Apple Hires Indie Studio A24 to Produce Films

[truthertech]

And that why its a problem for many of us. Apple doesn't seem to be able to focus on products that MANY of us would like to buy and depend on. A decent upgradable Mac Pro. Maybe Apple should spin off the Mac OS X and Mac business.

I apologize for being off topic. Very frustrated with the current crop of choices and not trying to be snarky. Apple seems to be getting more and more fractured.

Hope they do well in movies.

Please buy Star Trek and reboot properly. I can dream ...

It's fascinating that there are still people who don't understand that it's not Steve and Woz with a few employees doing everything at Apple anymore, how large corporations function or how the most valuable company in the world with tens of thousands of engineers and hundreds of billions just in cash,:

1) can't somehow manage to have a video content business while at the same time have a hardware group. Or

2) that the industry leading experts that Apple hired to go out and buy the rights to movies and other content, and to contract with producers, etc., to produce content have anything to do with the engineers and managers designing hardware or are somehow distracting the hardware folks from working on the next iPad, iPhone or Mac.

 

[imageWIS]

The Mac receives an amount of attention proportionate to the degree of importance it plays in Apple’s long term product strategy, as do other products such as the Apple Watch (including watch bands).

It’s the ones who stubbornly continue to think that the Mac somehow represents the future of computing at Apple who fail to see the big picture.

Please explain how a TV show is the future of computing. This. Should. Be. Good.

 

[ryanwarsaw]

Updated it with sub-par parts (poor thermal management, weak as heck graphics cards and still no upgradability/expandability in a soldered in chasy) at a grossly inflated price.
I'm sorry but I can't cheer for this guy. He may be making the comapny a lot of money, but at the expense of their core customers that supported the company for decades when times were thin for Apple.

Well if Tim "KooK" isn't for you go try your luck with Michael Hell and buy a Dell. Cook has a legal obligation to do what's best for his shareholders. He has no legal obligation to do anything for you.

 

[Abazigal]

Please explain how a TV show is the future of computing. This. Should. Be. Good.

https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2016/10/20/apples-trojan-horse-into-hollywood

In 2014, Apple didn't buy Beats for $3 billion just as a music streaming play. Instead, Beats was Apple's content streaming play. The Beats acquisition and resulting Apple Music service will serve as the foundation for Apple's broader content strategy. We are already starting to see the early stages of this plan taking shape.

Apple's video strategy:

Use Apple Music to mask original video programming ambitions. Check.
Expand to other types of original video programming. Check.
Position Apple Music as a carrot for an "Apple Video" streaming service by offering a combined Apple content subscription including Apple Music and Apple Video.

The Big Picture

Apple is not getting into video content to boost its services revenue. Instead, video and music streaming will be positioned as ways to increase the value found in using Apple hardware.

Apple sees itself as the company best able to bridge the gap between Hollywood and Silicon Valley - a technology company with a range of devices and a loyal base of more than 700 million premium users that values high quality content. In addition to scouting programming ideas on its own, Apple will take a few pages from its Apple Music playbook to embrace, and potentially partner with, existing content companies on original programming ideas if the right opportunities arise. Hollywood isn't Apple's enemy.

When comparing Netflix and Apple Music paid subscribers, it becomes clear why using Apple Music as a type of incubator for Apple's video streaming service ends up being such an interesting twist. By using original video content to boost Apple Music, Apple already has nearly 20M paying viewers accessing that video content. This compares to Netflix's 83M user count - not bad for a 16-month-old paid streaming service. As the amount of additional video content increases, Apple hopes this will further increase Apple Music subscriptions, thereby improving its video chances. Apple's $3 billion Beats acquisition was a Trojan horse into Hollywood.

It’s all about the ecosystem.

 

[ipponrg]

https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2016/10/20/apples-trojan-horse-into-hollywood





It’s all about the ecosystem.

