Apple Abandoned Low-Cost TV Dongle Plans, but Looking to Double New Apple TV+ Content Rate in 2022

[guzhogi]

I really wish they'd make a dongle. I'm sure the parts are small enough to fit. The AppleInsider article about this said that Apple wants to maintain a "premium" reputation. Who says a dongle can't be "premium". Plus "Premium" and inexpensive aren't mutually exclusive. Maybe have "premium" design and build quality, but "cheap" cost. Doesn't mean much if it's the opposite (ie cheap design & build quality, premium price).

Before anyone says it, yes, I know Apple is a business and they have a duty to maximize profit. However, I hate that. I want Apple to be profitable enough to be able to better itself and grow, but have products inexpensive enough to allow more people to afford them. Plus, invest enough in their employees so that they can put a roof over their heads, food on the table, and enough time & money to improve their skills.

 

[Juicy Box]

Please rename the Apple TV/Apple TV+/TV app/devices. WAY too confusing.

Confusing names.

The ATV, ATV+, and Apple's TV app is really confusing for people, especially the general public.

A bunch of threads on this forum shows how confusing it is for people.

After the Apple's TV app started launching on non-apple devices, there has been many threads of people asking how to use the Apple TV (meaning tvOS) built in to their Smart TV.

Actually, just looking at some of the posts in this particular thread, I don't know if people are talking about The Apple TV, Apple TV+, or Apple's TV app.

 

[chucker23n1]

Why doesn’t it make any sense? Not every product Apple makes has to be premium and premium priced.

Because Apple’s brand isn’t really set up that way.

Maybe if they branded it the Beats TV?

But even then, what’s in it for Apple?

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

I think the whole dongle idea for TV support is too simplistic, and weird. I mean, you can't have a lot of apps, because: No memory. You can't have some caching, because: No memory. No, or really limited memory.

Could the Apple TV be smaller? Maybe, but it's got a lot of stuff under the hood. To go a dongle route would be a major step down, and likley have the things turning into literal fire sticks from the heat...

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

The ATV, ATV+, and Apple's TV app is really confusing for people, especially the general public.

A bunch of threads on this forum shows how confusing it is for people.

After the Apple's TV app started launching on non-apple devices, there has been many threads of people asking how to use the Apple TV (meaning tvOS) built in to their Smart TV.

Actually, just looking at some of the posts in this particular thread, I don't know if people are talking about The Apple TV, Apple TV+, or Apple's TV app.

Yeah, but, I can see the reason. I think they wanted 'Apple TV' to be ubiquitous, and it is. It's an app, it's a subscription, it's a shim on a TV, it's all of it. Big step for a 'hobby project'.

 

[kyleh22]

I guess subscription services make more money than low priced dongles. Steve was a product mastermind; Tim is a profit mastermind.

 

[MagnetaPaladin]

Apparently the people who said Apple TV+ didn’t have edgy content never watched The Morning Show.

 

[MagnetaPaladin]

If Apple TV+ would have a live TV feed with local channels, sports, etc, that was like youtubetv or hulu+ live TV, that would rule.

Apple excels at delivery beautiful 4K content, but also dolby atmos/5.1 sound.

No one service ties all this together.

I pay 70 ish bucks a month for YTTV. Great picture quality and ease of use, they cannot figure out how to deliver 5.1. its a running joke.

Interested in hulu+ live tv. Directv just rebranded. ATT live streaming I think.

I am actually surprised Apple has not done this. It would cement the need for an Apple TV device.

AT&T TV/ DirecTV Stream is pretty close to that. It also integrates pretty well with the existing Apple TV STB.

Now the TV’s with integrated streaming having the largest share of market in TV streaming is telling, but Apple also seems unwilling to go that route. Ask Gene Munster.

 

[Pakaku]

This is ridiculous if it is real. As if only likable people use Apple products?!

That's the message Apple wants to send. Why else would they get into the movie and TV business in the first place?

 

[jimimac71]

There is.

This is yet another app not compatible with my Samsung Galaxy Tab A. No one ever tells me why this is.

 

[Bushibot]

Apple has abandoned its plans for a low-cost Apple TV dongle and is set to significantly accelerate and expand the output of new content on Apple TV+ next year, according to The Information.

Sources said to be familiar with Apple's plans speaking to The Information have apparently revealed many of the company's internal discussions and attitudes around Apple TV+ in detail. The company allegedly sees Apple TV+ as a standalone business rather than a mechanism to encourage users to buy into the Apple ecosystem.

