Apps Amazon Instant Video

[d21mike]

Here's the actual rule from the review guidelines:

"Apps that link to external mechanisms for purchases or subscriptions to be used in the App, such as a "buy" button that goes to a web site to purchase a digital book, will be rejected"

As you can see this is a rather broad formulation. Any kind of shopping cart would surely be seen as an "external mechanism for purchases".
Sure. But since this feature doesn't have anything to do with purchasing content, I fail to see your point.
I think it is you who is stuck on technical mechanisms. What counts is the intention behind Apple's rule. The rule exists to prevent purchases of digital goods within apps without using Apple's billing system. If Amazon had, say, an "add to watchlist" feature and then a "buy watchlist" button on their web page, Apple would certainly classify this as an "external mechanism for purchases". Renaming the shopping cart to "watchlist" doesn't change that.

As I wrote before, even if someone were to find a loophole, Apple would simply close it by changing the rule. They have done this before.

You could be right. I will finish with this. Maybe "Add to WishList" which I think Amazon has so that others can buy it for you. I think that is the purpose of WishList but I think can be used to buy it yourself.

In any case I think Amazon could allow the App on the Apple TV and direct them to the amazon.com web site for any purchasing decisions. That I would think would not be a problem.

 

[derekshank]

So with some imagination they could make this a pretty painless process and avoid paying the commission. Which most say is their big problem. They want you to be able to buy from their store without paying commission.

Aside from the reasons Rigby pointed out that this isn't really viable... I don't believe that the commission is the only problem.

I've detailed the reasons I believe Amazon isn't coming to the Apple TV elsewhere... but I'll summarize some of them here as well. It might be too long for you to read... but I really think it explains what is going on right now.

Unlike a subscription service like Netflix and Hulu, Amazon (and Vudu) also sell content. I would imagine that Amazon is far less interested in the yearly "Prime Membership" income, and far more interested in selling and renting movies and TV shows (like iTunes does).

It's the same reason that Vudu and iTunes aren't on the Fire TV. They are direct competitors. Amazon doesn't want you to buy from Walmart or Apple on their device... and Apple likewise doesn't want you to own a Fire TV in the first place. Vudu wants to discourage you from owning either an Apple TV or a Fire TV, because they know they'll always be at a disadvantage on those devices.

Amazon is trying to build more loyal customers (like Apple has), rather than build something that works alongside Apple products. They don't want to cooperate with iTunes... they want to replace it.

Amazon is less interested in making loyal Apple customers happy, and far more interested in building their own base of loyal customers that will use Amazon services, but also pay for their hardware, and purchase lots of content. If that's the ultimate goal, discouraging folks from buying an Apple TV makes sense.

As for the "commission"... while I'm sure Amazon doesn't want to pay it - I think it goes deeper than that. Amazon could easily make a dumbed down app (like the iOS app), but that is basically conceding that iTunes will be the primary option for content purchasing in a home with an Apple TV. Given that they are direct competitors, both for content and set-top boxes, there is no way they'll just concede to being #2 to Apple.

People then ask why the iOS app exists then. The answer is simple: The iOS app is intended for you to have your library that you purchased on Amazon available when you leave the house. Amazon knows that they need to be compatible with an iPhone if they want a chance to compete. 43+% of Americans have iPhones. You can't ignore them and hope to succeed.

Apple TV 4? Current estimates say it only has 13.1% marketshare (all Apple TV models account for 31%) in the set-top box world. The FireTV has a 27.5% marketshare... so Amazon rightly feels that they can really compete with Apple here. If they were to make an Amazon app, the Apple TV 4 would instantly be the only set-top box that can access both Amazon and iTunes. That gives Apple a huge marketable advantage over the Fire TV that Amazon is not interested in giving them.

As for the airplay option... Amazon offered Airplay before this type of competition between the Apple TV and Fire TV really heated up. It's one thing to not create an app that has never existed... and it's quite another to disable a service that you've previously allowed. You think people are mad now about no app? Think about the outrage if Amazon makes it impossible to watch your content on an Apple TV?

