Did you not read any of this thread? Avalanche have cut development for iOS and PC too. Whatever the ATVs issues may be, they have nothing to do with why Di3.0 support is ending on tvOS.
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.
Disney Not Planning Additional Updates to 'Disney Infinity 3.0' for Apple TV
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Did you not read any of this thread? Avalanche have cut development for iOS and PC too. Whatever the ATVs issues may be, they have nothing to do with why Di3.0 support is ending on tvOS.
The article is about Disney and ATV. My point is apps are dead on Apple platforms because Apple is killing them. I don't give a rat's behind about PC.
So you jumped on someone for not having read the article, but it's your point that has nothing to do with the topic at hand? Got ya.
It makes business sense for Disney, but I do feel bad for the folks that shelled out money and then got dropped.
Follow the links back... My post was jumped on first when I cited the toucharcade article as explaining ATVs "apps" fate from literally day one. He poops on the toucharcade article because it was from December. But he fails to recognize that the toucharcade article correctly predicts the future, due to the current state of ATV. Proof being Disney's current retreat.
My point remains (as it has from the beginning) that Apple has killed apps, so the Disney move is not unexpected.
The topic is about Disney's actions related to the ATV platform. That's what my commentary has been about.
[doublepost=1459480279][/doublepost]So let me post the template tag line for all future ATV app related news (news that you shouldn't waste time caring about):
<company name here> not planning any future <any action> on the failed Apple TV platform.
Only a moron would believe that apps have a future on Apple TV.
Last edited:
One single company's actions do not prove anything.
Please explain, because on any platform where Apple has a store they are the number one platform for apps with the largest developer base. That even includes the Apple TV that admittedly needs some work to get to the level of the iPhone or iPad stores.
Apple removed discoverability features from all app stores starting with iOS a year ago. They did this suddenly and without any advance notice. Users cannot sort by release date. If you create a great app, no one will find it.
The toucharcade article correctly states that developers view "featuring" as a fiasco, based on luck, or connections (e.g. Tim, this is Zuck calling.. we have this new app you're going to feature for us). You don't have Tim's phone number.
Yes, developers need to market their apps. But any product marketing plan is based on how users buy the product (see marketing 101) AND Apple enforces a captive store on iOS and ATV, so without a simple sort by release date discoverability, and risk of not being featured, total product development and marking costs plus risk exceed the viability threshold for small developers. Being on the top of a new releases list can provide a spark of revenue that makes a small developer with an original idea take off (how it worked in the beginning) - Apple shut that down and now decides if an original idea is worth featuring - customers have no say because they never see apps that Apple buries.
I've been selling software for 28 years and have had iOS apps in the store since 2008. Yes, the app store was a gold mine in the beginning for us small devs (see my earlier posts that describe that "magic"). But Apple has killed it now by their own elitist stupidity.
And I would respectfully disagree with your perception that having a simple "sort by release date" discovery feature is the best way (for a consumer) to discover quality content. In fact, a system that promotes that as it's main discovery mechanism could be easily gamed, and was, which is why Apple made, and continues to make, changes to how people discover content. Understand that Apple's first commitment in any captive store is to provide the best mechanism to help customers find the item they are looking for, not the best way to make sure that any developer can "shark tank" their app to Apple's customer base. REAL marketing involves not just STOREFRONT SIGNAGE or ENDCAP PLACEMENT, which is what you are essentially advocating as paramount to success. Yes, large established brands probably have an easier time getting placement in those "premium" areas, but don't think for a second that they haven't spent large sums of money on external brand development and establishing a following for said brand that drives a desire for people to discover their product. This is a fallacy in your hypothetical marketing 101 class. Just means your marketing plans focus is incorrect. I would also disagree with your perception that the App Store is dying. A platform that is dying would have tech leaders like microsoft clamoring to introduce methods to develop iOS apps on their Proprietary platforms/OS. Adjustments to discovery also created more of a focus on quality. So NOW, I don't have to see the latest FART apps anymore... oh darn... Point being, I've seen SEVERAL companies really double down on mobile apps in general. Just went to a working lunch with one this week in fact, maybe you've heard of them, UsTwo? They made this wildly successful game called Monument Valley. Of course they also understand the value of diversification and partnership with other established brands.
Now i will say that the OS X app store and the restrictions there with sandboxing and such that needs some work... but thats not the subject of this particular discussion.
That might be from your developer point of view, and I can´t and won´t dispute it. But, for me as a consumer it is still the absolute best App store without equal. What it means is that apparently the large studios that are pushing the small ones out of the market are good at meeting consumer´s demands. Nevertheless I notice I use many apps from small developers too.