The Information reported in 2018 that Apple was working on a low-cost TV dongle device as a more inexpensive alternative to the Apple TV, which starts at $149. The project was driven by Tim Twerdahl, an Apple video and audio marketing executive, who argued that a low-cost TV device would make it more affordable for users to access Apple TV+ based on his experience overseeing similar projects at Netflix and Amazon.

Greg Joswiak and Phil Schiller reportedly overruled Twerdahl, insisting that Apple should not begin making cheap, low-margin devices due to its potential to damage its reputation for premium products, meaning that Twerdahl's low-cost TV device project was abandoned. Twerdahl is said to have recently left the company.

Apple decided that an appropriate middle-ground solution would be to develop apps for Apple TV+ on other platforms, such as devices from Samsung, Roku, Amazon, Sony, and Microsoft, which aligned with earlier concerns among executives, including Eddy Cue, that Apple TV+ would need to be available on a wide range of devices, including non-Apple ones.

Executives are said to have debated putting the Apple brand on another company's device for over a year, ahead of Apple reaching an agreement for a dedicated Apple TV+ button on the Roku remote control. Apple has apparently discussed similar arrangements with at least one other TV manufacturer, but there are no imminent plans for another dedicated button.

The report explained that Apple intends to increase the amount of regular new content on Apple TV+ in 2022, with at least one new item added per week, at more than double the pace of new content in 2021.

Despite Apple's willingness to pay a premium for Apple TV+ content, the company apparently refuses to cover budget overruns, insisting that studio partners pay for any additional costs.

Some studio executives have apparently felt frustrated with Apple's lack of willingness to market shows aggressively before they come out, treating the debut of new shows like hardware products. The company is also said to share little detail with studio partners about the objectives of marketing campaigns, and whether they are aiming to advertise to acquire subscribers or raise awareness of an individual show.

Apple TV+ is also set to benefit from more than $500 million in marketing this year. The company is believed to have spent significantly less than this on marketing in 2020. Netflix, by comparison, spent $1.1 billion on marketing during the first half of 2021 alone. Apple has also reportedly told advertising partners that it will not buy campaigns for Apple TV+ titles on Facebook or Instagram.

It was estimated that by the end of 2020, Apple TV+ had around 40 million subscribers. These numbers are roughly the same as of this summer, according to an individual said to have knowledge of Apple's subscriber figures. Approximately half of Apple TV+ subscribers are now paying for the service, with the other half still using a free trial period.

Other tidbits from the report include the fact that Apple has endeavored to protect its brand within Apple TV+ shows, insisting that the unlikeable character of "Jo" in "Mythic Quest" was not seen using Apple devices during the show's second season.

For more details, see The Information's full report.

Article Link: Apple Abandoned Low-Cost TV Dongle Plans, but Looking to Double New Apple TV+ Content Rate in 2022

Too bad, I hate the pushy add **** and constant prime redirects on the fiertv sticks. I would have happy bought several to apple adapters replace them abs have the same clean UI as on the Apple TV attached to my living room TV. I’m in no way ever forking over money to put Apple TV on multiple older Tv’s. Classic management bring so rich they forgot how regular consumers do math.

 

[oneMadRssn]

They don't need to make a profit on each unit sold because they make plenty of money on services now.

Are they making plenty of money on services specific to the Apple TV though? They don't break it down into detail for investors. Sure they're making a ton off the App Store, iCloud storage, and such. But it seems they're not really making much off the kind of things that are prevalent on the Apple TV, specifically Apple Music, AppleTV+, and Apple Fitness. I mean, it might be revenue-positive, but I doubt it's substantial. And in the case of Apple Music, we know they're probably losing a bit on it given the disclosures of how much they pay for the rights. It seems those services are instead just premium features to get you locked-in to the ecosystem. Sort of how Apple used to sell iLife and iWork, when really those were just ways to get you locked-in to Mac. In other words, those services sell AppleTVs, not the other way around.

 

[jimimac71]

Why doesn’t it make any sense? Not every product Apple makes has to be premium and premium priced.

So far everything Apple sells costs more. I'm too cheap to shop Apple. This keeps Google products strong. IE: Android and Chromebook.

 

[Thrutheroofnunderground]

They probably abandoned it because it would be too cheap to make/price and would cannibalize into the over priced 4kTV.

Everybody that wants one of those at this point basically has one. I haven't ever seen the value in it. Too expensive for what you get.

