expensive display.  
    Oh, if only they had done that with the iMac. My big expensive 27 inch screen would still be in use and not acting as a paperweight after have the graphics card literally slow cook itself to death.

    The only headless options were the Mini at one end and the Pro at the other, both left for years to rot.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 65 of 74
    Anyone who thinks this isn’t a significant shift in strategy is blind. And stop bringing up iPod. The Mac in the early 2000s was nothing like iOS is today. The only way Apple was going to grow iPod (and iTunes) sales was via Windows. That is absolutely not the case today. Of course if Apple is building something to compete with Netflix/Amazon/HBO then yeah that services needs to be everywhere. But that is a strategy shift.

    The latest episode of Ben Thompson’s excellent podcast explains it well.

    https://exponent.fm/episode-158-a-significant-shift/

    If DED thinks this is the right strategy then that’s what he should be arguing and providing reasons why he thinks it’s the right business move.

    You are overlooking the fact that the Apple TV hasn’t outsold Roku, and other platforms. Now you can buy TVs with their software already on them. So why would a consumer even bother trying out an Apple TV when most of the stuff they would watch is already on the new tv they bought anyway?

    anyone who ever thought Apple would make their own tv should have abandoned that idea 8 years ago when Steve died. If you think competition is tough in the smartphone market, just take a look how bad it is in the tv market.  It’s so bad that Best Buy allowed Amazon to put their software on Best Buy’s house brand tv. 

    This also shows Apple’s hand in how they will address the loss of revenue with a smaller iPhone market. Once they get their content squared away this could make up the difference and then some. More people would rather pay $20-40/mo. than pay $1000 for a smartphone that they think isn’t that much better than their 4 year old one that just got s new battery for $29-49. 

    So the author of th WSJ article thinks Apple is copying Microsoft, but they’re not.  Microsoft makes you pay for your software every year whether you use any new features or not. 
    Microsoft’s problems started a long time ago when Ballmer didn’t want to try new markets or bother to put in the polish to make their existing ones desirable. Nobody wanted to upgrade office, the new version of windows was hated by the corporate world, and PC sales were tanking.

    The only thing you could say that Apple and Microsoft had in common is complacency. Apple is waking up to it a lot earlier than Microsoft did, let’s see what they do about it.

    BTW, Apple loves to license their stuff. Steve talked about it, licensed the iPod to HP, and would have continued to license the Mac OS if the licensees paid a “fair price”, but they told him to go pound sand.  
    williamlondon
  • Reply 66 of 74
    asdasd said:
    Anyone who thinks this isn’t a significant shift in strategy is blind. And stop bringing up iPod. The Mac in the early 2000s was nothing like iOS is today. The only way Apple was going to grow iPod (and iTunes) sales was via Windows. That is absolutely not the case today. Of course if Apple is building something to compete with Netflix/Amazon/HBO then yeah that services needs to be everywhere. But that is a strategy shift.

    The latest episode of Ben Thompson’s excellent podcast explains it well.

    https://exponent.fm/episode-158-a-significant-shift/

    If DED thinks this is the right strategy then that’s what he should be arguing and providing reasons why he thinks it’s the right business move.

    Personally I think it’s a good move by Apple, although am unsure of the benefits to me - can I cast games to the TV? There’s a lot of app specific support like Netflix or YouTube that casts to my LG TV already. 

    I have a feelimg though though that if the analysts and WSJ were demanding that Apple open up then DED would be penning a polemic about why Apple would never do that, if he hasn’t already. 
    Ben Thompson maxes good point on his podcast that it makes sense for Apple to push content as wide as possible, especially content that is not exclusive to Apple. I agree. But I still think it’s an open question as to whether Apple should become a media company in the first place. I see a lot of discussion around distribution strategy but very little on if this is the right overall strategy. I think of Apple as a product company and to me original content seems less like an Apple product and more like Apple has a shit ton of money and this is something they decided to throw it at.
    Apple IS a media company. One of the biggest. 
    Movies, TV shows, music, podcasts and books. Remember?
    williamlondon
  • Reply 67 of 74
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,754member
    asdasd said:
    Anyone who thinks this isn’t a significant shift in strategy is blind. And stop bringing up iPod. The Mac in the early 2000s was nothing like iOS is today. The only way Apple was going to grow iPod (and iTunes) sales was via Windows. That is absolutely not the case today. Of course if Apple is building something to compete with Netflix/Amazon/HBO then yeah that services needs to be everywhere. But that is a strategy shift.

    The latest episode of Ben Thompson’s excellent podcast explains it well.

    https://exponent.fm/episode-158-a-significant-shift/

    If DED thinks this is the right strategy then that’s what he should be arguing and providing reasons why he thinks it’s the right business move.