All of that to say... Amazon Instant Video and Vudu won't be on an Apple TV any time soon. I'd put money on it - regardless of what their customer service reps tell the public.

 

[off_piste]

I think it is a two-way street between the two companies. If Apple truly doesn't care then wouldn't Sling TV be available for the Apple TV?

 

[d21mike]

I think it is a two-way street between the two companies. If Apple truly doesn't care then wouldn't Sling TV be available for the Apple TV?

Apple has said all are welcome. They would love for Sling TV to be there the same as HBO Now, Showtime, Netflix and Hulu where they receive 15% of the subscription revenue if they pay via the iTunes Store. Now probably Sling TV does not want to pay the sales commission to Apple. But just like Hulu charges extra if you pay via iTunes Store there would be no reason why Sling TV could not do the same. I really have zero interest is subscribing to Sling TV until they eliminate Commercials for On Demand Content and also allow more then 1 stream. HBO Now has 3 streams. Netflix has 2 streams (for the base price) and I think Hulu has 3 but not sure. My guess is that Sling TV does not yet understand the market or simply wants to keep the user base small as a test case.
[doublepost=1454355264][/doublepost]Maybe Apple needs to add a stream service like Amazon Prime and Netflix but with more current movies since it does not have Original Content (for now).

 

[Rigby]

Apple has said all are welcome.

Statements like this are primarily PR. Apple knows full well that paying 30% to a middle man is not a viable business model in electronic sell-through.

Maybe Apple needs to add a stream service like Amazon Prime and Netflix but with more current movies since it does not have Original Content (for now).

Be careful what you wish for. If that happens, they'll probably do their best to push Netflix out as well.

 

[derekshank]

I think it is a two-way street between the two companies. If Apple truly doesn't care then wouldn't Sling TV be available for the Apple TV?

If Amazon or Sling had created apps, and Apple had denied them... there is no way in hell that wouldn't get leaked.

But you're right. The blame doesn't lie directly with any one company. There are reasons that these companies don't feel compelled to make an Apple TV app, and some of those reasons are created by Apple.
[doublepost=1454356662][/doublepost]

Be careful what you wish for. If that happens, they'll probably do their best to push Netflix out as well.

I don't really agree.

There are plenty of apps that compete directly with Apple services that are in iOS. If Apple tried to block everyone that competed with them, we would be without Google Maps, Waze, Spotify, Pandora, Fitbit... and a whole host of others. Of course Apple wants to encourage you to stick with their products, and discourage competition... but they won't outright block anyone simply because they are a competitor.

Apple shares some blame for Amazon not being on TVOS... but not all of it. This is a mutual competition between them, that Amazon feels like it has a chance at winning. That's the reason.

 

[d21mike]

Statements like this are primarily PR. Apple knows full well that paying 30% to a middle man is not a viable business model in electronic sell-through.
Be careful what you wish for. If that happens, they'll probably do their best to push Netflix out as well.

Since you quoted the misleading 30% you may not have read my full post. It was reported multiple times that Apple was now charging streaming services like Sling 15%. In particular HBO Now, Showtime, NETFLIX, Hulu. And I said Hulu added at least that amount if you purchased via iTunes. No reason Sling could not do the same.

 

[Rigby]

Since you quoted the misleading 30% you may not have read my full post. It was reported multiple times that Apple was now charging streaming services like Sling 15%. In particular HBO Now, Showtime, NETFLIX, Hulu.

These are all subscription services. I specifically wrote "electronic sell-through". The "all are welcome" statement was made by Apple in the context of Amazon, which is not just a subscription service. But even if it was "only" 15%, that's still significantly more than the entire profit margin on sell-through movies.
[doublepost=1454359415][/doublepost]

There are plenty of apps that compete directly with Apple services that are in iOS. If Apple tried to block everyone that competed with them, we would be without Google Maps, Waze, Spotify, Pandora, Fitbit... and a whole host of others.

