Apple TV+ versus Disney+ compared -- the streaming wars escalate

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 78
    mjtomlinmjtomlin Posts: 2,673member
    kmarei said:


    the killer app is now something that has a pretty front end (something like popcorn time)
    that pulls content from all the streaming packages you subscribe to, and shows it all on one interface
    without me needing to remember which package has what show
    i just click mandalorian, and it starts streaming
    exactly like popcorn time, but legally :)


    This is exactly how Apple is positioning the tv app... A bunch of subscription streaming "channels" and their content in one place. Where Apple offers their own "channel", tv+.
  • Reply 62 of 78
    mjtomlinmjtomlin Posts: 2,673member
    MacPro said:
    lkrupp said:
    In my opinion, right now, there is no comparison between TV+ and Disney+. Disney+ hits the ground with a huge catalog of blockbusters plus originals. TV+ starts out with a handful of originals, period. I subscribed  to TV+ and am in the seven day free period. After I watch everything I’m interested in I have to sit back and wait until something new comes out. I may wind up canceling before billing starts and do that waiting without the billing to see if the interest continues. Just IMHO.

    That said the low cost of Apple TV + having it along with Disney isn't too onerous.  Plus it is free for most people and maybe that offer will go on (would make sense IMHO for Apple to keep this for ever if it helps sell hardware) ...   I mean who doesn't buy at least one new Apple product every year? :) 

    While the promotion may go on for a while, I'm pretty sure it's only a one-time offer per Apple ID (or even Family Sharing group). If you buy 10 Apple products in the next 5 years, you'll still only get the initial free year of the service.
  • Reply 63 of 78
    mjtomlinmjtomlin Posts: 2,673member
    gatorguy said:
    kevin kee said:
    So far I am happy with AppleTV+ contents... But the biggest difference is that AppleTV+ seems like a service that has one purpose: to support Apple ecosystem/hardware.
    Obviously not. The AppleTV+ app is designed for the widest possible exposure and no one needs even a single piece of Apple gear to enjoy it. The content is available on the Roku platform, Amazon Fire Sticks, via Chromebooks, and directly via various web browsers. Anyone who wants to consume AppleTV+ content can do so without buying the first piece of Apple gear. 

    They aren't showing any indication this is meant only to support Apple's ecosystem and hardware.

    Eh. Actually it does. Just because Apple made it available on other platforms, doesn't mean it isn't primarily meant to support their own. Offering a free year for buying Apple hardware is a clear indication of that. Subscriptions are fleeting, owning and using a piece of hardware usually lasts much longer. This is obviously about drawing new people into Apple's ecosystem. And it is a brilliant move on Apple's part.

    Second, there isn't an AppleTV+ app. It's the AppleTV app. AppleTV+ is a channel available in the app along with channels from other content producers.
    edited November 2019
  • Reply 64 of 78
    mjtomlinmjtomlin Posts: 2,673member
    There's also two free episodes of "The Morning Show", and 1 free episode of "SEE" - no sign-up required.

    The Morning Show is great, especially love Reese Witherspoon, and I like their take on the #metoo movement -> accusation leads to instant guilt, and how everyone [over]reacts to it.

    I didn't think I'd be interested in "SEE", but after watching the first show, I liked it. I still think the whole premise is a bit ridiculous... humans without vision are like ducks without wings; sitting ducks... and nature would've eventually wiped humans off the face of the earth... but it's an alternate reality so it is interesting to watch how they manage to cope and deal with it.

    And as others have mentioned, neither of these are in no way "kid friendly". All those wining about those rumors, got it waaaay wrong.
  • Reply 65 of 78
    spice-boyspice-boy Posts: 1,450member
    gatorguy said:
    MacPro said:
    A new Verge article seems to agree with my premise that Apple TV+ maybe included with product purchases ongoing (not just temporarily)  and be similar to Amazon Prime in the sence that it is bundled with another service or in Apple's case another hardware product purchase.  That, IMHO is definitely the way to go for Apple.
    Do you think adding in free AppleTV+, about a $50 value, would be enough to drive additional hardware sales profits to make up the north of $6B cost of just producing this initial abbreviated content not including maintenance and distribution? The costs going forward will be going up, probably significantly. It doesn't seem like it would be a big draw for closing iPhone sales they otherwise wouldn't have.

