One show Apple has in the pipeline I'm really looking forward to is Masters of the Air. That's the third installment of the WW2 miniseries Hanks & Spielberg have done. Band of Brothers and The Pacific are both one of the best miniseries ever imo so I have no doubt Masters of the Air will be just as good.
Yes, that is the show that I am most looking forward too also, as I love the BOB miniseries.
I’ve had it since I bought my Apple TV 4K (a month. I haven’t watched a single thing. There is just nothing that jumps out at me. They desperately need a content library.
apple ][ said: Disney has the Mandalorian. I think that many people signed up to Disney just to watch that one show.
50 million subscribers isn't the result of the Mandalorian. It's the result of a back catalog featuring decades of Disney, Star Wars, and Marvel entertainment that people were already sold on. In the future, you might be able to give more weight to Disney's new material, but not for a service that just launched. Like I said, comparing Disney+ to Apple TV+ is kind of pointless in the near term.
Plus, most Disney+ Original shows are quite bad, aside from Mandalorian. Back catalog is disney+’ specialty, originals will have to wait a while.
Antenna is a smallish marketing company with no apparent expertise in streaming media statistics, and no evidence on their site of any previous studies in that arena. The name is no indication of their areas of interest. They are not a media industry research company even if the name might imply that.
My personal guess is they are using this as a PR opportunity to get their company more recognition, boost revenues in a trying environment. That's what their business does. IMO It wasn't intended to be a thorough and well-vetted study, it was simply using the Apple name and the cachet it brings for marketing Antenna as a company. Looks like it was effective. https://www.antennagroup.com/about/antenna
apple ][ said: Disney has the Mandalorian. I think that many people signed up to Disney just to watch that one show.
50 million subscribers isn't the result of the Mandalorian. It's the result of a back catalog featuring decades of Disney, Star Wars, and Marvel entertainment that people were already sold on. In the future, you might be able to give more weight to Disney's new material, but not for a service that just launched. Like I said, comparing Disney+ to Apple TV+ is kind of pointless in the near term.
Accurate. The totality of offerings (and especially those things I want to watch or plan to watch at some point) is what has convinced me that my 1-year subscription to Disney+ has been worth it. I’m most likely going to cancel my currently free Apple TV+ subscription when it expires.
FWIW I haven't seen a bad show yet on AppleTV+. Some are not of interest to me, but every single thing I've sampled has been —without exception — top-quality story-telling, with great casts, beautifully shot/edited, and of the highest quality in other areas. This doesn't mean you have to like it, but if you appreciate the craft of good television and high-quality original programming that doesn't have to be 90 percent from the UK/PBS, then I think you'll easily find $5/month worth of stuff to enjoy. And since you're buying Apple gear anyway and it comes with a free year, why not take advantage?
As for the people above who have posted that they don't want any "politics" or "preaching" -- this is code for "this show had better not challenge my pre-set (and probably bigoted) beliefs in any way." I like shows with perspective (it's sort of the thing that creates drama, conflict, and plot), and I am often interested in shows that challenge me in various ways (intellectually, emotionally, religiously, or politically). Clearly I'm the weirdo, but I seem to learn a lot that way.
FWIW I haven't seen a bad show yet on AppleTV+. Some are not of interest to me, but every single thing I've sampled has been —without exception — top-quality story-telling, with great casts, beautifully shot/edited, and of the highest quality in other areas. This doesn't mean you have to like it, but if you appreciate the craft of good television and high-quality original programming that doesn't have to be 90 percent from the UK/PBS, then I think you'll easily find $5/month worth of stuff to enjoy. And since you're buying Apple gear anyway and it comes with a free year, why not take advantage?
As for the people above who have posted that they don't want any "politics" or "preaching" -- this is code for "this show had better not challenge my pre-set (and probably bigoted) beliefs in any way." I like shows with perspective (it's sort of the thing that creates drama, conflict, and plot), and I am often interested in shows that challenge me in various ways (intellectually, emotionally, religiously, or politically). Clearly I'm the weirdo, but I seem to learn a lot that way.
Best comment yet on this story. My kids were watching Ghost Writer on the weekend and it was very obvious that the production quality and acting were far above the quality of most children's programing. Apple's approach for quality over quantity will definitely keep me subscribing. I know that not every show they produce will be suited to my personal tastes, but the ones that are will make it more than worth the small expense.
As to your second point. I'm not sure they will appreciate it when you state the obvious like that.
As for the people above who have posted that they don't want any "politics" or "preaching" -- this is code for "this show had better not challenge my pre-set (and probably bigoted) beliefs in any way."
It can mean that but it's mainly about content that is produced with that intention. The intention behind movies like Indiana Jones, Jurassic Park, Back to the Future, Avengers and so on is to entertain. It's not 'I am <insert identity or social movement> and here's my story'. For people who are more tolerant to that content, it's not new. For people who are less tolerant of it, they likely won't watch it. Some will and may or may not have their opinions changed by it. But it's not considered leading content in the entertainment industry because it doesn't have a primary motive to entertain.
Apple has always strived to be the best in every field they participate in and almost always accomplished it and they've done it by delivering the best experience that the target audience expects. The target audience for content expects the best form of entertainment and if they were meeting those expectations, these numbers would reflect that. It's not an either/or scenario, pushing good entertainment doesn't come at the expense of other content, most platforms have a mix of content. Apple is in the best possible position to do the best out of any media platform because of their financial position. Most other platforms (music and video) are operating on very thin margins. All they have to do is make good decisions about the content they buy.
Some content they have is good, some is in the pipeline and it's still a new service but it has to be better than the others to avoid being a loss-making service. It can probably work fine running at a loss as it adds value to the hardware sales but still better if it was a service compelling enough for people to choose instead of another.
