Relative to the revenue generated from millions of Prime memberships, yeah, pretty much nothing.
Note: estimate of between 40 and 60 million current U.S. Prime memberships depending on source.
I thought Amazon was losing money? Then building an app so that they can lose more money isn't cost effective.
I feel like this is a joke that went over my head. They're about to buy a fleet of container ships and cargo planes, and your argument against building an app is that it isn't cost effective?
I thought Amazon was losing money? Then building an app so that they can lose more money isn't cost effective.
I feel like this is a joke that went over my head. They're about to buy a fleet of container ships and cargo planes, and your argument against building an app is that it isn't cost effective?
Roku seems to be cutting better deals since they have no ulterior motives as a small company. Until this changes, Apple TV isn't the future of TV anymore than Roku is the future of TV and Roku seems to have the edge so far.
Pay $50 for the Roku stick, get everything, or pay $140 for an Apple TV and get some things.
Everything for $50? Does Roku support AirPlay from iOS and OS X devices, streaming of iTunes content including movies and music, Apple Music, iTunes Match, and Photos integration? My Apple TV is hooked into my home theatre systems and is the primary and best music playback system in my house. I didn't realize Roku provided all of these tightly integrated Apple ecosystem functions for only $50.... hmmm.
Yes, an Apple TV is the only place to get those features so I concede I wasn't using the term "everything" literally. Of course you're a casualty of putting all your eggs into one company's ecosystem (one that is notoriously walled off) and then being forced into sub-optimal products like the Apple TV that can't strike deals like their competitors can.
HBO, Netflix, YouTube, not to mention iTunes and the ability to rent or buy pretty much anything, and also the ability to have a little Amazon app on you iPhone and stream directly to the AppleTV for big-screen-viewing anyway. Honestly, this is a ridiculous argument from Bezos. He surely pays that 30% to have iPad and iPhone apps for Amazon Prime?!
However (and as a UK user), Amazon Prime is not a great content app - much of what is listed, albeit with pretty images and a good search/recommendation engine, is not available online and only "on Amazon.com", meaning you have to actively look for the little 'Prime' symbol in the top corner of the content image - this is not a great UI..
Not having Amazon Video is one of the principal reasons my ATV4 is collecting dust.
Since Apple didn't exactly accommodate developers quickly porting their current iOS app code bases to TVOS (no local persistent data storage aside from nsuserdefaults, no webkit) they really need to bring as many high-value apps to ATV4 as they can, even if that means cutting a deal with Amazon.
Dude, Amazon Videos suck. I probably used it twice in 4 years as Prime member. I used Netflix and Hulu most of the time. Seriously, with Sling TV, Netflix and OTA antenna, you ain't need anything else!
Some of you are delusional here. Bash Amazon all you want but the reality is that Apple is a completely inferior solution here and they are keeping developers and apps off the platform that could help close the gap.
My AppleTV is the least used streaming box in my house. It isn't even just because of Amazon. As others noted apps like SlingTV are also not available and the point is they are available on the other platforms.
You need to spend a considerable amount of money on Apple just to even get the ability to properly download and manage apps on an Apple TV at this stage.
Amazon Fire Stick costs $40. Roku Streaming Stick costs $50. Apple's four year old third generation Apple TV is available for $69 and you cannot download or manage any services on it.
Most people have Prime because they bought it for the shipping. However regardless of Amazon, my Apple TV box is well behind the times. My Roku and Fire sticks simply allow more access to more services, allow me to manage my channels better and get used a lot more.
My top services are Netflix, Amazon Prime, SlingTV and Pluto. Apple TV has two of those four and Pluto has to also withhold content due to Apple licensing issues. (So it seriously must be an Amazon issue right?) All of those services work with my other two boxes, Amazon and Roku.
Not having Amazon Video is one of the principal reasons my ATV4 is collecting dust.
Since Apple didn't exactly accommodate developers quickly porting their current iOS app code bases to TVOS (no local persistent data storage aside from nsuserdefaults, no webkit) they really need to bring as many high-value apps to ATV4 as they can, even if that means cutting a deal with Amazon.
Dude, Amazon Videos suck. I probably used it twice in 4 years as Prime member. I used Netflix and Hulu most of the time. Seriously, with Sling TV, Netflix and OTA antenna, you ain't need anything else!