Perhaps. I'll point out though that Spotify is not on Apple TV while it is on Roku ...

Of course Apple wants to encourage you to stick with their products, and discourage competition... but they won't outright block anyone simply because they are a competitor.

They may not outright block anyone, but they can create conditions that make it very difficult for competing products.

Apple shares some blame for Amazon not being on TVOS... but not all of it.

I agree with that. It takes two to tango.

 

[d21mike]

These are all subscription services. I specifically wrote "electronic sell-through". The "all are welcome" statement was made by Apple in the context of Amazon, which is not just a subscription service. But even if it was "only" 15%, that's still significantly more than the entire profit margin on sell-through movies.

You replied to my post which was in response to this person statements about "Sling TV". I was not talking about selling Movies or TV Shows. Only Streaming Services.
"I think it is a two-way street between the two companies. If Apple truly doesn't care then wouldn't Sling TV be available for the Apple TV?"

And here is the reporting about the 15% if purchased thru the Apple TV.
http://recode.net/2015/04/13/how-to...subscription-fee-sell-your-stuff-on-apple-tv/

 

[Rigby]

You replied to my post which was in response to this person statements about "Sling TV".

Yeah well, you replied to a sentence that was talking specifically about sell-through, and in a thread about Amazon Video.

And here is the reporting about the 15% if purchased thru the Apple TV.
http://recode.net/2015/04/13/how-to...subscription-fee-sell-your-stuff-on-apple-tv/

Your source seems to suggest that the 15% are merely a rumor:

"While Apple and its partners have never talked about it publicly, my understanding is that a handful of video services, including Netflix, Hulu Plus and pro-baseball’s MLB.TV, give Apple 15 percent of their monthly fees for any subscriber who signs up on Apple TV."

But yeah, it's very well possible that highly popular services get a sweetheart deal. But will that last once Apple starts to compete with one of them directly?

 

[d21mike]

Yeah well, you replied to a sentence that was talking specifically about sell-through, and in a thread about Amazon Video.
Your source seems to suggest that the 15% are merely a rumor:

"While Apple and its partners have never talked about it publicly, my understanding is that a handful of video services, including Netflix, Hulu Plus and pro-baseball’s MLB.TV, give Apple 15 percent of their monthly fees for any subscriber who signs up on Apple TV."

But yeah, it's very well possible that highly popular services get a sweetheart deal. But will that last once Apple starts to compete with one of them directly?

Okay, clearly I was talking bout Sling TV, so obviously you are not open to this discussion.

I will add the following for others who follow this discussion with a open mind.

Yes, I read the article about the 15%. And of course no one but Apple and HBO (and others) have a copy of the signed agreement. I tend to believe the source of the article and you of course prefer to assume all the streaming services are paying 30%.

This is from the Hulu site. The difference is $2 or about 15% (13.99 - 11.99). Seems to me it would be a higher difference if they were paying Apple 30%. But of course I would not know for sure what their deal with Apple is. But I see no reason they could not have charged 16.99 to better recoup the money paid to Apple if they were paying 30%. I mean they are very clear they are charging more because they are paying Apple a Transaction Fee.
And the wording of this to me means that they are now only paying Apple 15% even if signed up via the iPhone/iPad which to me makes more sense then just the Apple TV which was maybe how it started.
Why does the Hulu No Commercials plan cost more if I pay through iTunes on iOS devices?
If you sign up on an iOS device (iPads and iPhones) and pay for your Hulu subscription with your iTunes account, there is an additional charge due to transaction costs associated with Apple. The cost of the No Commercials plan when you sign up on an iOS device is $13.99/month. You may also subscribe to Hulu by visiting hulu.com/start on a mobile or web browser to avoid this charge.

If you’re a Hulu subscriber through iTunes on your iOS device and would like to cancel your account, please visit here for cancellation steps.

