Bloomberg attacks Apple TV as failing to be "a groundbreaking, iPhone-caliber product"

13567

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 122
    The only thing that really matters in this segment is content. Without good deals in place a competitor is dead in the water.
    There is a lot of content on the Apple TV, what other streaming box maker puts their own content on the box. Its all about the 
    apps and there are plenty of them on the Apple TV. Since I dropped Cable/Sat, I have been streaming Playstation VUE and Directv Now and 
    other apps on four different Apple TVs and I am saving a lot money...I think anyone is going to do anything on these streaming boxes like 
    regular TV because those content owners will not let that mold be broken......
  • Reply 42 of 122
    irelandireland Posts: 17,798member
    ireland said:

    Where the Apple TV falls short is three-fold:

    1. Apple needs a better video strategy. And POTA and Carpool Karaoke is not it. They need to either buy Netflix or build a truly competitive Netflix competitor. If people may want to subscribe to music, people desperately want to subscribe to a TV and film plan.

    2. They need a first-party gaming controller at least as nice as the PS3 controller. It doesn't need to be included, but it needs to ready as a one click add-on at checkout and ready to be tested in stores with a big marketing push and a HUGE developer push behind it. You don't leave it to a third party to make your damn gaming controller.

    3. The regular remote control needs to be rethought. The touch area idea is sound. What's not sound is a TV controller that shatters if you drop it on a wooden floor. A TV controller shouldn't need a damn rubber third party case to be practical. And I think there's probably room for a couple more physical buttons on the remote to help with non-voice navigation. And more ergonomic and slightly larger.

    That is what Apple TV is lacking.
    1. Has Apple said that Planet of the Apps or Carpool Karaoke are the sum total of their original content strategy? No. They've said that it's a starting point for them.

    2. The 3rd party controllers are getting quite good. I have the SteelSeries Nimbus and the only thing I can think of that Apple could improve on would be the addition of the W1 chip for bluetooth. Is that a compelling enough addition for a game controller? Not sure it would have the same usability impact as it does with headphones.

    3. The remote isn't perfect, but it's a huge improvement on the previous Apple TV remote...touch control, accelerometer/gyroscope, Siri microphone. Apple is also allowing plenty of alternative input scenarios with keyboard support, game controllers, and iPhone/iPad input.
    I know the remote isn't perfect—it explodes when you drop it. A W1 chip isn't the point regarding gaming controller. The point is to take gaming seriously you must build your own damn dedicated gaming controller with a huge marketing a developer push around this—John Siracusa has said this and I totally agree. I never said CK & POTA are their total content strategy, I'm just more of a look at what they do not and what they say kind of guy. Re Apple TV content strategy I've an 8' beard.
    edited February 2017
  • Reply 43 of 122
    avon b7 said:
    I can't see the point of putting console sales in there.

    Consoles are not designed to be upgraded every two years and are aimed at a market that is infinitely smaller than the mobile phone market. They are not even designed as earnings providers but as earnings drivers.

    The point of the console market and games is that it is a mult-billion dollar industry in itself. Lots of people said Apple should have entered that market but they chose not to.

    The moment passed.
    Yes, it didn't make sense at all but Daniel always needs something to spin his article. Year after year the video game industry is a multi-billion dollar  money making machine that is only growing. Some games costing way more that the biggest movies to make. 
    ireland
  • Reply 44 of 122
    irelandireland Posts: 17,798member
    sog35 said:
    ireland said:
    sog35 said:
    BOTTOM LINE IS THIS: YOU CAN ONLY DO SO MUCH WITH A STREAMING BOX THAT COSTS $150 AND IS STUCK CONNECTED TO YOUR TV. 

