Everything Apple Announced at Today's 'It's Show Time' Event in 6 Minutes

Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Mar 25, 2019.

  1. juiz206, Mar 25, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2019

    juiz206 macrumors member

    Apr 21, 2016

    WTF, I hope Huawei takes China for good.

    And I not talking about Apple News China LOL. There's something called Europe, Latin America, etc.

    If there is something I like from Microsoft, Google, is that they actually care about internationalization of their services. No surprise they beat Apple down on other countries.
  2. upnorth85 macrumors 6502a


    Oct 2, 2011
    MN, USA
    I think it is too late. I read the current Apple News. Since I subscribed to WaPo within this, and NYT, WSJ and Economic Times outside of the Apple eco system, I am able to use these sources within the Apple News. If Apple does include one or more of these within the App, I will lose access to these news sources on my PC Laptop. This should have come at least 2 years back. As far as Apple TV, I watch Netflix and Amazon Prime and also have Youtube TV and Red. My needs are fully met. I am thus not too excited by this announcement. No word if this charge is for family or just one iPhone.
  3. 69Mustang macrumors 604


    Jan 7, 2014
    In between a rock and a hard place
    Apple doesn't own that content and they don't have the rights to stream it in the fashion you're describing. The cost to gain those rights would be immensely prohibitive imo.
  4. Moonlight macrumors 6502a


    Jul 9, 2002
    Los Angeles

    I totally agree that the strategy is solid (if sad for Apple as a hardware company), but their execution is poor
  5. Baymowe335 macrumors 601

    Oct 6, 2017
    I’ve explained it a million times...

    You’ll just refute every point with some nonsensical reason it’s not innovative or pivot to another product you think lacks innovations.


    Custom chips

    All innovative in their own ways, some very important.

    Features aren’t innovation.
  6. Sasparilla, Mar 25, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2019

    Sasparilla macrumors 65816

    Jul 6, 2012
    It was alot more interesting than I thought it would be. Found the credit card offering to be the most compelling item (could see how that could help me) and will probably try that. Have gotten hooked into the News app, so will probably also try the news+ since its free for a month - hopefully it doesn't go the way of the magazines...

    Can only say that games are tough. Most people that would pay a monthly subscription for games are already on consoles / PC's with smartphone games being things to get you through in a pinch. I hope I'm wrong about that - but looks like the most likely thing, to me, to crash and burn on the runway.
  7. iapplelove macrumors 601


    Nov 22, 2011
    East Coast USA
    They already stream the music. They could charge 39.99 a month for it all and put Netflix out of business quick if they wanted
  8. iRalph macrumors member

    Jun 8, 2012
    Miami, Fl
    I used to skip school a couple years ago just to watch the keynotes. Nowadays I even forgot apple was having its event today, such a shame the direction apple is taking
  9. dragje macrumors 6502a


    May 16, 2012
    Amsterdam, The Netherlands
    It all sounds interesting, but Apple.....that “apple + “ logo..... one of the most ugly designs I ever saw in a logo.
  10. archvile macrumors 6502


    Oct 27, 2007
    I agree, I wish they would have just branded everything under an “Apple Media” umbrella or something.
  11. 69Mustang macrumors 604


    Jan 7, 2014
    In between a rock and a hard place
    Maybe you're not understanding what's going on here. Apple has streaming rights for music. Yes. They paid for those rights. Apple does not have the same rights for the other content like movies and TV shows. They can't charge $40 to stream that content. They can't charge $10, $50, $100, or a $1000 a month. They don't own the streaming rights.

    So no. They can't put Netflix out of business if they wanted... not unless they spend tens of billions like Netflix and then negotiate the regional rights like Netflix, and... but mostly spend tens of billions like Netflix.

    None of this stuff is "if they wanted".
  12. Lesser Evets macrumors 68040

    Lesser Evets

    Jan 7, 2006
    These things don't speak to me as a consumer of Apple products. I might be very alone in this, but...

    • I take my news from all over, not the homogenized and slanted (and today, very badly edited) MSM magazines and echo chambers
    • I don't game on the Apple. I learned to do that on a PC because Apple f'd it up. So forget that crap. I don't even game very much anyway.
    • TV is damn boring. It's dull. DULL. And there is no way around that, now. It is actually an antiquated form of entertainment to me. It isn't that the TV itself is old, rather the format and presentation of scripted works; news is too slow and dulled down and edited and censored on TV; movies had the life sucked out of them over the 90s and have been completely pap this decade, so I'd not even waste seeing them "small screen".

    How about some productivity? Apple used to offer solutions for work and such. Focus on website creation, if nothing else. Do something to simplify and bring the esoteric to the neophyte! I thought iWeb was going to go down that road.... BUY SPARKLE. ANYTHING!!!

    And make some better hardware.
  13. iapplelove macrumors 601


    Nov 22, 2011
    East Coast USA
    Yes I understand they do not own the content, however they stream music. The wealthiest company can’t at least negotiate ? You’re just sayin nope like you know...the Netflix comment was just talk, only used “ if they wanted” once
  14. mcfrazieriv macrumors 6502a


    Jan 30, 2012
    Irvine, CA
    Blindly following doesn't mean the innovation is still there.
  15. swingerofbirch, Mar 25, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2019

    swingerofbirch macrumors 68040

    Oct 24, 2003
    The Amalgamated States of Central North America
    I think the reason they didn't articulate the value is because the reason they created these businesses is to be in these businesses rather than to make an amazing product.