 

[off_piste]

Apple has said all are welcome. They would love for Sling TV to be there the same as HBO Now, Showtime, Netflix and Hulu where they receive 15% of the subscription revenue if they pay via the iTunes Store. Now probably Sling TV does not want to pay the sales commission to Apple. But just like Hulu charges extra if you pay via iTunes Store there would be no reason why Sling TV could not do the same. I really have zero interest is subscribing to Sling TV until they eliminate Commercials for On Demand Content and also allow more then 1 stream. HBO Now has 3 streams. Netflix has 2 streams (for the base price) and I think Hulu has 3 but not sure. My guess is that Sling TV does not yet understand the market or simply wants to keep the user base small as a test case.
[doublepost=1454355264][/doublepost]Maybe Apple needs to add a stream service like Amazon Prime and Netflix but with more current movies since it does not have Original Content (for now).

I'm not sure I buy that. Sling TV could offer the same alternative enrollment program that Hulu offers and maintain their same profit margin. Or they could do like their iOS app and just require you to signup through their website. There's something more at play. SlingTV has no reason to hold back as they're not trying to promote one ecosystem over another so there's no benefit to them cutting themselves off from a decent sized portion of the market.

 

[d21mike]

I really do not understand why some of you feel Apple would not want Sling TV or the Amazon Prime Stream Service on the Apple TV. Again, not talking about Amazon Video where you have the complication of competing with iTunes. They made a big deal about HBO Now and even got a 3 month head start on everyone else. I assume that was not free. And why would they not want to receive the 15% (or 30% that others feel much be the case) from HBO Now, Showtime, CBS All Access, Netflix and Hulu. But for some crazy reason they would not want Sling TV. You might say, well Sling TV may be "closer" to the TV Streaming Service they have been rumored to start for years. Well what about CBS All Access which would be part of that service. Some recent comments from Tim (create a great platform for others) and from the CBS CEO that Apple has put things on hold. It just makes sense they would want to sell others streaming services on Apple TV.

FROM BuzzFeed:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/johnpaczkowski/the-apple-tv-youve-always-wanted-is-finally-here#.lsB3ee1kDl

Incidentally, that Amazon Prime Video is the exception to the conga line of content offerings above is entirely Amazon’s doing. A ~magnanimous~ Apple tells BuzzFeed News that “all are welcome” on its new Apple TV platform. But Amazon — which recently purged Apple TV from its store — doesn’t have a Prime Video app in the Apple TV App Store. And as of a few days ago, it hadn’t submitted one. (An Amazon spokesperson told BuzzFeed News the company “doesn’t have anything to share” on the topic.) Which means presumably I’ll be streaming Season 2 of Transparentfrom my phone to my TV come December — a bummer because Prime Video is my second-favorite feature of Amazon’s membership service, right after two-day shipping 30-pound bags of dog food to my front door.

 

[applezulu]

For Amazon, Prime video is a loss leader. They don't care about having a hobbled Amazon video app on iOS, because it's a side market. It would be foolish from their perspective, however, to create a similar hobbled app for ATV. Watching content in the living room is still where the money is. The Prime video service is intended to gain your virtual foot traffic, which then can be converted into income derived from purchasing and renting other digital content. They are not going to create a 'prime-only' hobbled app for ATV, because that would be stupid. They'd be spending money on the Prime service loss leader, only to deliver your virtual foot traffic directly to Apple's iTunes. They're also not going to create a full-service Amazon Video app for ATV, because that would also be stupid. Apple's 'in-app purchase' rules mean they'd have to hand over most of their profit to Apple.

What about the fact that you can use Airplay from your phone to watch Amazon's Prime service? Well, that's a balancing act for Amazon. Disabling that function would probably cost them subscriptions. Leaving the Airplay function on is just helpful enough to avoid the cancellations, but just inconvenient enough to cause people who want to use it a lot to consider running an Amazon Fire or other box alongside their Apple TV box, and switch back and forth. If you're just done watching "Kimmy Schmidt" and want to rent a movie, you'll stay put and rent it from Amazon. This scenario makes buying or renting additional content from them viable and profitable, while handing over $0 to Apple in the process. That's the calculation, and for the time being, that's how it's going to be.