    Now if AppleTV was a $400 product then you could expect something revolutionary. But it isn't.  It was mean to supplement your iPhone. Period.
    CEO Sog strikes again. CAPS prove he's right. Why not a $999 Apple TV Mr. Wall St.
    I'm saying people are expecting way too much for a streaming box that cost $150. They are expecting a $150 device to change the world, solve world hunger, and bring an end to war. Please.
    Right. CAPS.
    edited February 2017
  • Reply 45 of 122
    That remote, so sensitive to scrolling and stopping at exactly the place you want. Tested it at the Apple store, and because of it, I'll stick with the previous generation. Apple TV could be so much more with a better remote. Maybe get rid of touch on remote, and stick with a couple of buttons and air pointer.
  • Reply 46 of 122
    Why does a product have to be "groundbreaking" to be good? The Apple TV v3 that's currently in our house does the job just fine. Everybody is happy using it for what they want.
    macxpressbrucemc
  • Reply 47 of 122
    irelandireland Posts: 17,798member
    sog35 said:
    ireland said:
    There's nothing wrong with the Apple TV box. I've lots of 720p content on my 60" Kuro hanging on my large living room wall and it looks great—then again Kuro plasmas with their fuzzy pixels tend to make anything look great. The internal hardware isn't where it falls down.

    So for my situation and point of view I don't need 4K at all. The OS isn't the problem either. I like a simple app-laden Home screen. It's easy to understand and you have folders to categorise sets of apps for a clean entertainment UI desktop and you've voice search to solve the search thing.

    Where the Apple TV falls short is three-fold:

    1. Apple needs a better video strategy. And POTA and Carpool Karaoke is not it. They need to either buy Netflix or build a truly competitive Netflix competitor. If people may want to subscribe to music, people desperately want to subscribe to a TV and film plan.

    2. They need a first-party gaming controller at least as nice as the PS3 controller. It doesn't need to be included, but it needs to ready as a one click add-on at checkout and ready to be tested in stores with a big marketing push and a HUGE developer push behind it. You don't leave it to a third party to make your damn gaming controller.

    3. The regular remote control needs to be rethought. The touch area idea is sound. What's not sound is a TV controller that shatters if you drop it on a wooden floor. A TV controller shouldn't need a damn rubber third party case to be practical. And I think there's probably room for a couple more physical buttons on the remote to help with non-voice navigation. And more ergonomic and slightly larger.

    That is what Apple TV is lacking. A Netflix-like solution from Apple: I'd acquire Netflix. They are the solution. Creating a studio by itself will be too much of a distraction for Apple. Netflix is turn-key, provided they can keep most their content deals—with enough money anything is possible. A very good first party gaming controller. And a far better TV remote.

    And two years into sorting all that do a damn AIO TV on a subsidised contract and optionally as outright purchase.
    Oh look who's playing Apple CEO now?
    One difference between you and me is 6 months ago I wasn't trying to burn Tim at the stake. You've too much invested in Apple; your opinion is completely coloured. If you were a journalist you couldn't write about them honestly, or at all.
    edited February 2017
  • Reply 48 of 122
    ireland said:

    I know the remote isn't perfect—it explodes when you drop it. A W1 chip isn't the point regarding gaming controller. The point is to take gaming seriously you must build your own damn dedicated gaming controller with a huge marketing a developer push around this—John Siracusa has said this and I totally agree. I never said CK & POTA are their total content strategy, I'm just more of a look at what they do not and what they say kind of guy. Re Apple TV content strategy I've an 8' beard.
    Have you tried controllers like the SteelSeries Nimbus? The only thing missing vs. current generation console controllers is specialized "extras" like the touchpad on the PS4 controller or the headphone jack on the Xbox One. All of the standard controls are present: D-pad, dual thumbsticks, A/B/X/Y buttons, home button, dual shoulder buttons, dual triggers. Battery life is easily just as good as consoles, and the bluetooth works very well. I've been playing NBA 2K17 on the iPad Pro and the controller experience is the equivalent of using the PS4 controller with a PS4. There's nothing lacking there. 
  • Reply 49 of 122
    irelandireland Posts: 17,798member

    sog35 said:
    Why does a product have to be "groundbreaking" to be good? The Apple TV v3 that's currently in our house does the job just fine. Everybody is happy using it for what they want.
    exactly.