    Perhaps bundling everything together for one fee, music movies and a device discount or something each year aka Amazon Prime makes sense, but on the surface offering AppleTV+ at no charge just for buying "something Apple" seems like a loss leader and Apple doesn't typically play there do they? Maybe the end game is driving Netflix out of business and decreasing the value of HBO to the point it gets sold off, making controlling the stack a little easier. 
    Apple is far far away from putting any of the other streaming services "out of business" and I doubt that is their goal. Tim wants to go to the Oscars. 
  • Reply 66 of 78
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,153member
    mjtomlin said:
    gatorguy said:
    kevin kee said:
    So far I am happy with AppleTV+ contents... But the biggest difference is that AppleTV+ seems like a service that has one purpose: to support Apple ecosystem/hardware.
    Obviously not. The AppleTV+ app is designed for the widest possible exposure and no one needs even a single piece of Apple gear to enjoy it. The content is available on the Roku platform, Amazon Fire Sticks, via Chromebooks, and directly via various web browsers. Anyone who wants to consume AppleTV+ content can do so without buying the first piece of Apple gear. 

    They aren't showing any indication this is meant only to support Apple's ecosystem and hardware.



    Second, there isn't an AppleTV+ app. It's the AppleTV app. AppleTV+ is a channel available in the app along with channels from other content producers.
    Yeah I have it. Glad you knew what I meant instead of getting confused. :)
    edited November 2019
  • Reply 67 of 78
    Zirlin said:
    I have an idea. Why don't we put all of these paid channels together on one bill? We could give it a name like...cable.
    So I used to pay about $50 for cable.... But I also paid $15 for HBO and $13 for Netflix (Netflix being Netflix, HBO having GoT and a couple of other things I watched). so about $78 a month.


    Now I pay $15 for Netflix, $15 for HBO, $5 for Apple TV (In a year), $7 for Disney (in 3 years). $42 a month for more TV than I can realistically watch. I couple cut one and still have too much TV. All there's I pay through iTunes and get discounted iTunes gift cards, but we won't factor those savings in for the sake of giving cable a chance to compete here...


    But here's an idea. Try to cancel your cable.... and then when you are done 2 hours later, post about that experience. The fact I can click a button and cancel is worth something too.
    SpamSandwichrezwits
  • Reply 68 of 78
    hexclockhexclock Posts: 1,240member
    revenant said:
    i see no irony that jeff goldblum used to do apple commercials and is now doing a show with national geographic of which disney is a controlling interest.


    That’s because it’s a coincidence, not an irony. Everyone uses that word wrong. 
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 69 of 78
    ireland said:
    The Apple TV app on iPhone is terrible.
    It ain’t great on the iPad either. Apple has its work cut out for it.
  • Reply 70 of 78
    Thrashman said:
    Hard to compare Oprah to iron man 
    or #metoo to Star Wars.
    Give it a fucking rest already.


    rezwitsSoli
  • Reply 71 of 78
    OK, I signed up for both Apple TV+ a few weeks ago and I signed up for Disney+ last night. Disney’s service is absolutely the big winner here, especially for families. Everything within their service is free and there’s no chance the kids could be exposed to either adult content (except for mild cursing and violence on The Simpsons, Marvel and Star Wars).

    And it’s now even more clear to me that Apple must buy a studio with a large library of content in order to be competitive. Sony Pictures, MGM, Turner Classics, one of the major broadcast TV networks... any with a large library full of great movies or shows which would give them an anchor to hold onto customers once the free 1-year trials start to end. It would take Apple 60 years to catch up otherwise.
    edited November 2019
  • Reply 72 of 78
    I don't think it's a "war".

    It's not like I have $10 allotted for streaming services, and only one can get my $$$.  In the end, I think I'll get both, and just basic TV off the air.  I live close enough to the Awendaw towers to get clear digital signals.
  • Reply 73 of 78
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,712member
    mjtomlin said:
    MacPro said:
    lkrupp said:
    In my opinion, right now, there is no comparison between TV+ and Disney+. Disney+ hits the ground with a huge catalog of blockbusters plus originals. TV+ starts out with a handful of originals, period. I subscribed  to TV+ and am in the seven day free period. After I watch everything I’m interested in I have to sit back and wait until something new comes out. I may wind up canceling before billing starts and do that waiting without the billing to see if the interest continues. Just IMHO.

    That said the low cost of Apple TV + having it along with Disney isn't too onerous.  Plus it is free for most people and maybe that offer will go on (would make sense IMHO for Apple to keep this for ever if it helps sell hardware) ...   I mean who doesn't buy at least one new Apple product every year? :) 

    While the promotion may go on for a while, I'm pretty sure it's only a one-time offer per Apple ID (or even Family Sharing group). If you buy 10 Apple products in the next 5 years, you'll still only get the initial free year of the service.
    I don't know obviously but I have a hunch Tim will keep this going at one product a year.  We'll see :)
  • Reply 74 of 78
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,712member

    hexclock said:
    revenant said:
    i see no irony that jeff goldblum used to do apple commercials and is now doing a show with national geographic of which disney is a controlling interest.