Is this comment about 'Amazon sucking' about movies or TV shows or both? I admit haven't really found any of these streaming services much use for movies but both Netflix and Amazon Prime have been an endless source of (for my taste at least and my wife who watches totally different shows to me lol) good TV series I never saw the first time around on cable. Specifically on Amazon Prime I am enjoying several series, Rome and True Blood as well as countless ones on Netflix. Given AP is free (well I'd have it any way simply for the great shipping and returns system) what's not to like? I do really like the UI on AP it's very intuitive.
When asked whether Apple's customary 30 percent take of all App Store purchases is a factor in negotiations, Bezos said that "private business decisions should stay private."
Translation: Yes.
Translation from "Bezosspeak": That's what I want you to think so we don't look like the bad guy.
Amazon could easily do what they have done on iOS they want more control at the expense of their users and do to TV what they have done to books. I canceled my Prime long ago and don't miss it.
I feel like this is a joke that went over my head. They're about to buy a fleet of container ships and cargo planes, and your argument against building an app is that it isn't cost effective?
It's obvious that it is since they haven't.
I see. Well feel to carry on drinking Bezos' kool-aid.
It's ridiculous that it's not "acceptable" to put an Instant Video app on Apple TV, but it's perfectly fine for iOS. Why not make only an app that lets you stream your purchases and Prime Video like the iOS app if they don't want to give a cut to Apple?
Since Apple doesn't charge developers a cent to have their video subscription services on AppleTV, we can see Amazon's idea of "acceptable business terms", involves either handing over iTunes account information or paying Amazon a stipend.
It's stupid.. if they don't want to sell content with the cut to Apple why don't they just do what they've done for YEARS on iOS and make it only for streaming Prime Video and accessing your Amazon Video library.. probably because it will make the Fire TV more useless than it already is!
Since Apple doesn't charge developers a cent to have their video subscription services on AppleTV, we can see Amazon's idea of "acceptable business terms", involves either handing over iTunes account information or paying Amazon a stipend.
It's stupid.. if they don't want to sell content with the cut to Apple why don't they just do what they've done for YEARS on iOS and make it only for streaming Prime Video and accessing your Amazon Video library.. probably because it will make the Fire TV more useless than it already is!
Everyone is assuming that's all it is. It may be but as neither Apple nor Google has chosen to comment no one knows. We're guessing.
Since Apple doesn't charge developers a cent to have their video subscription services on AppleTV, we can see Amazon's idea of "acceptable business terms", involves either handing over iTunes account information or paying Amazon a stipend.
It's stupid.. if they don't want to sell content with the cut to Apple why don't they just do what they've done for YEARS on iOS and make it only for streaming Prime Video and accessing your Amazon Video library.. probably because it will make the Fire TV more useless than it already is!
Maybe the issue is weakness on Apple's side. Apple is a fourth place streaming solution. This is not a situation like on the iPhone where Apple has 95% of the profits and a decent chunk of the market and where they are innovating. They are expensive and lagging behind the competition. Apple's model used to be to sell content. We remember Steve Jobs proclaiming that people didn't want to rent their content. Right or wrong, the times have changed. Apple has no video streaming service. I'm of the opinion that their music streaming service has been underwhelming as well.
Apple is not the leader here in innovation, marketshare or profits. They are not the most innovative streaming box. They do not have the most marketshare. They collect no profits from videostreaming.
How are they in a position to dictate anything? They need Amazon more than Amazon needs them. Apple can declare they should set the terms but they haven't been hitting homeruns and crafting solutions that allow their age old demands for a long time. Apple TV will end up like iBooks if Apple doesn't wise up.
Since Apple doesn't charge developers a cent to have their video subscription services on AppleTV, we can see Amazon's idea of "acceptable business terms", involves either handing over iTunes account information or paying Amazon a stipend.
It's stupid.. if they don't want to sell content with the cut to Apple why don't they just do what they've done for YEARS on iOS and make it only for streaming Prime Video and accessing your Amazon Video library.. probably because it will make the Fire TV more useless than it already is!
That theory might hold water if Amazon Video wasn't on every other streamer. It's on Roku, smart TVs of every brand, Blu ray players that have built in steamers, and the gaming consoles.
It's stupid.. if they don't want to sell content with the cut to Apple why don't they just do what they've done for YEARS on iOS and make it only for streaming Prime Video and accessing your Amazon Video library.. probably because it will make the Fire TV more useless than it already is!
