“An enhanced and improved iTunes Store and a much better TV app for Apple TV and iOS is the most likely way Apple will bring its video services to market, predict the analysts from Ovum,” Jonny Evans writes for Apple Must.
“Ovum’s analysts believe that rather than launching a classic Netflix-style subscription video-on-demand (SVOD) service, the company plans something more subtle and (potentially) more compelling: A platform-based bid to create an ecosystem both itself and others can thrive in,” Evans writes. “If they are right, the new platform will host Apple’s originals and the iTunes video-on-demand (TVOD) store, and it will aggregate a broad range of third-party TV and OTT video services.”
“Apple new service will not be available to non-Apple devices,” Evans writes, “but the company will enable others to receive the service on their hardware through support for AirPlay 2 – as revealed at CES… Apple also wants to get people to engage with iTunes, offering an environment in which they are encouraged to subscribe to third-party streaming services and explore TV on demand catalogs. Originals will be made available free of charge to encourage people to take a look.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: This will be an intriguing experiment for sure. At the very least, it’ll be yet another thing Apple device users get that you cannot get anywhere else (see: Apple iMessage service).
Apple has enough cash to keep producing high-quality content and make it available for free to Apple device owners for-basically-ever.
When buying a Mac, iPhone, iPad, Apple TV, etc. gets you access to FREE exclusive hit series and other content, Apple’s so-called “competitors” will be deer in the headlights, with nothing to offer but their typical Apple knockoff products. They’ll then be forced to sign deals with other outlets to offer free NON-EXCLUSIVE content that can be found elsewhere.
Apple devices sales will increase, meaning the install base will increase, meaning Apple Services will increase and the cost of exclusive original content will bar the low-margin fragmandroid bottom-of-the-barrel scrapers from ever following. Hey Haw! — MacDailyNews, October 10, 2018
Smart move to make it a nice little perk of owning an Apple device. – MacDailyNews, October 10, 2018
I’d like to create an integrated television set that is completely easy to use. It would be seamlessly synced with all of your devices and with iCloud. It will have the simplest user interface you could imagine. I finally cracked it. – Steve Jobs
SEE ALSO:
Analyst: Apple is planning to give billions of dollars in video content away for free – March 18, 2019
Apple patent application for Apple TV interface reveals aspects of live TV streaming service – February 5, 2019
Apple’s deep bench of original programming continues to grow – January 18, 2019
Apple plans to give away original content for free to device owners as part of new digital TV strategy – October 10, 2018
Maybe if I can Chromecast them off my iPad…
Provided they’re any good.
You won’t be able to Chromecast them off-of-your iPad, however you will be able to beam/stream them to your TV using Airplay 2
My tv doesn’t support AirPlay 2 and I’m not willing to get an AppleTV. Oh well… no harm done.
Apple learn to play with others, I’m not your pawn.
Btw… Google Apps support chromecast on an iPad. This is Apple crippling products to steer you yet again.
What Apple products are Apple crippling by giving away free content?
By not wnot playing well with others and requiring me to buy an additional device, an Apple TV to watch the “free content” on my TV. If it supports other standards, such as Chromecast, I don’t have a point, but it was claimed by Papple that it won’t.
The real question is how much is the Apple Tax being increased on hardware buyers to subsidize media that they don’t want?
This board is bizarre. Worship Apple one minute and then go silent when Apple forces anticonsumer behavior including overcharging, unreasonable bundling, SJW politics and and tone deaf censorship on closed platforms.
or you could buy one of the TV sets that is supporting it. There are quite a number of them now, and more coming.
Buy a new TV to watch “free” Apple programming on a TV. Ever wonder why people call some Apple users sheep?
Google makes money by scraping your metadata for advertising, so they want to be everywhere. Apple makes money selling compatible devices and services. Two different business models drive opposite behaviors.
They monetize their user base as well.
Apple with its ‘closed garden’ approach to the products and services will have to walk the fine line between benefiting the user and becoming the ‘corporate store’ where they are the only providers of services for their devices. The App store walks very dangerously close to that right now by being the only App source for the average Apple device owner.
Which would be fine if the wrote or purchased all content in the store. They don’t.
I most agree with Dialtone here, but let’s not forget that Apple sells the default search engine spot on iOS to Google for about $10 BILLION per year. That puts a chink in their “we don’t sell our customers” armor.
I’d like them to make that more of a choice, where the user is ASKED which search engine they want to use, even if that takes a billion or so out of what Google is willing to pay. Too many people never touch the defaults, but might choose something more privacy-oriented if asked.
Let your Chromecast send back everything you every watch or do with it back to google so they can then target you with all kinds of stuff… Dialtone hit it right on the head!!!
See… if Apple didn’t get paid billions by Google to have Google as default search, you might have had a point…
Then again, tell me how to not participate in differential privacy.
Differential privacy is anonymous aggregation of data. You’re participating without truly participating. It’s like those strips on the road that count cars so the people in charge of infrastructure can make proper decisions about engineering roads. They’re just aggregating data in order to improve the infrastructure. Nobody is gathering your personal data and the only real benefit being had is delivered to the users. Unless you are against better roads? You might as well complain that buying an iPhone is contributing to Apple knowing how many people bought iPhones. That’s how misguided your complaint about differential privacy is.
RYAN does have a point about Google. On iOS Google is much more restricted. Is it ideal? No. Is it better than using a Chromecast or Android device? Yes.
Pay attention!
If I can choose NOT to participate, no problem.
If I participate, even anonymously, I am enriching Apple. I should have control over whether I enrich Apple.
The very act of stripping my identity from my behavior (information), without consent, is THEFT! With consent, no problem.
That is an extreme tinfoil hat take on differential privacy. You are free to have extreme views but no reasonable person will share those views. Good luck.
For a group so obsessed with privacy and personal data, you are quite willing to have it stolen from you. This is logic and fact, not opinion.
My actions on my device are owned by me. Should be totally controlled by me, or at least get my permission. I don’t owe Apple a living beyond things I willingly purchase.
For as much complaining that’s done about Google, you pat Google with your data, and almost all is opt-in. Conversely it is bragged about that with Apple you pay with money and your data is yours. Well then, opt-in on differential privacy, if not already there, should be.
Well it turns out it is indeed optional…
Click to access Differential_Privacy_Overview.pdf
So I have no complaint on this matter.
“tell me how to not participate in differential privacy.”
Opt out. Do you always speak without knowing what the hell you’re talking about? Schmuck.
You’re too late DB! See above.
And I always said “if”.
You are the DB who asked “tell me how to not participate in differential privacy.” Users who aren’t ignorant fools like you already knew how.
Correction.
Stupid DB….
Many people will look at the plethora of new streaming services coming out, each with a monthly charge…
And then look at Apple, where you can get their streaming service for $139 one-time charge, and it comes with an amazing player box which can do pretty much anything you want it to.
I’d say Apple’s about to sell a lot more Apple TV boxes.
Loss of flexibility is worse than $139.
Apple offerings will be so white and sanitized that no one is actually going to want to watch them. free is the only way they will get eyeballs. Seriously. Apple has no idea how hollywood works, or what those customers want. they need to stick to plastic widgets, thats the ONLY thing they are actually sort of good at.