 

[off_piste]

I really do not understand why some of you feel Apple would not want Sling TV or the Amazon Prime Stream Service on the Apple TV. Again, not talking about Amazon Video where you have the complication of competing with iTunes. They made a big deal about HBO Now and even got a 3 month head start on everyone else. I assume that was not free. And why would they not want to receive the 15% (or 30% that others feel much be the case) from HBO Now, Showtime, CBS All Access, Netflix and Hulu. But for some crazy reason they would not want Sling TV. You might say, well Sling TV may be "closer" to the TV Streaming Service they have been rumored to start for years. Well what about CBS All Access which would be part of that service. Some recent comments from Tim (create a great platform for others) and from the CBS CEO that Apple has put things on hold. It just makes sense they would want to sell others streaming services on Apple TV.

FROM BuzzFeed:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/johnpaczkowski/the-apple-tv-youve-always-wanted-is-finally-here#.lsB3ee1kDl

Incidentally, that Amazon Prime Video is the exception to the conga line of content offerings above is entirely Amazon’s doing. A ~magnanimous~ Apple tells BuzzFeed News that “all are welcome” on its new Apple TV platform. But Amazon — which recently purged Apple TV from its store — doesn’t have a Prime Video app in the Apple TV App Store. And as of a few days ago, it hadn’t submitted one. (An Amazon spokesperson told BuzzFeed News the company “doesn’t have anything to share” on the topic.) Which means presumably I’ll be streaming Season 2 of Transparentfrom my phone to my TV come December — a bummer because Prime Video is my second-favorite feature of Amazon’s membership service, right after two-day shipping 30-pound bags of dog food to my front door.

Ok, let's take your position that it's 100% on Sling TV. Why would Sling TV not have an app for the Apple TV but do for every other conceivable platform except Sony which just so happens to have its own streaming tv service that is on everything except the Apple TV? Sling TV should be agnostic when it comes to hardware/systems, they generate all their revenue through subscriptions.

 

[d21mike]

Ok, let's take your position that it's 100% on Sling TV. Why would Sling TV not have an app for the Apple TV but do for every other conceivable platform except Sony which just so happens to have its own streaming tv service that is on everything except the Apple TV? Sling TV should be agnostic when it comes to hardware/systems, they generate all their revenue through subscriptions.

Well, if I had to guess is because they do not want to pay Apple for in-app purchases and don't want to follow what Hulu is doing. And don't want to have customers only have the option to subscribe on the SlingTV Web site. I do not believe it is because Apple refuses their App or they would have probably said so. There are a lot of Apps getting on the App Store. With some I am a bit surprised.
I did call their customer support last year and the person I talk to said they would love to add support to Apple TV. Of course that could have been BS. Also, could have been before the Apple TV 4. I just now ask the Chat Service and the only answer was we will pass it on.
I believe as Apple TV gains more and more market share (assuming they will) then Sling TV will add the App and figure out a way to make it work. But now or later I believe it is in SlingTV hands.

This is from their Web Site:

When will Sling TV be on Apple TV?
We are always looking to add to Sling TV’s supported devices. Unfortunately, our service is not currently available on Apple TV. However, Sling TV customers can use their credentials to enjoy the ESPN networks they receive as part of their subscription through the WatchESPN app on Apple TV.

 

[off_piste]

Well, if I had to guess is because they do not want to pay Apple for in-app purchases and don't want to follow what Hulu is doing. And don't want to have customers only have the option to subscribe on the SlingTV Web site. I do not believe it is because Apple refuses their App or they would have probably said so. There are a lot of Apps getting on the App Store. With some I am a bit surprised.
I did call their customer support last year and the person I talk to said they would love to add support to Apple TV. Of course that could have been BS. Also, could have been before the Apple TV 4. I just now ask the Chat Service and the only answer was we will pass it on.
I believe as Apple TV gains more and more market share (assuming they will) then Sling TV will add the App and figure out a way to make it work. But now or later I believe it is in SlingTV hands.

