While inconvenient, not surprising. I do this with VUDU now. I just go to the website on my phone to purchase the content.
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.
Apple Removes Ability to Buy and Rent in Update to Apple TV App for Android TV and Google TV
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Look at Apple trying to avoid the price of a duopoly standard that they helped to establish
Its funny the ATV+ app for the FireTV never had the ability to rent/purchase iTunes movies from the outset but Roku did, with the AndroidTV versions later arrival didn't realise it also allowed purchase/rentals. Ironic because Apple allows Amazon to provide purchase/rentals in the Prime App on the AppleTV.
In the US its not much of an issue with various digital rental/purchase platforms and the unifying Movies Anywhere so it doesn't really matter where you buy, but in some countries, like here in Canada iTunes has by far the largest catalog, especially if you like older movies. Vudu isn't available, Google Play/Youtube is OK for new releases but has a pretty anemic selection, and Amazon only just started digital purchases here. And no Movies Anywhere to make digital purchases platform agnostic.
In the US its not much of an issue with various digital rental/purchase platforms and the unifying Movies Anywhere so it doesn't really matter where you buy, but in some countries, like here in Canada iTunes has by far the largest catalog, especially if you like older movies. Vudu isn't available, Google Play/Youtube is OK for new releases but has a pretty anemic selection, and Amazon only just started digital purchases here. And no Movies Anywhere to make digital purchases platform agnostic.
lol - you've got something on your nose.
Then don’t buy one… there are plenty of high end TVs already above that price point. You think Apple is going to make a cheap TV??? You want them to? That market is flooded already.
If you don’t want a $5000 TV (if it comes to be) buy one of the many, many other options on the market and plug in your ATV box. That’s Apple’s budget TV.
That’s for the crap version. $9999 for the Apple Television Pro Max. Non OLED, of course.
One would think Apple would feel privileged to pay that 30% for access and SDKs to the platform, but apparently not. Total mystery, can't quite figure it out.
Plus another $1000 if you want its stand...
But the iTunes Store doesn’t really have a differentiating factor, and if that’s the case why wouldn’t people just go to another store?
You also have to choose if you want a VESA mount or a stand when you order, because it’s impossible to do both.
Apple’s point would be that Epic could do exactly what Apple just did. What Apple did NOT do is sneak another purchasing mechanism through app review.
I thought a 30% commission was essential to preserving the security and integrity of the blah blah blah. Is that only Apple's position when they're receiving the commission?
Roku is not effected as well as Samsung/LG tvs. So I doubt its to push people, it's just a pettiness with google like usual. You can get a Roku for $20.
Looks like they apply their own rules: you don't want to pay, you don't use it.
I am not sure why this is suprising or why people think its "ironic." Apple allows exactly the same thing and Amazon prime does exactly this. So companies can choose to not pay the 30% of Apple TV just like Apple chose not to pay it.
How is what they did inconsistent with that? They didn’t sue Google and demand an end to the commission. They didn’t try and sneak an alternate purchasing mechanism through the Play Store. They did exactly what you are allowed to do on Apple’s own store, which is to remove the purchasing mechanism.
I don't know if I'd fully go with that sentiment... Lack vision? Sure. Aggressive? More along the lines of stubborn insisting on protection of their margins. Ultimately they're holding the purses though, and from that perspective, prior strategy has worked. Their revenue generation outside of hardware sales has done quite well, to the chagrin of reading many developer's legit complaints about store policies.
Thanks. I know I am spot on. Cracks me up that people think Apple doesn't want to drive traffic to their store where they can demonstrate a better experience. And others have said, this is the very solution Apple has told other developers to use, including Microsoft. Given that these tv os's only get updated with new hardware, why should Apple continue to provide revenue for a platform that isn't seeing regular software updates?
It’s like rain on your wedding day? Like 10,000 spoons when what you need is a knife?
Epic put an in-app option to pay against the rules of the store, which got their app rejected by the Google Play store. It seems like by comparison, this is Apple respecting the Google Play store rules.
I guess people on macrumors forums don’t quite know what ”ironic” means, or don’t understand that Apple doing exactly what it expects developers who use its own App Store to do does not meet the definition of irony. Who woulda thunk it.