I won´t deny that it is hard to make it as a developer. I have heard enough stories here from developers that explain this in good detail. But many small developers do make it to the top, so it is not impossible. And as long as the platform is still the biggest in terms of number of developers AND consumers, I have a hard time seeing how Apple should have killed it.
Your missing the single point that invalidates your entire argument:
Apple's App Store is captive. Developers cannot sell on the platform any other way.
Developers have no choice but to accept Apple's ever changing terms or go away. In June 2014 they just forced developers to give away 5 copies via family sharing. If a dev did not accept the terms they could not upload new binaries and renew their membership at the next renewal. Their dev membership would then expire and their apps would be pulled from the store.
iOS is not that different from OS X technically, so there is no real reason to restrict other stores or just selling directly. I would gladly move to a different store that offered better discoverability and better terms. Or just sell directly. Apple should have to compete just like everyone else. Allowing this does not hurt Apple or the platform. Users could still be protected by developer signing like Mac and API checking like is currently done for iOS apps - Apple could just sell a signing and API checking service for binaries distributed anywhere. The technology exits, but Apple will not budge on this until they are forced to.... stay tuned.
But one question: Did you get a paycheck for attending the working lunch you attended this week? If so, was that paycheck directly by app sales from an app that you wrote by yourself? If not how was that paycheck funded? Who paid for the lunch??
[doublepost=1459581725][/doublepost]
Thanks for the response that recognizes the challenges small devs face
I'm replying separately, but my points about Apple's captive app store still apply. Allowing other stores or direct distribution would not affect your choices. Consumers could still choose to use Apple's store exclusively if they only want Frogger and Tetris re-duex, or they could go "slumming' to the 2-N tiers to find the truly new innovative (even whacky "who would of thought of that" crazy ideas - like maybe slingshotting birds at pigs sitting in unstable wood/glass/brick structures) stores - that someone in a cube at Apple isn't going worry about having to explain to a bean counter why they to pressed the "featured" button for.[doublepost=1459582206][/doublepost]
No, but wink, wink... See the history of Anki Drive. Their "marketing only" app was in the store a few days before WWDC '13, but their bluetooth race car game hardware was not available for purchase until 5 months later. This was clearly in violation of Apple's own app approval rules. Anki drive had $50 million in San Fran VC money. NO ONE can deny that their $$$ didn't buy something. This was a big deal to me because I was working on an app that got rejected because Apple had not approved the hardware it was for yet. We had to send our hardware to multiple apple testing labs (they changed locations at their whim) to get bluetooth certification before the app would be approved... I've also worked for big companies that had a direct line to a real person at Apple. I saw apps submitted and approved within hours by just picking up the phone. So yes, it's a rigged system.
But again, the original toucharcade article clearly states that developers see featuring as just luck.
so I'll repeat the point made earlier: The risk of not being featured, total product development and marking costs plus risk exceed the viability threshold for small developers.
I've written 6 apps by myself and made a good haul in the early days. The last app I wrote was a complete game with completely original gameplay - it's going nowhere. I have at least 2 other completely original gameplay ideas that will never see the light of day because the platform is no longer viable.
So I hope you all like Frogger and tetris redux.
Oh, and could someone please list the small developers that "made it to the top" in the last year?
Last edited:
This is all true and by traditional measures, both the Apple TV and Watch are successes. However, Apple is a much bigger company now than when iPhone/iPad launched, with a much bigger loyal user base. The Watch would've sold 10 million no matter what it was so it's perceived as a flop.
Also, as iPhone/iPad sales are slowing, Apple needs to focus on the next big thing, not on niche products. And according to what was written about Jobs, he spent many many many years thinking about how to solve TV. He did not intend it to be niche.
Apple made some huge blunders with Apple TV, including using the A8 chip, not supporting 4K, and not making a bigger focus on gaming. They should've used the A9X chip, shipped an official controller, and paid for a couple of AAA quality games. Why would someone play a game on their living room TV that looks worse than their phone? And then they required all games be playable on the remote. Disney pulled support when they realized the Apple TV is not really a gaming platform.
I have always wondered why Apple doesn't care about gaming. The young demographic who love macs are also the most likely to be gamers. Don't they realize they are losing millions of gamers to Windows PCs? Why not make a few exclusive AAA Mac games? Or iOS games that take advantage of the latest chips? If Apple created an amazing game that would be their Mario, that alone would sell 100m Apple TVs.
EDIT: Even if Apple didn't care about gaming, why didn't they launch with their own exclusive iTunes TV content? All the other streaming services are creating their own content as their main strategy.
Last edited:
Disney killed this entire line last week. Apple sales probably had little to do with not getting further updates.