Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Amazon Developing Competitor to Apple TV Set-Top Box
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Netflix is doing just fine. In some ways better than ever.
The thing that would destroy Netflix is for anyone to buy them.
Netflix has a weird business model necessitated by the people they do business with (Media Companies).
In order for Netflix to work, it needs to be available everywhere. They also need the nerves to gamble with astronomical sums of money.
They do a reasonable job with that now, any new owner stands a 99+% chance of screwing that up and making them irrelevant inside of 3 years.
Karl P
I do not shop nor have I ever purchased anything through Amazon. So I'm definitely not a customer.
I currently hold no position in AMZN. So I have no monetary interest in how they conduct business.
I said what I said because that's Amazon's business model, operate and release products at a loss or at cost (at best) in an attempt to get their foot in the door. What does it ever get them? A tiny sliver of the pie, on a good day. They never release compelling enough products that people will actually use on a daily basis. The two people I know who have a Kindle device never use it. My sister got a Kindle Fire for free from a tv show and hasn't taken hers out of the box, she's always on her iPhone by the way. The girl I'm seeing has a Kindle but never uses it either. So what's the point of Amazon even attempting to get into these markets when there's no hope of dominating them? The way I see it, Amazon puts something out there merely to get people to buy into the space where they make all their money, through their online store and services.
And it's a very interesting point to note that Amazon would have to be making a profit for the next 30 years just to match one quarter of Apple's profits.
Internaut
macrumors 65816
Bingo. It's the same with the Kindle Fire. All Amazon is interested in is putting as many of their cash registers in your hands as possible. I do see a risk to Apple though; that is the likes of Google and Amazon who near as damn-it give their hardware away might strange Apple the services and entertainment company. That would be a long way off IMHO.
You think it's about the hardware. I'm arguing that it's the ecosystem. I don't think Amazon cares about device penetration as a pie percentage. They're gunning for ecosystem domination.
The original kindle wasn't and still isn't really made to dominate the ereader market. It's made to get you locked into/invested into Amazon's bookstore.
Yeah... definitely THIS....
I get Apple releasing the AppleTV box as kind of an experimental side project (or "hobby" as they put it). But 3 revisions later, it doesn't feel like they've done much more than that -- and now the rest of the industry offers arguably more functional/better boxes to do essentially the same thing.
Perhaps the *real* answer is that Apple never cared much about providing these services via a dedicated set-top TV box in the first place? Maybe it was just a way to deliver the content to the willing and interested, so they could research what needed to go into their own television set?
Knowing how much Apple likes integration (all in one computers, etc.), it would logically follow that they'd prefer you buy into the television watching experience, Apple style, with everything rolled into a TV set.
I get Apple releasing the AppleTV box as kind of an experimental side project (or "hobby" as they put it). But 3 revisions later, it doesn't feel like they've done much more than that -- and now the rest of the industry offers arguably more functional/better boxes to do essentially the same thing.
Perhaps the *real* answer is that Apple never cared much about providing these services via a dedicated set-top TV box in the first place? Maybe it was just a way to deliver the content to the willing and interested, so they could research what needed to go into their own television set?
Knowing how much Apple likes integration (all in one computers, etc.), it would logically follow that they'd prefer you buy into the television watching experience, Apple style, with everything rolled into a TV set.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Too much nitty-gritty decision-making at the very top of the company. As a company rapidly grows, the top has got to push the decision-making down to keep up with expanding growth. Apple has long kept it at the very top and it has seemed to work well. However, that only works so long. Eventually too many decisions need to be made by too few and the bottlenecks show, things slow and the business feels the momentum pain.