    The AppleTV4 was never meant to be ground breaking.
    What a weak argument. It's like the child who comes third in a race and says "yeah, but I wasn't really trying". You're actually making the Apple TV sound worse than it is with those kinds of comments.
    edited February 2017 brucemc
  • Reply 50 of 122
    dewmedewme Posts: 5,335member
    The only thing that really matters in this segment is content. Without good deals in place a competitor is dead in the water.
    Exactly, for both good and bad. On the good side, having most of your iTunes content instantly available on your TV or home theatre is great.  

    On the bad side, Apple and all other makers of similar home entertainment hubs and media players are totally at the mercy of the content owners. The perfect vision for the Apple TV is to be able to pick & choose only the TV and media content sources that I want to subscribe to, in an a-la-carte fashion based on personal preferences, have them always accessible whenever and wherever I want to consume them, and without commercial interruption. I also want to be able to subscribe and unsubscribe at-will. In other words allow me to cut out the networks, cable providers, content curators, and middlemen by paying for only what I want. Make it an on-demand My Network consisting only of my selected line-up of content that's not locked to any broadcast schedule or clock.  For folks who prefer to receive "free TV" it'll still be available and still be peppered with 25% constant interruptions and fixed broadcast schedule.

    As a device, the Apple TV is fine. You can nit pick details like the "which way is up?" ATV4 remote, the price, and the clunky user interface, but it is as good or better than comparable offerings from other vendors. I've never used it as a gaming platform so I can't weigh in on that aspect. I do wonder why there is no Safari app on Apple TV, especially with the iCloud productivity apps from Apple being quite decent. Seems like Safari on Apple TV would be a reasonable alternative to a ChromeBook for some situations, like classrooms. Sure, AirPlay mirroring works pretty well but there are times when all I want to do is hit the web from the sofa and don't want a Mac or iPad on my lap, just a lightweight BT keyboard. If the next ATV has integrated Safari I'll buy it on day 1. Maybe they sell it as a baby Mac Mini, i.e., Mac Nano.


    edited February 2017
  • Reply 51 of 122
    FatmanFatman Posts: 513member
    First off analysts are rarely experts. They are usually opinionated individuals that have financial interests for a stock to move either up or down, and will make their opinions public to sway sentiment in the direction of their stock position (aka manipulate price). I wouldn't waste my time attempting to argue a case against them.
    However, regarding the article, Apple TV -In my opinion - has the slickest interface of all streaming products, the worst remote, and lacks content it needs to be a mainstream product. It is not revolutionary. I think the 'living room' as we know it, is dying. Aside from a place with a big screen, it no longer serves the function it used to

    Apple is right in its strategy to continue with incremental gains in phones, and future AR products - with contact lenses based hardware being the holy grail - yes, you heard it here first from the Fatman!
  • Reply 52 of 122
    Hello,

    I've been an AppleTV user since the 2nd generation box came out.  I don't know about it being earth-shattering, but it sure did change my household.  I started out using it as a way to stream my movies off iTunes via HomeShare, then 2 years ago it matured enough where I discontinued my cable TV service.  And I like the platform enough where I've been replacing my box each time a new one comes out, and currently use the 4th generation box.  

    From where I sit, it isn't Apple that is failing to be transformative, but content providers who are standing in the way of the market evolving.  I believe the market is slowly but surely moving toward on demand streaming, but the legacy providers are resistant to that kind of change.  Cable companies resisting ala carte pricing models is one example (why should I pay for HGTV if I never watch it....?).  Similarly, if you want to stream content the default is to have an existing cable tv subscription.  True transformation isn't going to happen until that default model is shattered.  Apple can only push the string so far with that.  I really think that in time, content providers will face the same choice that smartphone makers faced ten years ago:  either adapt to Apple's vision, or watch your market share disappear.  But we aren't there yet, and won't be for some time.  Right now streaming packages from the major players (DirecTV Now....) tend to be repackagings of the cable tv model...pay a bunch of money for a bunch of channels.

    So I like what I'm seeing with AppleTV.  I think the TV app is a valiant effort in the face of resistant content providers and does have a lot of promise.  On the other hand, companies like Netflix aren't eager to just hand off customers to the TV app...they want to control the interface and user experience too.  