I just want to point out a few flaws in your outdated article

Apple sees itself as the company best able to bridge the gap between Hollywood and Silicon Valley - a technology company with a range of devices and a loyal base of more than 700 million premium users that values high quality content. In addition to scouting programming ideas on its own, Apple will take a few pages from its Apple Music playbook to embrace, and potentially partner with, existing content companies on original programming ideas if the right opportunities arise. Hollywood isn't Apple's enemy.

The problem with this statement is that the music industry is not the same as the video industry. They've tried this before during the Jobs era and failed. Maybe this time around, it will work out given the amount of investment that is going into this.

When comparing Netflix and Apple Music paid subscribers, it becomes clear why using Apple Music as a type of incubator for Apple's video streaming service ends up being such an interesting twist. By using original video content to boost Apple Music, Apple already has nearly 20M paying viewers accessing that video content

Do music audiences and video audiences necessarily correlate to each other?

I disagree with your buddy Neil Cybart here (even though this article was written in 2016) for a few reasons. People that watch a lot of videos may not listen to a lot of music and vice versa. There are some overlap characteristics, but it'd be flawed to try to connect the two together because you will exclude the majority. With the vast array of existing and future subscription services from major studios, Apple has a very tough hill to climb. Apple needs to address the major existing flaws in their current situation: lack of ubiquity, controlled creativity, and narrow target demographic.

Of course if Apple somehow releases their video streaming service to be ubiquitous across all devices and platforms, that would surprise me.

On a side note, continuing to neglect the Mac crowd may come back to be a case study in B-school books. It's the mac crowd that has got them to where they are and supports them.

 

[Abazigal]

On a side note, continuing to neglect the Mac crowd may come back to be a case study in B-school books. It's the mac crowd that has got them to where they are and supports them.

And the Mac crowd is but a minority compared to Apple’s total user base today. The harsh reality is that the original core user base simply doesn’t matter as much anymore, because it’s the new user population who has the power in this relationship and sets the tone for what kind of company Apple will be.

Let’s play Devil’s advocate. What’s the worst that could happen to Apple? I am going to assume that app developers are still going to continue using a Mac because that’s what they need for their job, even if they don’t have any particular love for the platform.

I think that when we look back at this many years from today, history will conclude that Apple made the right move here. Circumstances changed, and the company changed, and that’s just the way she goes.

 

[ipponrg]

And the Mac crowd is but a minority compared to Apple’s total user base today. The harsh reality is that the original core user base simply doesn’t matter as much anymore, because it’s the new user population who has the power in this relationship and sets the tone for what kind of company Apple will be.

Are you sure it's reality? I don't think you're looking at the bigger picture from where you are standing. Tech companies including large IT corporations are growing their Mac usage. It's why JAMF is even a thing now. There are 2 types of Mac users: business/prosumer and consumer. It'd be a disappointment if Apple shuns the former because they feel their consumer base is more important and miss on all the opportunities in professionals.

You have been bragging about how much money Apple makes. Why is it wrong for Apple to continue to grow their other sectors? You've said it before. They have the capital to hire anyone and do anything. Why limit yourself with all that extra money?

Let’s play Devil’s advocate. What’s the worst that could happen to Apple? I am going to assume that app developers are still going to continue using a Mac because that’s what they need for their job, even if they don’t have any particular love for the platform.

The worst that can happen is other platforms such as Android and Windows or even a fork become a more prolific environment for all demographics. By not listening, you're allowing other platforms opportunities to usurp. Think back to when the Dells/HP/Compaqs came in, or when the Blackberries faded away. Do you want that to happen to your beloved ecosystem?

 

[Abazigal]

You have been bragging about how much money Apple makes. Why is it wrong for Apple to continue to grow their other sectors? You've said it before. They have the capital to hire anyone and do anything. Why limit yourself with all that extra money?

I won’t say it’s “wrong” to focus on growing the Mac. Just that at any one time, I am of the opinion that resources spent working on the Mac is almost always better spent elsewhere, due to a little economic concept called opportunity cost.