What Apple needs is to be spawning a bunch of Steve Jrs to run slices of the Apple... maybe even compete with each other to make the most out of their slices. Then every piece of Apple would get the focus it needs (and the decisions made when they need to get made) rather than this perception of focusing on one thing at a time and then having campaigns like getting "back to the Mac" and similar. There should never be a need to promote getting back to the Mac; there should always be a big chunk of Apple focused on advancing the Mac, another big chunk focused on advancing iDevices, and focused group(s) on even the hobbies with massive upside like
TV.I'm not an insider so take the above as best guess speculation but that's what Apple looks like to me: too much nitty-gritty decision-making held at the very top with guys who don't have the spare capacity to give much focus to some of the old and much of the new. IMO, Apple has grown too fast for such consolidated management control to keep up with the decision-making needs and thus the ongoing sense of "where's the new innovations?", "why is ____________ taking so long?", etc.
IMO, Apple should have long-since dominated the
TV-type opportunity. If Apple can't give it the focus internally, an app store would allow the outsiders to make it into all that it can be. This hobby should have been Apple's "next big thing" several years ago. Too bad they are inviting so many others to bite into that opportunity when they are so well positioned to own it... if they just wanted it badly enough (to give it the focus it needs). For example, a relatively tiny company like Roku should not possibly be able to make so many deals with so many players better and faster than mighty Apple. Roku is focused on THIS business. IMO, Apple has too few trying to juggle too much. Solution: evolve with the amazing growth by shifting the decision-making authority down to lower levels. Apple is long since removed from being a relatively small tech company where that made sense (again IMO).
Last edited:
I don't really think that any additional box would ruin the sophisticated look and interior design that you prefer for your living room.
Neflix just posted earnings and signed up over 2 million new subscribers last quarter.
There stock is up 146% during the last 52 weeks.
You clearly don't have a clue what you're talking about.
Last edited:
Since in both cases you are investing your money into the company and its products, then I would say both.
Especially when it comes to streaming services and products that only work within a particular ecosystem.
And Netflix passed HBO with number of subscribers.
http://variety.com/2013/digital/news/netflix-surpasses-hbo-in-u-s-subscribers-1200406437/
I have to give you Airplay. Apple TV is worth it for airplay itself. But this will be an opinion thing. Since I don't like to use multiple devices the Roku has the most content, so I like it best. Go to Roku and it has everything...except ATV.
And here's where I understand Apple's "stance" but at the same time don't agree.
It would appear (to me) that Apple has no interest in creating apps for any devices other than their own.
But I ask - is it better/worse to lose out on a piece of $99 hardware or the revenue stream from movies/tv/etc if someone can use the Apple ecosystem on another device.
Personally I think there's more money to be made with book, music and video purchases in the long term. But perhaps I'm wrong. And again - I don't think Apple cares - they've decided their ecosystem will be Apple product only.
I use roku 3 and apple tv... if apple had apps it would be nice but then roku has porn (private channels) and I don't see apple doing that...
I don't especially want to stream from my iphone to apple tv... plus things like vudu need a native app to perform well.
I use berlin phil's digital concert hall, and that is only native on certain devices (mostly sony but not ps3) and through airplay through iphone.
I don't especially want to stream from my iphone to apple tv... plus things like vudu need a native app to perform well.
I use berlin phil's digital concert hall, and that is only native on certain devices (mostly sony but not ps3) and through airplay through iphone.
If you did not live in a "Me too" world, you would still be driving a Ford Model T.
The key thing is "Currently Amazon's Instant Video service is available on iPads and iPhones, the Xbox 360, the Nintendo Wii, the Sony Playstation 3, smart televisions from LG, Panasonic, Samsung, Sony, and Vizio, TiVo, the Roku box, as well as a number of Blu-ray players."
Everyone else supports Amazon. So why would I necessarily buy Amazon's box? My Blu-Ray supports it, my TiVo does, my next TV probably will, my laptop, iPad and iPhone (and I have ways of getting all those on my TV). Not sure if my WDTV media player does, but I've got SO much that does, it's okay.
The point being is that my AppleTV is pretty much what I use, then the WD TV box and that covers 99% of MY needs. The occasional Amazon, I stream from one of the other boxes. If Amazon's box was cool, I might replace the WD box at some time, but I doubt it.
If amazon prime gave me a few more books a month, that might make me an Amazon fan (vs. Vudu and Netflix) but who knows...
Gary