    Long way of saying, I didn't go into AppleTV expecting it to be earth-shattering, but it is a product that does exactly what I want it to do.  It has potential, but Apple is facing a different market in TV than it faced ten years ago with the iPhone.
    StrangeDaysdewmebrucemcpscooter63Rayz2016
  • Reply 53 of 122
    We were led to believe after 3 years and Steve's dying breath uttered "I solved the TV interface blah blah" statement, that we WERE expecting a "breakthrough" product through TV 4 

    Far from it - starting with: out of the box NOT being able to get sound. Can you say 2016 MacBook Pro "Touch Bar"?  Yep this nonsense of "nothing you have will now connect" started waaaaaaay back with TV alienating users ability to use their current devices. Come on... no sound is a big one no matter how much you now like TV 4. And to top it off the "fix" was NOT something you could just drive to BestBuy and buy, no it was so unique you had to order it online and wait for it to arrive?

    And all of this hassle was created because they removed the audio port for... yep you guessed it a USB-C port, but not because you could use it it was ONLY in case you had to bring it to the genus bar for repair. They removed the optical sound port for Genius Bar to get access to something that MIGHT break?  Well that's not a vote of confidence no matter what you think?

    ok that's that. 

    Next up the interface:  you have other boxes having the ability to stream and play 4K video - something Apple claimed was too "nitche" to even consider? This from the same company that took 5 years to get us 1080p on TV?  Hello?  Has no one at apple been to a Costco the past 2 -3 years??  The 4k TV's have been out for 3 "non computer upgrade cycles" at least . 

    So the new mac has 4 USB-C only because we need to "stay ahead of the curve", and no headphone jack on iPhone 7 (same reason) but they release a tv box specifically for a TV that doesn't offer something that's been on a tv for 2-3  years??  That shows me a lot about the team running its development of this device. 

    And then the user interface. Since the moment it was released, as a developer and beta tester I have bitched and complained about the scrolling options when looking at your OWN movies. One slight tiny movement of the finger throws you out of the "TITIES" column into the "UNWATCHED" column or "GENRES" column - then when you try to go back to where you were ("I almost made it to the letter "D") it makes me start over and over and over back to the letter "A". Seriously?  How hard would it be to make it an actual dedicated "non jumping" column for each topic?  One you stay in while scrolling downwards?  What a pain in the ass. And each beta request was met with "please send screen shots were not sure what you're describing?"  WTF?  Oh I sent screen shots but they ask I describe what each screen shot was for. So I made a damn movie and then I never heard from them ever again until one day I got a notice "this ticket is now closed as a dupicate@. When I asked what that meant I was told "weee not at liberty to discuss this". Huh?

    And it took 19 months to come up with even a slight "fix"?  Now at least when it "jumps columns", it At least tries to get closer to where you were in the 26 letter alphabet, but I hardly find this scrolling option "state of the art" or "groundbreaking". My 8 year old kid who mastered wii at 3 with smaller hands has no advantage either. Over and over he yell "Dad I can't get to Scooby-Doo it keeps jumping columns around "F" can you come do this?

    Now before someone jumps in and says "just use Siri!"  Yeah about that... Siri won't search through your shit, only things you bought from Apple. So why can't she search the drive connected to my Mac providing me with my 2,000+ bluray movie library? The iPhone the Mac itself - know how to search. How come the groundbreaking  TV 4 cant?  At least that would be a workaround around the scrolling column disaster. 

    Ill stop there. Trust me there's much more to go on about. 

    So before we totally attack this asshole - and yes he is an asshole - consider that after a 3 year wait and death of our beloved CEO this is what they have given us?  And now we're heading on it's 2 year anniversary of its release and still no resolve to these two main issues?  Sorry but this (TV 4) was then and in many aspects still is a mess compared to other tv boxes out there. 