I think they're missing a trick not merging iTunes Movies and Apple TV+. They don't even have to lift a finger, just make their movie service subscription-based and take away the barrier of having to make a purchase for each movie. People who buy Apple products spend thousands on hardware, why would they not spend even $50/month to be able to watch any movie, including just released movies, at any time. The amount can scale depending on how many movies people watch per month. If Netflix can offer thousands of movies on their subscription, Apple should be able to strike some rental deals with movie providers. A huge library of movies is one of the main attractions of the Netflix subscription. Their TV content is ok but it's nothing groundbreaking, it's pretty average for the most part, except the big ones like Friends, Breaking Bad and Game of Thrones and they didn't make those.
AppleTV+ badly needs to up its game. There’s some really good stuff there, but too much PC nonsense. And Apple needs to commit some serious cash to purchase a library. (There’s a reason Amazon has become so successful in this space).
Otherwise it’ll be written off in a few years as a ‘hobby’, or at best, it’ll follow the fate of News and limp along.
"PC nonsense" translation: LGBTQ, women, and people of color
Wrong. Orange is the New Black is very very non-PC. It is almost entirely women. Many of the lead roles are lesbians, some are bisexual, and there is a transgender woman in it too. Several more lead roles are black woman, amongst Asian women and many Hispanic women too. So no, "PC nonsense" doesn't mean "LGBTQ, women, and people of color". It means scared to offend. And boy, Netflix isn't scared to offend.
Who was talking about Netflix?
I was using Netflix/Orange is the new black as an example of a popular show that is very non-PC, whilst also being very diverse in its representation of society, and not scared to trample on the socially accepted politically correct norms; in other words as an example that PC is not intrinsically linked to "LGBTQ, women, and people of color". People are bored of PC crap and the last thing they want is to be told how they should be thinking. But right now, Cook and therefore AppleTV+ is about as PC as you could get.
Yes but Netflix has something for everyone. TV+ is Quite limited in appeal. I reckon a lot of people watched some stuff to start, and by now have largely forgotten to even pop in anymore. Perhaps “barren” is too string a word, but it’s close.
AppleTV+ badly needs to up its game. There’s some really good stuff there, but too much PC nonsense. And Apple needs to commit some serious cash to purchase a library. (There’s a reason Amazon has become so successful in this space).
Otherwise it’ll be written off in a few years as a ‘hobby’, or at best, it’ll follow the fate of News and limp along.
"PC nonsense" translation: LGBTQ, women, and people of color
Wrong. Orange is the New Black is very very non-PC. It is almost entirely women. Many of the lead roles are lesbians, some are bisexual, and there is a transgender woman in it too. Several more lead roles are black woman, amongst Asian women and many Hispanic women too. So no, "PC nonsense" doesn't mean "LGBTQ, women, and people of color". It means scared to offend. And boy, Netflix isn't scared to offend.
Who was talking about Netflix?
I was using Netflix/Orange is the new black as an example of a popular show that is very non-PC, whilst also being very diverse in its representation of society, and not scared to trample on the socially accepted politically correct norms; in other words as an example that PC is not intrinsically linked to "LGBTQ, women, and people of color". People are bored of PC crap and the last thing they want is to be told how they should be thinking. But right now, Cook and therefore AppleTV+ is about as PC as you could get.
Since you're not the OP, you're only speculating as to what they meant. I'm making my assumptions on patterns of actual behavior here in these forums.
What I see in ATV+'s current and upcoming lineup is a pretty wide assortment of content, and will only get moreso as they continue to expand their library. So to address your explanation: Which of this content, in your opinion, tells the viewer "how they should be thinking"?
Comments
My personal guess is they are using this as a PR opportunity to get their company more recognition, boost revenues in a trying environment. That's what their business does. IMO It wasn't intended to be a thorough and well-vetted study, it was simply using the Apple name and the cachet it brings for marketing Antenna as a company. Looks like it was effective.
https://www.antennagroup.com/about/antenna
As to your second point. I'm not sure they will appreciate it when you state the obvious like that.
Apple has always strived to be the best in every field they participate in and almost always accomplished it and they've done it by delivering the best experience that the target audience expects. The target audience for content expects the best form of entertainment and if they were meeting those expectations, these numbers would reflect that. It's not an either/or scenario, pushing good entertainment doesn't come at the expense of other content, most platforms have a mix of content. Apple is in the best possible position to do the best out of any media platform because of their financial position. Most other platforms (music and video) are operating on very thin margins. All they have to do is make good decisions about the content they buy.
Some content they have is good, some is in the pipeline and it's still a new service but it has to be better than the others to avoid being a loss-making service. It can probably work fine running at a loss as it adds value to the hardware sales but still better if it was a service compelling enough for people to choose instead of another.
I think they're missing a trick not merging iTunes Movies and Apple TV+. They don't even have to lift a finger, just make their movie service subscription-based and take away the barrier of having to make a purchase for each movie. People who buy Apple products spend thousands on hardware, why would they not spend even $50/month to be able to watch any movie, including just released movies, at any time. The amount can scale depending on how many movies people watch per month. If Netflix can offer thousands of movies on their subscription, Apple should be able to strike some rental deals with movie providers. A huge library of movies is one of the main attractions of the Netflix subscription. Their TV content is ok but it's nothing groundbreaking, it's pretty average for the most part, except the big ones like Friends, Breaking Bad and Game of Thrones and they didn't make those.
What I see in ATV+'s current and upcoming lineup is a pretty wide assortment of content, and will only get moreso as they continue to expand their library. So to address your explanation: Which of this content, in your opinion, tells the viewer "how they should be thinking"?