This is from their Web Site:

When will Sling TV be on Apple TV?
We are always looking to add to Sling TV’s supported devices. Unfortunately, our service is not currently available on Apple TV. However, Sling TV customers can use their credentials to enjoy the ESPN networks they receive as part of their subscription through the WatchESPN app on Apple TV.

I still don't see how that adds up. You have to sign up for SlingTV through their website as it is now. Download the iOS app and try to sign up - you can't, only login. So I have to ask what is so different about the Apple TV that they can't/won't create an easy port from the iOS version?

 

[d21mike]

I still don't see how that adds up. You have to sign up for SlingTV through their website as it is now. Download the iOS app and try to sign up - you can't, only login. So I have to ask what is so different about the Apple TV that they can't/won't create an easy port from the iOS version?

You responded to me. Yes, I agree, you are preaching to the choir. You and I are a bit in the minority here.

 

[derekshank]

Perhaps. I'll point out though that Spotify is not on Apple TV while it is on Roku ... They may not outright block anyone, but they can create conditions that make it very difficult for competing products.

That's true. But Pandora and iHeartRadio are on the AppleTV, which begs the question... is Apple keeping Spotify away, or is Spotify keeping itself away?

And yes... Apple can certainly create conditions that make it difficult for competing products - and almost certainly do. But at the moment, we have no evidence that Apple treats Amazon or Spotify any differently than Hulu or Pandora.

Apple is going to do what is best for Apple... and that will mean that some companies who can afford to will stay away. But you could make (and I have made) the argument that Amazon wants to stay away for a variety of reasons that have nothing to do with the percentage that Apple would charge them for sales.

As for SlingTV... They are owned by Dish, right? They are a direct competitor with Time Warner. With the rumors that Apple may be interested in purchasing Time Warner... I'm sure SlingTV is weighing the decision about what is best for the future of their company. Considering the currently limited marketshare of the ATV4, SlingTV has the luxury to wait and see how things play out before making their decision.

My hunch is that Apple's own streaming service is not an "if" but a "when" - at which point SlingTV will be a direct competitor with Apple streaming services no matter what happens to Time Warner. SlingTV would almost certainly be at a major disadvantage on the ATV4... just like Amazon Instant Video vs iTunes.

So again, the reasons that these apps are not on the Apple TV are probably not merely because Apple has created an unwelcome environment for these particular services... but more because Apple is in direct competition with such a wide variety of services... and those services are not interested in just giving away an advantage to Apple.

 

[akm3]

So they reported that Amazon Prime on TvOS was coming 'in a few weeks' back in late November 2015. We've heard nothing. Is the latest thinking that they've decided NOT to pursue it? That makes me sad.

 

[Sakurambo-kun]

So they reported that Amazon Prime on TvOS was coming 'in a few weeks' back in late November 2015. We've heard nothing. Is the latest thinking that they've decided NOT to pursue it? That makes me sad.

More likely there was never an app in development and the customer service guy lied or was simply misinformed.

 

[2010mini]

Aside from the reasons Rigby pointed out that this isn't really viable... I don't believe that the commission is the only problem.

I've detailed the reasons I believe Amazon isn't coming to the Apple TV elsewhere... but I'll summarize some of them here as well. It might be too long for you to read... but I really think it explains what is going on right now.

Unlike a subscription service like Netflix and Hulu, Amazon (and Vudu) also sell content. I would imagine that Amazon is far less interested in the yearly "Prime Membership" income, and far more interested in selling and renting movies and TV shows (like iTunes does).

It's the same reason that Vudu and iTunes aren't on the Fire TV. They are direct competitors. Amazon doesn't want you to buy from Walmart or Apple on their device... and Apple likewise doesn't want you to own a Fire TV in the first place. Vudu wants to discourage you from owning either an Apple TV or a Fire TV, because they know they'll always be at a disadvantage on those devices.

