YouTube and Spotify also won't offer any apps on Apple Vision Pro

Posted:
in Apple Vision Pro

Like Netflix, YouTube and Spotify won't be building specialized apps for Apple Vision Pro, nor will they allow their iPad apps to run on the hardware.

Apple Vision Pro with reflections of people and a red
YouTube and Spotify aren't coming to Apple Vision Pro



Some of the world's biggest corporations are taking a wait-and-see approach with Apple's new hardware, declining to offer any support for apps. Netflix was first to confirm that no native or iPad ported app would come to Apple Vision Pro, and now two more prominent companies join the mix.

According to a report from Bloomberg, both YouTube and Spotify have confirmed that their apps will not be available on Apple Vision Pro. The companies recommend users visit their websites in Safari instead.

Spotify, YouTube, and Netflix make up the world's biggest streaming services. However, it isn't clear whether their apps missing from the platform will cause potential buyers to bypass the platform.

Since Apple Vision Pro is an expensive product starting at $3,499 that serves a small niche of use cases, the customers buying the device won't miss those services. It is likely that developers and Apple fans will be first in line, both of which likely already use competing Apple platforms like Apple TV+, Apple Podcasts, and Apple Music.

Most other third-party streaming services are embracing Apple Vision Pro with at least a port of the iPad app. The Disney+ app is launching on the platform with full 3D environments to watch content from, like on Tatooine or the Scare Floor.

The news isn't exactly a surprise, as Google is usually slow, if defiant, about adopting new Apple platforms or features. Spotify is in a similar situation, except it is generally more openly hostile towards Apple and its business models.

Apple Vision Pro is available for pre-order on January 19, starting at $3,499. It ships to customers on February 2.



Read on AppleInsider

«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 27
    Uh oh… Apple’s gonna have another monopoly in Vision Pro.  Call the antitrust layers.  =P
    jwdawsothtbyronlwatto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 27
    Hmm Netflix and Spotify i wouldn’t care about

    but no YouTube tbh is a bit of a bummer

    but that’s what you get as an early adopter 
    byronlwatto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 27
    larryjwlarryjw Posts: 1,031member
    I get Google being anti-apple as they are a direct competitor.

    But why is Spotify opposed to Apple products? Hardly makes sense to limit your customer base. 
    byronlwatto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 27
    wait-and-see approach”, my @$$. Actively blocking their apps is just being plain sour p*
    thtStrangeDaysdamn_its_hot9secondkox2byronlwatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 27
    To offer support at this point, you’d need to be reasonably confident that 1) a lot of people will buy the $3500 AVP and use it a lot, 2) a decent percentage of those people will want to use your app with it, 3) the app experience would be far superior to what you can offer through a browser, and 4) all of these things will combine to justify the expense of development and ongoing support. It’s a tall order, especially when you can always wait a bit and see how things go. 
    muthuk_vanalingambeowulfschmidtbyronlwilliamlondongrandact73watto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 27
    roakeroake Posts: 814member
    They say that now…

    The premium version going for pre-sale tomorrow (Vision Pro model) allows Apple to get their most impressive version out and start turning heads.  They move 75k units by 2/2/24 and keep making more.  They have already started tapping into the biggest war-chest that has ever existed for advertising, and one of the largest, well thought out marketing blitz that has ever existed is launched on the same day pre-orders go live.

    For the rest of the year, they continue to sell Vision Pro units as fast as they can make them. They meanwhile continue to apply the finishing touches to a more “budget” version of the platform that doesn’t offer the EyeSight feature, has a slightly less impressive experience, and fewer premium materials, making them far faster and cheaper to produce.  They are also lighter and have improved power-supply/battery options.  By this time, Apple has spent approaching $5 billion across their product lines for advertising, with the Vision Pro budget edging out iPad and Mac product lines, and falling short only of the iPhone line.  Every ad demonstrates slick and jaw-dropping technology and application that feels like it could only exist in science fiction.

    Meta and other competitors disparage the Vision and make the claim that they offer a similar experience and support the MetaVerse; They constantly point out that the MetaVerse is the next big thing and is not supported by Apple.  No-one cares, and demand for the Apple platform continues to grow; people want something that is here now, and Meta missed their opportunity.  The most popular third parties have taken sharp notice, and have started to introduce support.

    After a year of increasingly pent-up demand that is now barely containable, Apple announces the new Apple Vision in September, starting at $1499 for the basic experience (which is excellent), with available options that can push the price as high as $2799, with the average order topping $2100.  They also announce that these will be in consumers hands before Christmas.  Sales explode.