    Personally I think it’s a good move by Apple, although am unsure of the benefits to me - can I cast games to the TV? There’s a lot of app specific support like Netflix or YouTube that casts to my LG TV already. 

    I have a feelimg though though that if the analysts and WSJ were demanding that Apple open up then DED would be penning a polemic about why Apple would never do that, if he hasn’t already. 
    Ben Thompson maxes good point on his podcast that it makes sense for Apple to push content as wide as possible, especially content that is not exclusive to Apple. I agree. But I still think it’s an open question as to whether Apple should become a media company in the first place. I see a lot of discussion around distribution strategy but very little on if this is the right overall strategy. I think of Apple as a product company and to me original content seems less like an Apple product and more like Apple has a shit ton of money and this is something they decided to throw it at.
    Apple IS a media company. One of the biggest. 
    Movies, TV shows, music, podcasts and books. Remember?
    Apple isn't a media company just yet IMO. At present it is simply a reseller of licenced content. That will change when Apple begins selling its own home grown content or signing contracts with creatives for inclusion of original content in its services (which should be platform agnostic in my view).
    mac_128muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 68 of 74
    asdasd said:
    Anyone who thinks this isn’t a significant shift in strategy is blind. And stop bringing up iPod. The Mac in the early 2000s was nothing like iOS is today. The only way Apple was going to grow iPod (and iTunes) sales was via Windows. That is absolutely not the case today. Of course if Apple is building something to compete with Netflix/Amazon/HBO then yeah that services needs to be everywhere. But that is a strategy shift.

    The latest episode of Ben Thompson’s excellent podcast explains it well.

    https://exponent.fm/episode-158-a-significant-shift/

    If DED thinks this is the right strategy then that’s what he should be arguing and providing reasons why he thinks it’s the right business move.

    Personally I think it’s a good move by Apple, although am unsure of the benefits to me - can I cast games to the TV? There’s a lot of app specific support like Netflix or YouTube that casts to my LG TV already. 

    I have a feelimg though though that if the analysts and WSJ were demanding that Apple open up then DED would be penning a polemic about why Apple would never do that, if he hasn’t already. 
    Ben Thompson maxes good point on his podcast that it makes sense for Apple to push content as wide as possible, especially content that is not exclusive to Apple. I agree. But I still think it’s an open question as to whether Apple should become a media company in the first place. I see a lot of discussion around distribution strategy but very little on if this is the right overall strategy. I think of Apple as a product company and to me original content seems less like an Apple product and more like Apple has a shit ton of money and this is something they decided to throw it at.
    Apple IS a media company. One of the biggest. 
    Movies, TV shows, music, podcasts and books. Remember?
    Reselling other people’s content doesn’t make you a media company. Going by that logic Target was a media company because they sold CDs and DVDs.
    williamlondonmac_128muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 69 of 74
    asdasd said:
    Anyone who thinks this isn’t a significant shift in strategy is blind. And stop bringing up iPod. The Mac in the early 2000s was nothing like iOS is today. The only way Apple was going to grow iPod (and iTunes) sales was via Windows. That is absolutely not the case today. Of course if Apple is building something to compete with Netflix/Amazon/HBO then yeah that services needs to be everywhere. But that is a strategy shift.

    The latest episode of Ben Thompson’s excellent podcast explains it well.

    https://exponent.fm/episode-158-a-significant-shift/

    If DED thinks this is the right strategy then that’s what he should be arguing and providing reasons why he thinks it’s the right business move.

    Personally I think it’s a good move by Apple, although am unsure of the benefits to me - can I cast games to the TV? There’s a lot of app specific support like Netflix or YouTube that casts to my LG TV already. 

    I have a feelimg though though that if the analysts and WSJ were demanding that Apple open up then DED would be penning a polemic about why Apple would never do that, if he hasn’t already. 
    Ben Thompson maxes good point on his podcast that it makes sense for Apple to push content as wide as possible, especially content that is not exclusive to Apple. I agree. But I still think it’s an open question as to whether Apple should become a media company in the first place. I see a lot of discussion around distribution strategy but very little on if this is the right overall strategy. I think of Apple as a product company and to me original content seems less like an Apple product and more like Apple has a shit ton of money and this is something they decided to throw it at.
    Apple IS a media company. One of the biggest. 
    Movies, TV shows, music, podcasts and books. Remember?
    Reselling other people’s content doesn’t make you a media company. Going by that logic Target was a media company because they sold CDs and DVDs.
    Then who is that is a player?  Amazon? They do the same thing and make some original content, but most of their sales is other people’s content.