 

[Thrutheroofnunderground]

Are they making plenty of money on services specific to the Apple TV though? They don't break it down into detail for investors. Sure they're making a ton off the App Store, iCloud storage, and such. But it seems they're not really making much off the kind of things that are prevalent on the Apple TV, specifically Apple Music, AppleTV+, and Apple Fitness. I mean, it might be revenue-positive, but I doubt it's substantial. And in the case of Apple Music, we know they're probably losing a bit on it given the disclosures of how much they pay for the rights. It seems those services are instead just premium features to get you locked-in to the ecosystem. Sort of how Apple used to sell iLife and iWork, when really those were just ways to get you locked-in to Mac. In other words, those services sell AppleTVs, not the other way around.

If any other music platform is making money, then I would definitely believe Apple is, with their active user base, and those users who seem much more willing to pay for apps and other services.

 

[Thrutheroofnunderground]

If they’re unwilling to create a cheaper dongle, the least they could do was to make an app for Android. There are so many people who want to watch their shows, but flat out refuse to watch them on a phone browser. And I don’t blame them. I don’t understand why they’re not entertaining this idea. They already have Apple Music on there, so what makes this any different?

It's available on a looot of TVs, Roku, and Firestick (how I access it). Idk about straight up Android TV, but it's on a lot of devices/options.

 

[coolchris101]

Definitely need more content.

 

[Thrutheroofnunderground]

I'll say. You can't go five minutes through Ted Lasso without a very conspicuous shot of an iPhone or MacBook. I mean, fine, whatever -- but when Coach Steve said he was "sharing his iCloud" with his girlfriend, that just felt SO ham-fisted. (Also, Coach Steve seems like more an Android guy to me, tbh.)

Why is that? He seems like a I'll keep my phone for a long time kind of guy to me, and until the very recent past, that would have been an iPhone only. Why would he say "cloud storage" if he's talking about iCloud storage? Likewise, the way he is so into the women he dates, if she had an iPhone, he would have one.

 

[oneMadRssn]

If any other music platform is making money, then I would definitely believe Apple is, with their active user base, and those users who seem much more willing to pay for apps and other services.

Isn't the general consensus that other music platforms are not making much money? Spotify is barely making money and only in some quarters, yet they have more paying subscribers than Apple and pay the artists a smaller fee per play. Larger base, smaller expenses, and they're barely squeaking by.

 

[Thrutheroofnunderground]

I think they made the right decision.

Streaming dongles are a fading market. Smart TV platforms are "good enough" for the large majority of consumers in 2021. Not only do they ship the AppleTV+ app on the various Smart TV app stores but they nearly all include AirPlay 2 functionality at this point.

Looking at the Smart TV sales data it would appear that AirPlay 2 is available on 85%+ of TVs shipping today.

View attachment 1829175

Also worth looking at this chart showing the existing marketshare per manufactuer and per OS/platform:View attachment 1829181

Roku, Google, and Amazon have been tripping over themselves for years to ship as many $30-50 streaming dongles as they could. They have a grand total of 13% marketshare to show for it.

Idk how accurate this is though. After two or so years the LG TV we bought stopped randomly supporting Hulu (it wasn't a cheap TV either, well over $1K). We've been buying firesticks since. Same thing with an older Samsung. It was slow as heck after a few years, so we bought a firestick for it too. Not going to spend $800 every few years on a TV that will last much longer just for some slight feature upgrades, and I don't care about chasing slightly better picture quality at an exorbitant cost.

 

[spinedoc77]

That's interesting on the difference in marketing budget between Netflix and Apple TV +. I just canceled my Netflix and signed up for Apple TV+, will see how that goes. Netflix is going downhill IMO, a large percentage of front page movies are foreign and subtitled. It's not that I mind, or that some of those are most likely very good movies, I just want a simple option to filter them out as I honestly cannot stand watching subtitled or dubbed movies. I suspect the reason you can't filter them out is because if you could you would see the lack of new content.

But in any event what I've been doing lately is just waiting for episodes to catch up, then binge watching them instead of paying every month. Walking Dead? Pay 1 month of AMC and binge watch it, 1 episode every 2 or 3 nights. Same thing with Disney, HBO Max, etc. There is a lot of stuff on Apple TV + so I will probably keep that for a few months, but if they keep releasing new stuff (like Netflix used to do) I may keep them forever. Same with Amazon, they release new stuff (as well as the other Prime benefits) so I keep them around.

 

[BlakeSchneider]

It's available on a looot of TVs, Roku, and Firestick (how I access it). Idk about straight up Android TV, but it's on a lot of devices/options.

I’m talking about phones and tablets.

 

[RR24]

Apple has abandoned its plans for a low-cost Apple TV dongle and is set to significantly accelerate and expand the output of new content on Apple TV+ next year, according to The Information.

