Who wants to wear glasses while watching TV? This will flame out like 3D TVs did.This is for the new AR Apple glasses. A standard viewer wouldn't hold his phone up to his TV just for the heck of it. Way too clunky.
But, with the AR glasses, I can see this as being a cool little bonus for Apple Glasses and TV+ integration. I feel like the glasses will be announced with the new iPhone in October.
That actually sounds like fun. I’m not sure having a lunar lander on my (non existent) coffee table would be as interesting, but what you described sounds intriguing.Admittedly, I've not seen the true benefits of AG for everyday users. It has always seemed to be for those in the interior design space.
However, this news is intriguing. By bringing AG into AppleTV+, there are some interesting possibilities. For instance, in a murder mystery, it could allow closer inspection of evidence in 360 degree. Perhaps users can determine outcomes based how they interact with objects.
If done right, and they can weave interactivity into the plot, it could herald a new wave of storytelling.
False.Every show that Apple has, save for "Snoopy in Space," has scored under 75% on Rotten Tomatoes. Not exactly banging. Disney+'s premiere show "The Mandalorian" has a rating of 93% and "Hamilton" (which was out there for anyone to snag, but Disney thought of it) got 98%. But, keep telling me about quantity over quality.
Apple keep banging on about AR and VR and graphics performance, and yet consistently fail to get quality 'big name' games on their platforms.
What do they intend their big apple glasses product to be used for?
Their bland TV offering has no value.
People said this about the iPhone, iPad, and then the Apple Watch.
This is a reckless disregard for the truth. Do an actual search through Rotten Tomatoes and you will find that the majority of Apple's shows are in the 80-90% range. Since the original drop of shows, the majority of Apple shows have earned "Certified Fresh" scores on Rotten Tomatoes. And to top it off, audience scores are routinely in the same range or better (see Defending Jacob, for instance) than critic scores.Every show that Apple has, save for "Snoopy in Space," has scored under 75% on Rotten Tomatoes. Not exactly banging. Disney+'s premiere show "The Mandalorian" has a rating of 93% and "Hamilton" (which was out there for anyone to snag, but Disney thought of it) got 98%. But, keep telling me about quantity over quality.
Wow. You are just going to ignore my post and bring irrelevant viewing statistics? Yes, I also am aware that TV+ is a brand new service and thus has a smaller viewing audience. That doesn’t change the fact that the shows on TV+ are bangers, in fact, of the best shows of 2019-2020. The reviews are in. The people will soon come. As a great man once said, “Build it and they will come.”This link has the top 20 most watched shows from the 2nd quarter. I don't see any "bangers" from ATV on there. Netflix had the most.
Netflix Dominates (And HBO Max Rises) In New Report Detailing The 20 Most Popular Movies And Shows On The InternetA new report from online streaming guide Reelgood laid out the 20 most popular movies and TV shows of the second quarter of 2020.www.forbes.com
Just because people don't pay for one thing doesn't mean they pay for the other. Has Disney actually released figures or are we all just reporting some generic fact that could represent users not end user paid accounts.Unlike ATV+ people actually pay for Disney+. I’m not sure anyone is actually paying for ATV+ since they give it away like Halloween candy.
Like Apple didn't give away subscriptions?!? Almost ALL of Apple TV+'s subscriptions were given away free.
In fact, if you got Disney+ via Verizon service or the purchase of a new LG TV, Disney+ got some money from those companies for the subscriptions (not full price for sure, but some money). All of Apple's Apple TV+'s giveaways came directly out of Apple's own pocket, no payback at all.
Get back to me in November / December when people start dropping those Apple TV+ subs when they are no longer free.
The iPhone was a fantastic idea with some solid killer apps. Steve lead the introduction of the iPhone with those killer apps, not with the hardware.
The iPad was introduced as a media consumption device. Steve thought he was showing some killer apps... I don't think they really ended up all that great, though.
The Apple Watch's introduction didn't lead with the killer apps. It lead with being a super luxury product. It's gold! Look at these fancy bands! Apple couldn't talk about the software, because the software is pretty meh. Everything that's great about the software was also great on the Pebble.
The HomePod is a total dud because it doesn't have any worthwhile software. A dementia patient in a nursing home would make a better assistant than Siri (no offense intended... but it proves my point that being compared to Siri can be considered offensive.)