    I don’t really know of a media company that sells their own content directly. They don’t want to invest in the infrastructure. They just want to be paid. 
    williamlondon
  • Reply 70 of 74
    tbornottbornot Posts: 107member
    I think Apple gave Visio first dibs on AirPlay in return for allowing Apple to use their TVs to install AMD video cards for their top secret run at the money stream from the X Box.
  • Reply 71 of 74
    As I said on ped30.com, I have to say, some of the fun of reading a DED article is reading the accompanying comments. Sure, there are knucklehead comments, but there are also some that are well reasoned discourses. Those are the ones worth wading through the relatively shallow layer of muck for.
    edited January 13
  • Reply 72 of 74
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,427member
    avon b7 said:
    asdasd said:
    Anyone who thinks this isn’t a significant shift in strategy is blind. And stop bringing up iPod. The Mac in the early 2000s was nothing like iOS is today. The only way Apple was going to grow iPod (and iTunes) sales was via Windows. That is absolutely not the case today. Of course if Apple is building something to compete with Netflix/Amazon/HBO then yeah that services needs to be everywhere. But that is a strategy shift.

    The latest episode of Ben Thompson’s excellent podcast explains it well.

    https://exponent.fm/episode-158-a-significant-shift/

    If DED thinks this is the right strategy then that’s what he should be arguing and providing reasons why he thinks it’s the right business move.

    Personally I think it’s a good move by Apple, although am unsure of the benefits to me - can I cast games to the TV? There’s a lot of app specific support like Netflix or YouTube that casts to my LG TV already. 

    I have a feelimg though though that if the analysts and WSJ were demanding that Apple open up then DED would be penning a polemic about why Apple would never do that, if he hasn’t already. 
    Ben Thompson maxes good point on his podcast that it makes sense for Apple to push content as wide as possible, especially content that is not exclusive to Apple. I agree. But I still think it’s an open question as to whether Apple should become a media company in the first place. I see a lot of discussion around distribution strategy but very little on if this is the right overall strategy. I think of Apple as a product company and to me original content seems less like an Apple product and more like Apple has a shit ton of money and this is something they decided to throw it at.
    Apple IS a media company. One of the biggest. 
    Movies, TV shows, music, podcasts and books. Remember?
    Apple isn't a media company just yet IMO. At present it is simply a reseller of licenced content. That will change when Apple begins selling its own home grown content or signing contracts with creatives for inclusion of original content in its services (which should be platform agnostic in my view).
    That is correct. Nobody who understands the business defines a media company as a reseller of third party content.

    A media company has to produce its own content, as well as market and distribute it. Disney is perhaps the largest media company with several networks of exclusive Disney content. But all the major networks produce their own content as well as buy content from others. ABC/Disney (and now Fox), CBS/AllAccess, NBC/Universal, Warner Bros./CBS/CW, WB/DC, Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, HBO, AMC, etc. This has actually been going on for a while, as media companies slowly expand their reach. All have invested heavily in distribution networks, both traditional and digital, and the push to digital is on currently thanks to the inroads both Netflix and Amazon have made in such a short time. Almost none of the media companies offer only exclusively creative content; they all offer a mix of their own and third party content. But with both Disney and AT&T launching major streaming platforms this fall, that’s going to start changing.

    Apple is going the Amazon, Netflix route, and they almost have to due to the lack of originally created and owned content. Disney on the other hand now has their catalogue, Marvel, Lucas, and now Fox, they may be the first to offer exclusively owned original content without licensing any third party “filler” content. ATT won’t be far behind with the Warner/DC/HBO/Turner family of content. CBS has also recently invested heavily in All Access as an exclusive original content platform. No media company is sitting back resting on their laurels just looking to get paid by someone else to distribute their content, and that hasn’t been true for a very long time. Ironically, in that context Apple is the company who most resembles that allegation, as they take a percentage of everything sold on their platform, without creating any of it. In other words, bearing very little of the risk, while reaping many of the rewards. Now that’s changing.

    Given Steve Job’s claim in his book that he’d cracked the TV interface, I’m looking forward to see how Apple enters the original content field, whether they revolutionize how the content is consumed, or whether it’s just a clone of Amazon, Netflix and Hulu. One thing is for sure iTunes has never been the answer.
    edited January 13 muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 73 of 74
    bulk001bulk001 Posts: 478member
    I would disagree with the author’s thesis and see this as a a massive strategy reversal to the walled garden. I don’t think it is a bad thing but clearly they are looking to find ways to generate revenue off hardware that they did not make. 
    avon b7williamlondon
Sign In or Register to comment.