Sources said to be familiar with Apple's plans speaking to The Information have apparently revealed many of the company's internal discussions and attitudes around Apple TV+ in detail. The company allegedly sees Apple TV+ as a standalone business rather than a mechanism to encourage users to buy into the Apple ecosystem.

The Information reported in 2018 that Apple was working on a low-cost TV dongle device as a more inexpensive alternative to the Apple TV, which starts at $149. The project was driven by Tim Twerdahl, an Apple video and audio marketing executive, who argued that a low-cost TV device would make it more affordable for users to access Apple TV+ based on his experience overseeing similar projects at Netflix and Amazon.

Greg Joswiak and Phil Schiller reportedly overruled Twerdahl, insisting that Apple should not begin making cheap, low-margin devices due to its potential to damage its reputation for premium products, meaning that Twerdahl's low-cost TV device project was abandoned. Twerdahl is said to have recently left the company.

Apple decided that an appropriate middle-ground solution would be to develop apps for Apple TV+ on other platforms, such as devices from Samsung, Roku, Amazon, Sony, and Microsoft, which aligned with earlier concerns among executives, including Eddy Cue, that Apple TV+ would need to be available on a wide range of devices, including non-Apple ones.

Executives are said to have debated putting the Apple brand on another company's device for over a year, ahead of Apple reaching an agreement for a dedicated Apple TV+ button on the Roku remote control. Apple has apparently discussed similar arrangements with at least one other TV manufacturer, but there are no imminent plans for another dedicated button.

The report explained that Apple intends to increase the amount of regular new content on Apple TV+ in 2022, with at least one new item added per week, at more than double the pace of new content in 2021.

Despite Apple's willingness to pay a premium for Apple TV+ content, the company apparently refuses to cover budget overruns, insisting that studio partners pay for any additional costs.

Some studio executives have apparently felt frustrated with Apple's lack of willingness to market shows aggressively before they come out, treating the debut of new shows like hardware products. The company is also said to share little detail with studio partners about the objectives of marketing campaigns, and whether they are aiming to advertise to acquire subscribers or raise awareness of an individual show.

Apple TV+ is also set to benefit from more than $500 million in marketing this year. The company is believed to have spent significantly less than this on marketing in 2020. Netflix, by comparison, spent $1.1 billion on marketing during the first half of 2021 alone. Apple has also reportedly told advertising partners that it will not buy campaigns for Apple TV+ titles on Facebook or Instagram.

It was estimated that by the end of 2020, Apple TV+ had around 40 million subscribers. These numbers are roughly the same as of this summer, according to an individual said to have knowledge of Apple's subscriber figures. Approximately half of Apple TV+ subscribers are now paying for the service, with the other half still using a free trial period.

Other tidbits from the report include the fact that Apple has endeavored to protect its brand within Apple TV+ shows, insisting that the unlikeable character of "Jo" in "Mythic Quest" was not seen using Apple devices during the show's second season.

For more details, see The Information's full report.

Article Link: Apple Abandoned Low-Cost TV Dongle Plans, but Looking to Double New Apple TV+ Content Rate in 2022

Yeah, I was going to start watching Ted Lasso but decided no since I will have to add another subscription which for me, I would only watch that show. I have opt it to stay with ESPN+ more things to watch for me. Also, the Dongle would be a great alternative for people that don’t want have too many cables like me and want to use it for travel. There’s a big market for those, that’s one of the reasons why the Firestick and Roku Streaming Stick are dominating in that department hence why many are hesitant in buying a $200 Box vs a $50 stick. If Apple wants to continue to increase subscribers, the shows yeah are great but you will need to have an affordable platform that customers are willing to buy because a $200 box is too expensive might as well stick with the cheaper options.

 

[Pezimak]

Dont want to damage our "premium" name by making ANYTHING we sell affordable. Phill Schiller is an asshat. I don't care what he's accomplished; that statement is elitist and doesn't at all represent a good business decision.

You do realise that those words were ‘reportedly’ said, in other words it could all be completely made up. So your anger and frustration could be completely misguided. Also Apple is a premium brand, the same as many other brands are yet would you vent your anger at the same way? For marketing and making devices to suit its premium target market?

 

[RR24]

Dont want to damage our "premium" name by making ANYTHING we sell affordable. Phill Schiller is an asshat. I don't care what he's accomplished; that statement is elitist and doesn't at all represent a good business decision.

I think they sold the iPhone 5C or the iPhone SE 2 idk why they are saying that if they actually meant it.