    I love Apple. They are MY company but they are making some really bizarre decisions and doing more alienating their users (regarding requests for things WE want and need) then they are providing groundbreaking releases. I'm just one man with an optinion but is it too much to ask once you enter a column you stay in that column?  Imagine EXCEL jumping columns while scrolling but instead of other columns in the same document it starts scrolling through other documents instead. What a mess that would be!  How is this different?  Why aren't they fixing it along with Siri finding our stuff connected to the device?  "Either purchase it from us or screw you?"  That's the new apple?
    avon b7brucemc
  • Reply 54 of 122
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    Mark Gurman is definitely an anti-Apple, professional troll. It's plain as day. The fact that he permanently blocked me on Twitter for saying so is absurd and reveals his hyper-sensitivity. Poor young snowflake...
    Are you surprised?  If I were a tech journalist and anyone called me a professional troll then my reaction would be that this person isn't worth engaging with, and they're only likely to give me grief, so blocked.  That's not hyper-sensitivity, it's just having better things to do than deal with mindless keyboard warrior attacks.
  • Reply 55 of 122
    A) Apple TV does a lot of things great, I use it all the time, it's a great value for what it does, it's very useful in many ways: streaming hulu/netflix/HBO, renting movies, air play to my speakers, love the slow-mo backgrounds, which I keep on in the background just by themselves, which is always a hit with guests.

    B ) It seems pretty clear that Apple had high hopes for being the primary box that the cable content would be siphoned through; too bad that legislation mandating this capability be provided by the cable companies didn't pan out.

    C) Gaming is sorely lacking. There's got to be a lot of people like me that don't want to get involved in a PS or XBOX but still wants a fun FPS ffs. I love the game Mr Jump though.

    D) A gesture/voice recognition module would be fantastic.

    E) Where the f*ck is the killer app that will without a doubt catapult the popularity of Apple TV and enhance the overall ecosystem ????? ..seriously, what the hell is taking so long:
    karaoke.
    edited February 2017
  • Reply 56 of 122
    Well, Fake News at it's best!
  • Reply 57 of 122
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 3,056member
    I have a Fire stick. It sucks. I use my aTV all the time, but freely admit my life does not revolve around TV, and most of my TV consumption is OTA. I'd really like aTV to have a couple of OTA tuners and a coax jack (much like the Silicon Dust functionality.) But I rather suspect aTV will never go this route, as there is little way to monetize this (as the main article eloquently states, aTV specifically, and tech in general, are all about generating revenue for the manufacturer.)

    I've considered adding the SIlicon Dust products, but they are (to quote sog): WAY TOO EXPENSIVE.
  • Reply 58 of 122
    avon b7 said:
    I can't see the point of putting console sales in there.

    Consoles are not designed to be upgraded every two years and are aimed at a market that is infinitely smaller than the mobile phone market. They are not even designed as earnings providers but as earnings drivers.

    The point of the console market and games is that it is a mult-billion dollar industry in itself. Lots of people said Apple should have entered that market but they chose not to.

    The moment passed.
    The point of bringing up consoles is because Gurman claims the ATV isn't an iphone caliber product, but consoles (which people hoped ATV would become) have puny sales compared to an iphone and thus aren't iphone caliber either. And to point out they go many years without updates but no whining. Only Apple gets the whiners out en force. 
    robin hubermacgui
  • Reply 59 of 122

    Soli said:
    I hate to agree with this article- but I do.
    im a huge Apple fan...yet the Apple TV is a bit sad   That controller!  Still don't know why it has buttons.  Planet of the apps. Seriously?
    carpool karaoke...left me speechless.  
    1) You don't understand why a remote control has buttons? What's to understand?

    2) Planet of the Apps and Carpool Karaoke have nothing to do with the Apple TV.
    1) yes. Buttons.  Perhaps Apple could come up with a more creative and intuitive input method.  Apple managed to do that with the first iPhone - correct? (Refer to SJ's comments on button removal on the original iPhone).

    2) yes, content is everything when it comes to Apple TV.  U can't see that these 2 shows lack creativity?  
    1) They did -- a touch interface. It's great. Swipe-scrubbing is way better than cycling buttons. 