    Independent developers publish apps to encapsulate the video services, but these are an inferior experience, yet still intensely popular.  By the following February, YouTube, and Netflix have released 1st party apps for Apple Vision, claiming this is the future and they are in it for the long haul!  Spotify drags their feet because they cannot find a formula to adequately differentiate their product in this new marketplace.

    Apple quietly looks over to YouTube and Netflix, and utters, “POW!  How’d you like me now?”
    edited January 18 steve_jobsdamn_its_hotkurai_kagewatto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 27
    roake said:
    They say that now…

    The premium version going for pre-sale tomorrow (Vision Pro model) allows Apple to get their most impressive version out and start turning heads.  They move 75k units by 2/2/24 and keep making more.  They have already started tapping into the biggest war-chest that has ever existed for advertising, and one of the largest, well thought out marketing blitz that has ever existed is launched on the same day pre-orders go live.

    For the rest of the year, they continue to sell Vision Pro units as fast as they can make them. They meanwhile continue to apply the finishing touches to a more “budget” version of the platform that doesn’t offer the EyeSight feature, has a slightly less impressive experience, and fewer premium materials, making them far faster and cheaper to produce.  They are also lighter and have improved power-supply/battery options.  By this time, Apple has spent approaching $5 billion across their product lines for advertising, with the Vision Pro budget edging out iPad and Mac product lines, and falling short only of the iPhone line.  Every ad demonstrates slick and jaw-dropping technology and application that feels like it could only exist in science fiction.

    Meta and other competitors disparage the Vision and make the claim that they offer a similar experience and support the MetaVerse; They constantly point out that the MetaVerse is the next big thing and is not supported by Apple.  No-one cares, and demand for the Apple platform continues to grow; people want something that is here now, and Meta missed their opportunity.  The most popular third parties have taken sharp notice, and have started to introduce support.

    After a year of increasingly pent-up demand that is now barely containable, Apple announces the new Apple Vision in September, starting at $1499 for the basic experience (which is excellent), with available options that can push the price as high as $2799, with the average order topping $2100.  They also announce that these will be in consumers hands before Christmas.  Sales explode.

    Independent developers publish apps to encapsulate the video services, but these are an inferior experience, yet still intensely popular.  By the following February, YouTube, and Netflix have released 1st party apps for Apple Vision, claiming this is the future and they are in it for the long haul!  Spotify drags their feet because they cannot find a formula to adequately differentiate their product in this new marketplace.

    Apple quietly looks over to YouTube and Netflix, and utters, “POW!  How’d you like me now?”
    Blitz news: Apple Co-Founder! Bro Brosniak was hit by roof tile near his home.
  • Reply 8 of 27
    “But… but… but…, it’s because Netflix just hates apple!”

    LOL

    ITS BUSINESS. 

    The ROI just isn’t there for headsets. 
    muthuk_vanalingamgrandact73
  • Reply 9 of 27
    To offer support at this point, you’d need to be reasonably confident that 1) a lot of people will buy the $3500 AVP and use it a lot, 2) a decent percentage of those people will want to use your app with it, 3) the app experience would be far superior to what you can offer through a browser, and 4) all of these things will combine to justify the expense of development and ongoing support. It’s a tall order, especially when you can always wait a bit and see how things go. 
    it pretty trivial to let the iPad app run on Vision Pro. YouTube, Spotify, Netflix don't allow their iPad apps to be used on the Mac either. 

    Buried in the Vision Pro streaming announcements. IMAX app. I can't find anything that says what that is.
    9secondkox2watto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 27
    thttht Posts: 5,496member
    Native apps for streaming services is pretty low on the priority list for VP imo. 

    It’s much more important for visionOS to have a full-featured browser, Terminal.app and macOS level Microsoft Office.

    Those things will hold the VP back much more than the availability of native streaming apps, especially ones where you can already access from their website. 

    A user has to be able to open and use Office files, CLI apps and web sites interchangeably from macOS versions. iPadOS Safari and iPadOS MS Office have some deficiencies in features that need to be rectified. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 27
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 12,917member
    “But… but… but…, it’s because Netflix just hates apple!”

    LOL

    ITS BUSINESS. 

    The ROI just isn’t there for headsets. 
    What is the business value received by disallowing an existing iPad app to operate on AVP? 
    damn_its_hot9secondkox2williamlondondope_ahminewatto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 27
    Fuck Google and Spotify. They both suck. Seriously. 
    9secondkox2williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 27
    “But… but… but…, it’s because Netflix just hates apple!”

    LOL

    ITS BUSINESS. 