I suspect that money isn’t the bottleneck Apple is currently facing. Manpower is. At any one time, Apple only has so much human resources they can devote to so many projects. So if Apple decides to focus on the Mac, that means fewer resources that are working on some other product, such as the Apple Watch or the rumoured Apple glasses. Between the two, the Apple Watch is likely more lucrative, appeals to more people, and plays a more integral role in Apple’s product roadmap. And I do believe that Apple is already moving mountains just to sustain an annual refresh cycle for the iPhone and the Apple Watch.

Meanwhile, let’s look at say, reports of the upcoming refreshed Mac Pro. It’s a niche product. It likely won’t earn enough over its entire product life cycle to cover overall costs. It addresses only a very small percentage of Apple’s total user base. It does nothing to help push the other product categories forward. It’s there solely to stop the pro users from defecting.

That’s my take, at least. ‍

 

[ipponrg]

I won’t say it’s “wrong” to focus on growing the Mac. Just that at any one time, I am of the opinion that resources spent working on the Mac is almost always better spent elsewhere, due to a little economic concept called opportunity cost

I think you have a misconception here which you answered yourself here...

At any one time, Apple only has so much human resources they can devote to so many projects. So if Apple decides to focus on the Mac, that means fewer resources that are working on some other product, such as the Apple Watch or the rumoured Apple glasses.

One of the main reasons this is the case is people such as myself are uninterested in working for Apple. Apple recruiters have directly contacted me several times over the years to work on Siri and Apple services. The caveat is I would have to move to the bay area which presents its own set of problems. Apple effectively is limiting itself in hiring because they are growing their engineer personnel strategically yet don't set up corporate bases strategically enough. Their store employees greatly outnumber their corporate employees which makes it its own conundrum.

The other reason is you seem to think throwing a body count on a product is what creates, advances, and sustains a product. In engineering, we have a phrase "too many cooks in the kitchen". For simple refreshes without technology advances, it's not difficult to refresh.

The number of projects Apple works on pales in comparison to most of their competitors. A few internal memos have eluded to poor management in the Apple culture.

It does nothing to help push the other product categories forward. It’s there solely to stop the pro users from defecting.

It depends how you view it. You are of the mind that consumers are the one and only audience. What you forget is many (indie) studios use Mac Pros to this day to create content. Content creates an audience. The audience is your end product. You cut the source, then you have no end product.

 

[Abazigal]

The other reason is you seem to think throwing a body count on a product is what creates, advances, and sustains a product. In engineering, we have a phrase "too many cooks in the kitchen". For simple refreshes without technology advances, it's not difficult to refresh.

I am aware of the term “bozo explosion”. That’s why I don’t make the suggestion that Apple simply use their cash hoard to embark on a massive hiring spree.

And I do feel that Apple is currently doing a lot. Just how many companies have a full-fledged ecosystem comprising of hardware, software and services which they maintain 24/7?

 

[imageWIS]

I am aware of the term “bozo explosion”. That’s why I don’t make the suggestion that Apple simply use their cash hoard to embark on a massive hiring spree.

And I do feel that Apple is currently doing a lot. Just how many companies have a full-fledged ecosystem comprising of hardware, software and services which they maintain 24/7?

Are you serious with this question?

 

[Abazigal]

Are you serious with this question?

Why do you think I am joking?

Samsung has no services, and their OS is a skin of android.

Google has problems keeping even a low-demand phone in stock.

Microsoft’s hardware efforts are tiny.

Amazon...

So we see companies who excel either in hardware or software but rarely ever both.

 

[fathergll]

"It Comes at Night" is one of the best movies I've seen for 2017 but i know a lot of people hated it. Then again a lot of people have the film palate of a toddler so I'm not surprised as most Hollywood features are garbage yet they continue to rake in money.

 

[brdeveloper]

I thought it was for producing fonts.