    That’s because it’s a coincidence, not an irony. Everyone uses that word wrong. 
    Nah ... it's a good agent ;)
  • Reply 75 of 78
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,712member
    gatorguy said:
    kevin kee said:
    So far I am happy with AppleTV+ contents... But the biggest difference is that AppleTV+ seems like a service that has one purpose: to support Apple ecosystem/hardware.
    Obviously not. The AppleTV+ app is designed for the widest possible exposure and no one needs even a single piece of Apple gear to enjoy it. The content is available on the Roku platform, Amazon Fire Sticks, via Chromebooks, and directly via various web browsers. Anyone who wants to consume AppleTV+ content can do so without buying the first piece of Apple gear. 

    They aren't showing any indication this is meant only to support Apple's ecosystem and hardware.
    Agreed.
  • Reply 76 of 78
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,712member
    gatorguy said:
    MacPro said:
    A new Verge article seems to agree with my premise that Apple TV+ maybe included with product purchases ongoing (not just temporarily)  and be similar to Amazon Prime in the sence that it is bundled with another service or in Apple's case another hardware product purchase.  That, IMHO is definitely the way to go for Apple.
    Do you think adding in free AppleTV+, about a $50 value, would be enough to drive additional hardware sales profits to make up the north of $6B cost of just producing this initial abbreviated content not including maintenance and distribution? The costs going forward will be going up, probably significantly. It doesn't seem like it would be a big draw for closing iPhone sales they otherwise wouldn't have.

    Perhaps bundling everything together for one fee, music movies and a device discount or something each year aka Amazon Prime makes sense, but on the surface offering AppleTV+ at no charge just for buying "something Apple" seems like a loss leader and Apple doesn't typically play there do they? Maybe the end game is driving Netflix out of business and decreasing the value of HBO to the point it gets sold off, making controlling the stack a little easier. 
    To revisit this, I am not saying it will drive hardware sales or didn't mean to, I meant people buy the hardware anyway and Tim I suspect is wanting an excuse to give AppleTV + away for free to all that do.  As we later mentioned, long term strategy perhaps.  As others have mentioned Apple absorbing Sony would be something I would not see has a bad move.  Not just for their TV/Film libraries but camera technology too.  Funny thing is I have been hoping Apple would buy Sony for a very long time indeed and I doubt it will ever happen.  Talking of Sony, I see my Sony 200-600mm G lens shipped today ... at last!  :)
    edited November 2019
  • Reply 77 of 78
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,153member
    MacPro said:
    gatorguy said:
    MacPro said:
    A new Verge article seems to agree with my premise that Apple TV+ maybe included with product purchases ongoing (not just temporarily)  and be similar to Amazon Prime in the sence that it is bundled with another service or in Apple's case another hardware product purchase.  That, IMHO is definitely the way to go for Apple.
    Do you think adding in free AppleTV+, about a $50 value, would be enough to drive additional hardware sales profits to make up the north of $6B cost of just producing this initial abbreviated content not including maintenance and distribution? The costs going forward will be going up, probably significantly. It doesn't seem like it would be a big draw for closing iPhone sales they otherwise wouldn't have.

    Perhaps bundling everything together for one fee, music movies and a device discount or something each year aka Amazon Prime makes sense, but on the surface offering AppleTV+ at no charge just for buying "something Apple" seems like a loss leader and Apple doesn't typically play there do they? Maybe the end game is driving Netflix out of business and decreasing the value of HBO to the point it gets sold off, making controlling the stack a little easier. 
      Talking of Sony, I see my Sony 200-600mm G lens shipped today ... at last!  :)
    Cool! So where do you [plan using it? You've never hit me as a nature guy. 
  • Reply 78 of 78
    gatorguy said:
    MacPro said:
    gatorguy said:
    MacPro said:
    A new Verge article seems to agree with my premise that Apple TV+ maybe included with product purchases ongoing (not just temporarily)  and be similar to Amazon Prime in the sence that it is bundled with another service or in Apple's case another hardware product purchase.  That, IMHO is definitely the way to go for Apple.
    Do you think adding in free AppleTV+, about a $50 value, would be enough to drive additional hardware sales profits to make up the north of $6B cost of just producing this initial abbreviated content not including maintenance and distribution? The costs going forward will be going up, probably significantly. It doesn't seem like it would be a big draw for closing iPhone sales they otherwise wouldn't have.

    Perhaps bundling everything together for one fee, music movies and a device discount or something each year aka Amazon Prime makes sense, but on the surface offering AppleTV+ at no charge just for buying "something Apple" seems like a loss leader and Apple doesn't typically play there do they? Maybe the end game is driving Netflix out of business and decreasing the value of HBO to the point it gets sold off, making controlling the stack a little easier. 
      Talking of Sony, I see my Sony 200-600mm G lens shipped today ... at last!  :)
    Cool! So where do you [plan using it? You've never hit me as a nature guy. 
    Everybody close your curtains.
    Carnage
Sign In or Register to comment.