    2) which is why ATV is a platform for content from all over. i watch Game of Thrones on mine. the content needn't be apple's own. 
  • Reply 60 of 122
    sog35 said:
    A) Apple TV does a lot of things great, I use it all the time, it's a great value for what it does, it's very useful in many ways: streaming hulu/netflix/HBO, renting movies, air play to my speakers, love the slow-mo backgrounds, which I keep on in the background just by themselves, which is always a hit with guests.

    B ) It seems pretty clear that Apple had high hopes for being the primary box that the cable content would be siphoned through; too bad that legislation mandating this capability be provided by the cable companies didn't pan out.

    C) Gaming is sorely lacking. There's got to be a lot of people like me that don't want to get involved in a PS or XBOX but still wants a fun FPS ffs. I love the game Mr Jump though.

    D) A gesture/voice recognition module would be fantastic.

    E) Where the f*ck is the killer app to kill all other apps on the Apple TV ????? ..seriously, what the hell is taking so long:
    karaoke.
    Dude you can do karaoke on AppleTV.  But you need some hardware:

    1. Youtube App. Search - type song name and Karaoke. There is literally almost any decently famous song with Karaoke lyrics on Youtube. This is Much better then paying for songs on a traditional karaoke system

    Now you could simply sing along with your TV or use a mic connected to a sound system.

    Or if you are serious:

    1. Buy a cheap mixer on Amazon. This one is good for $29, it has echo effects and can handle 2 mics:

    https://www.amazon.com/Karaoke-Mixer-Fifine-Digital-Amplifier/dp/B00S82B0VA/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1487347273&sr=8-1&keywords=karaoke+mixer

    2. Buy a PA speaker. WARNING DO NOT USE YOUR TV OR HOME THEATER SPEAKERS WITH A MIC!!!  Tv and Home theater speakers are meant for compressed sound. If you run a mic with singing you will break them.

    Here's a nice speaker that can go LOUD in a decent size room. Cost $89 in Amazon. I use this single speaker in a 15x20 room that has 20 foot ceilings and is connected to another 12x15 room. It is very loud. Don't even THINK of using you TV speakers/home theater. You will kill them;

    https://www.amazon.com/LyxPro-SPA-8-Portable-Equalizer-Bluetooth/dp/B00MX3OO1S/ref=sr_1_15?ie=UTF8&qid=1487347414&sr=8-15&keywords=pa+system

    3. Buy a quality mic. Don't buy those crap plastic. Here is a solid Mic for $16

    https://www.amazon.com/Pyle-Pro-PDMIC58-Professional-Handheld-Microphone/dp/B003GEBGA0/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1487347472&sr=8-8&keywords=microphone

    In total the hardware will cost about $150 for 2 mics. And this will absolutely BLOW AWAY Karaoke systems costing $400 or more.  Plus you have 100% flexability with Youtube Karaoke videos. Other systems require you to buy their SONGS at high prices.


    How to connect this?  

    Use you TV audio output. Run an audio cable (Red/White) from you TV to the mixer. Run an audio cable from the mixer to the PA speaker.  Connect mics to mixer. You are done. If you TV does not have Audio (Red/White) output you can use a converted (if your TV has digital output).

    A great Karaoke App is IMPOSSIBLE without HARDWARE. Like I said before you can't use your TV/home theater speakers. They will get destroyed by uncompressed singing. And you don't want to use a crappy mic on the remote or your phone. You need a nice mic.  You need a mixer. You need a PA speaker.

    But really Youtube is the best Karaoke video source. Its free. It has a TON of selection. Its pretty much perfect for Karaoke.


    Thanks for that, I'll definitely check that stuff out. However, it seems pretty obvious to me, and even more so after reading your post, that an Apple Karaoke app would be a whopping success on the Apple TV. And the lack of such an app at this point seems like a HUGE oversight and missed opportunity.. to popularize the Apple TV, enhance Apple's overall ecosystem, and to dramatically increase the value of Apple Music with a tie-in. Every year I keep waiting for Apple to do this obvious move. It's been obvious for a long time, and it seems crazy to me that they haven't done this. Apple is in a unique position to do this better than anyone. Who's in charge of services there..

    Also, completely agree that it would be a terrible idea for Apple to buy netflix.
    edited February 2017
Sign In or Register to comment.