Maybe the issue is weakness on Apple's side. Apple is a fourth place streaming solution. This is not a situation like on the iPhone where Apple has 95% of the profits and a decent chunk of the market and where they are innovating. They are expensive and lagging behind the competition. Apple's model used to be to sell content. We remember Steve Jobs proclaiming that people didn't want to rent their content. Right or wrong, the times have changed. Apple has no video streaming service. I'm of the opinion that their music streaming service has been underwhelming as well.
Apple is not the leader here in innovation, marketshare or profits. They are not the most innovative streaming box. They do not have the most marketshare. They collect no profits from videostreaming.
How are they in a position to dictate anything? They need Amazon more than Amazon needs them. Apple can declare they should set the terms but they haven't been hitting homeruns and crafting solutions that allow their age old demands for a long time. Apple TV will end up like iBooks if Apple doesn't wise up.
The only reason that Apple doesn't have a streaming service is that Apple is unwilling to negotiate anything less than "acceptable business terms" licensing of content; i.e., Apple actually wants to generate income off of streaming. This isn't even conjecture; it's negotiations have been newsworthy since 2015. The fact that Samsung is now pushing ads on its Smart TV's indicates that the hardware margins in home theater are fading fast; how will the streaming box manufacturers survive as margins decrease?
As for the innovation in the Apple TV, it's right where it needs to be at this point in time, and when Apple has infrastructure is in place to push 4K content, higher performance gaming, and always on Sire, then we'll see another revision of the Apple TV. Yeah, it's expensive, but it does have more inherent capabilities than the bulk of the competition.
You probably are aware that Apple is engaged in a large buildout of infrastructure that will likely be targeted at media streaming, rather than their current reliance on third party solutions like AWS. More to the point, Apple has time, money, and motivation to continue improving it's media services. All that's left is the negotiations on content, and I'm sure they are ongoing.
I'm wating for Amazon before I opt for the AppleTV myself. I have 2 AppleTV 3s and a pair of ROKU for streaming Amazon in both the living room and the bedroom. AirPlay works as well when the wifi isn't flaky. But ROKU's are cheap and they appear to have the patent on that ultra handy EarPod connection in the remote. Great for late night watching.
Amazon does have some very good original programing, by the way. And if you are an Amazon junky, you probably already pay for "Prime" for the expedited shipping.
Comments
Make a basic Amazon Video app w/out purchasing for now -- just to give customers an ATV native app. Figure out the rest later.
My AppleTV is the least used streaming box in my house. It isn't even just because of Amazon. As others noted apps like SlingTV are also not available and the point is they are available on the other platforms.
You need to spend a considerable amount of money on Apple just to even get the ability to properly download and manage apps on an Apple TV at this stage.
Amazon Fire Stick costs $40. Roku Streaming Stick costs $50. Apple's four year old third generation Apple TV is available for $69 and you cannot download or manage any services on it.
Most people have Prime because they bought it for the shipping. However regardless of Amazon, my Apple TV box is well behind the times. My Roku and Fire sticks simply allow more access to more services, allow me to manage my channels better and get used a lot more.
My top services are Netflix, Amazon Prime, SlingTV and Pluto. Apple TV has two of those four and Pluto has to also withhold content due to Apple licensing issues. (So it seriously must be an Amazon issue right?) All of those services work with my other two boxes, Amazon and Roku.
Apple is not the leader here in innovation, marketshare or profits. They are not the most innovative streaming box. They do not have the most marketshare. They collect no profits from videostreaming.
How are they in a position to dictate anything? They need Amazon more than Amazon needs them. Apple can declare they should set the terms but they haven't been hitting homeruns and crafting solutions that allow their age old demands for a long time. Apple TV will end up like iBooks if Apple doesn't wise up.
As for the innovation in the Apple TV, it's right where it needs to be at this point in time, and when Apple has infrastructure is in place to push 4K content, higher performance gaming, and always on Sire, then we'll see another revision of the Apple TV. Yeah, it's expensive, but it does have more inherent capabilities than the bulk of the competition.
You probably are aware that Apple is engaged in a large buildout of infrastructure that will likely be targeted at media streaming, rather than their current reliance on third party solutions like AWS. More to the point, Apple has time, money, and motivation to continue improving it's media services. All that's left is the negotiations on content, and I'm sure they are ongoing.
Amazon does have some very good original programing, by the way. And if you are an Amazon junky, you probably already pay for "Prime" for the expedited shipping.