    The ROI just isn’t there for headsets. 
    What is the business value received by disallowing an existing iPad app to operate on AVP? 
    Since I’m not those companies. I can’t say for sure, but putting myself in their shoes, it’s pretty simple:

    the iPad app was designed for iPad. The Vision Pro is not the iPad. It’s a headset that requires more thought, creativity, and entirely new UX in order to not be an embarrassment when put up against Disney (for example), who has put the investment in. 

    you might counter with “well it’s it’s more embarassing to not even have an app.” But that’s not true. When the browser experience basically mirrors the app, only with even more features, the app doesn’t need to exist. Sure, it’s a little faster to tap an app icon than to navigate to a favorite on your browser, but that’s not a major deal when you’re looking at having an apples to apple comparison between a dedicated app designed specifically to take advantage of a device versus sloppily propping up your app made for an entirely different device. 

    Rather than looking like the sloppy companies that don’t know how to make an app, they bar their tablet app from being used on a headset and point to the already excellent browser option instead. 

    But if the vp becomes a viable market, you can bet Netflix, Spotify, YouTube, etc. will have dedicated apps. 
    edited January 19 muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 14 of 27
    Fuck Google and Spotify. They both suck. Seriously. 
    Hey man, I get the passion., but can we clean it up a bit? There are all kinds of people reading this. 

    I have two young nieces that have taken after me in all things apple and they don’t need to be reading that. Thank you. 
    DarkMouzefred1thtwatto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 27
    fred1fred1 Posts: 1,116member
    Fuck Google and Spotify. They both suck. Seriously. 
    Hey man, I get the passion., but can we clean it up a bit? There are all kinds of people reading this. 

    I have two young nieces that have taken after me in all things apple and they don’t need to be reading that. Thank you. 
    I agree. There’s no reason to pollute the discussions. 
    williamlondon9secondkox2watto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 27
    danoxdanox Posts: 2,963member
    If spacial video works Netflix/Spotify are going to cry foul help me government.
    williamlondon9secondkox2watto_cobra
  • Reply 17 of 27
    “But… but… but…, it’s because Netflix just hates apple!”

    LOL

    ITS BUSINESS. 

    The ROI just isn’t there for headsets. 
    What is the business value received by disallowing an existing iPad app to operate on AVP? 
    Since I’m not those companies. I can’t say for sure, but putting myself in their shoes, it’s pretty simple:

    the iPad app was designed for iPad. The Vision Pro is not the iPad. It’s a headset that requires more thought, creativity, and entirely new UX in order to not be an embarrassment when put up against Disney (for example), who has put the investment in. 

    you might counter with “well it’s it’s more embarassing to not even have an app.” But that’s not true. When the browser experience basically mirrors the app, only with even more features, the app doesn’t need to exist. Sure, it’s a little faster to tap an app icon than to navigate to a favorite on your browser, but that’s not a major deal when you’re looking at having an apples to apple comparison between a dedicated app designed specifically to take advantage of a device versus sloppily propping up your app made for an entirely different device. 

    Rather than looking like the sloppy companies that don’t know how to make an app, they bar their tablet app from being used on a headset and point to the already excellent browser option instead. 

    But if the vp becomes a viable market, you can bet Netflix, Spotify, YouTube, etc. will have dedicated apps. 
    "browser experience basically mirrors the app, only with even more features"? 

    No it doesn't.  Higher resolutions are often app dependant and browser will be massively inferior if anyone plans on using the VP while travelling, which has been mentioned by some as a use case.  You need the download and offline viewing, which is enabled by the app.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 27
    Yep, all those companies want to do is compete. The true embodiment of competitive spirit. You betcha…
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 19 of 27
    And why would they, for such a limited audience? Wait and see. If it gets popular, the apps will come.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 20 of 27
    XedXed Posts: 2,622member
    “But… but… but…, it’s because Netflix just hates apple!”

    LOL

    ITS BUSINESS. 

    The ROI just isn’t there for headsets. 
    1) In all my years on this forum you have to be the most consistently wrong troll that's ever been a member. I even have a suspicion that you're another poster that got banned  right before your current account was created.

    2) If it's not corporate spite — which Netflix, Spotify, and Google have toward Apple — then why was Netflix's iPad app working on AVP previously and then Netflix took the added effort, albeit minor, to disable it being allowed to run on the device? Why do you think it's good business for any of those companies to not allow something they've already made and that is already idealized for touch input to not run on Apple's new product? The reason is simple and clear. They are jealous of Apple and this will hurt the AVP experience more than it will hurt their user ship... and yet, I have a feeling Apple will prevail and you'll be eating crow once again.
    williamlondon9secondkox2watto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.