Amazon is trying to build more loyal customers (like Apple has), rather than build something that works alongside Apple products. They don't want to cooperate with iTunes... they want to replace it.

Amazon is less interested in making loyal Apple customers happy, and far more interested in building their own base of loyal customers that will use Amazon services, but also pay for their hardware, and purchase lots of content. If that's the ultimate goal, discouraging folks from buying an Apple TV makes sense.

As for the "commission"... while I'm sure Amazon doesn't want to pay it - I think it goes deeper than that. Amazon could easily make a dumbed down app (like the iOS app), but that is basically conceding that iTunes will be the primary option for content purchasing in a home with an Apple TV. Given that they are direct competitors, both for content and set-top boxes, there is no way they'll just concede to being #2 to Apple.

People then ask why the iOS app exists then. The answer is simple: The iOS app is intended for you to have your library that you purchased on Amazon available when you leave the house. Amazon knows that they need to be compatible with an iPhone if they want a chance to compete. 43+% of Americans have iPhones. You can't ignore them and hope to succeed.

Apple TV 4? Current estimates say it only has 13.1% marketshare (all Apple TV models account for 31%) in the set-top box world. The FireTV has a 27.5% marketshare... so Amazon rightly feels that they can really compete with Apple here. If they were to make an Amazon app, the Apple TV 4 would instantly be the only set-top box that can access both Amazon and iTunes. That gives Apple a huge marketable advantage over the Fire TV that Amazon is not interested in giving them.

As for the airplay option... Amazon offered Airplay before this type of competition between the Apple TV and Fire TV really heated up. It's one thing to not create an app that has never existed... and it's quite another to disable a service that you've previously allowed. You think people are mad now about no app? Think about the outrage if Amazon makes it impossible to watch your content on an Apple TV?

All of that to say... Amazon Instant Video and Vudu won't be on an Apple TV any time soon. I'd put money on it - regardless of what their customer service reps tell the public.

I agree that this is a decision by Amazon. Amazon wants Fire TV to be on the main STB. Apple's goal is the same (gotta say CEC control was genius)

Amazon considers Apple to be its direct competitor. maybe even its biggest competitor because of Apple's brand dominance worldwide. You can't watch a tv show or movie these days without seeing Apple's brand.

Amazon doesn't want to be "another streaming app" on Apple TV. It wants to replace Apple TV.

 

[NeilHD]

FWIW, Amazon in London are currently hiring for loads of engineers and software managers for their various Amazon Video projects.

There are specific positions for Android, web, desktop, billing, Roku, other embedded devices and more. None, however, mention Apple TV. One does mention IOS, but that is likely not the same thing.

Leads me to think, sadly, that there are no plans.

On the bright side (for me at least), I can get it on my new Blu-Ray player, which means no more airplaying.

 

[spinningblade]

That's true. But Pandora and iHeartRadio are on the AppleTV, which begs the question... is Apple keeping Spotify away, or is Spotify keeping itself away?

Pandora/iHeartRadio are very different services than Spotify. The former are just streaming radio apps based on genres/artists. Spotify lets you play almost any song you want, whenever you want. Spotify's direct competitor: Apple Music.

 

[shacky]

FWIW, Amazon in London are currently hiring for loads of engineers and software managers for their various Amazon Video projects.

There are specific positions for Android, web, desktop, billing, Roku, other embedded devices and more. None, however, mention Apple TV. One does mention IOS, but that is likely not the same thing.

Leads me to think, sadly, that there are no plans.

On the bright side (for me at least), I can get it on my new Blu-Ray player, which means no more airplaying.

That's what doesn't make sense to me, I have it on my Sony blu-ray player, but not my ATV. I know this has been discussed ad nauseam, but I just think that Amazon content and Prime program is more of a profit center than fire tv products. They should make it available for every device they can.