    There are some products, a recent example being the Echo Dot, that are just so right (much like the original iPod) and then the services follow by which a company like Amazon makes money.

    I wrote before this event that Apple is acting like Microsoft did in the 90s where it was afraid of losing its dominance so it would enter any market where it saw a competitor rising. If encyclopedia CD-ROMs were becoming a thing, Microsoft also had to be in that business with Encarta.

    Apple sees streaming TV as a market it has to be in for strategic reasons. No one could argue that there aren't enough creative paths for someone to put out a good TV show. There's nothing in particular about Apple institutionally that would lead them to come out with original content except that original content is now the measure by which you get someone to stay in your garden rather than just distributing other people's content, which is how they started with iTunes TV shows/videos.

    So I agree there was no surprise and delight. This was a company trying to make strategic financial decisions rather than presenting the consumer with a product they could use today (except for magazines . . . who wants magazines?). And they weren't good at hiding that it was strategic. They can talk all they want about low interest rates, but the bottomline is that they are extending their services revenue by taking a piece of the pie on debt that their customers incur when they use Apple Pay. They're now in the debt-interest collecting business.

    The News business in particular makes no sense. For one thing, they already tried it when the iPad came out. Many people have tried it. No one seems to like it. And magazines are dirt cheap. And you can already read the articles online for free. When you use the Apple News app, it already directs you to articles from sources you'll now be paying for. If they had actually been able to line up multiple major newspapers and make a bundle, they would have had something. But getting a few featured articles from the WSJ isn't significant.

    I thought out of all of them, the gaming service is the most appealing. I'm curious how well some of those games will play on Macs, though. And if being able to play them on every platform will be a requirement for developers. I prefer playing games on a Mac over iPhone, but a lot of Macs with integrated graphics can struggle with keeping frame rates at decent speeds compared to an iPhone.


    I was thinking more about today's announcement and how it was not consumer-focused vs. the original iPod and realized a parallel.

    It has been said (maybe not about the last couple years, but recently) that we are living in the golden age of television. That there is a lot of great television available.

    So what does Apple do? Fill a hole that doesn't exist.

    When the original iPod came out, we were living in a golden age of MP3s BUT we did not have a great portable MP3 player. Yes, the MP3s were illegal, but as someone who was in high school and college at that time, Napster and Limewire were omnipresent and when the iPod came out that's largely what people were filling their iPods with.

    It was only later that the iTunes Music Store came out with music files you could download for your iPod as the illegal services started to get shut down and waned in popularity.

    Apple made a product that met that moment--the golden age of ripped MP3s available on file sharing services.

    They did not introduce anything today that tapped into the golden age of anything we're in and added value to it. It was all "me too" (in the old sense of that phrase) offerings. We already have magazines. We don't need them anyway. We already have credit cards with better cash back deals. We already have amazing television offerings (OK maybe not as amazing as 5 years ago, but still pretty good and definitely a saturated market). We already have Oprah! I don't know what she was talking about saying she can now be in a billion pockets. She already has a pretty amazing podcast and she has her own television network. That promo video said that we've been "missing" her voice. Well her television network and her podcast and her magazine can't be doing too well if we've been missing her voice and need Apple TV Plus to hear it.

    Edit 2:

    When I try to think of value they could have added to this moment in time, it would be something that makes iOS devices better gaming machines.

    They said games are the most popular thing on the app store. Probably true.

    But most are junky and the input method of tapping on glass is poor.

    However, iOS devices are light, portable, and have incredible processing power.

    I don't know what the product would be. Maybe something as simple as a controller you pop your iPhone into but done more nicely than before.

    And it goes along with a new streaming service, all of the games of which use this new controller which can also control games on your Mac and Apple TV.

    I have an iPad I almost never use, and seeing friends with the Nintendo Switch I've often thought my iPad would be a lot more useful if it had some joycons on each side and some good games to play.

    A gaming *product* (as in consumer device you can buy) that realizes the already existing potential of iOS devices would be more like the old iPod type Apple rather than the 90s-Microsoft-type Apple.
  16. AlexJoda, Mar 25, 2019
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 26, 2019

    AlexJoda macrumors 6502a


    Apr 8, 2015
    As an European this sounds totally useless to me. They make a worldwide event to show some services that were available in less than 1% of the country’s of the world. Nobody knows even Apple News here although it exist for some years already. Most of the service on Apple TV are also only relevant for the US market. That won’t change with the Plus services. Same thing with Apple Pay. No acceptance at all.

    So it looks like Apple will become a regional service provider instead of being a global player...
  17. Cosmosent macrumors 6502a

    Apr 20, 2016
    La Jolla, CA
    Looking @ the BIG picture, it worked just as Cook & Co had hoped, when they first leaked "the Event" to the Press in early-Jan.

    Cook needed something to take investors eye off of poor iPhone sales (right after his Jan 2nd letter to Investors), & it worked beautifully !

    And, because the most important fact wasn't Released today, i.e., how the Streaming Video Service would be Priced, that clearly signals either they still don't know themselves, OR possibly, they figure the same upward trend (in the stock) can be extended to the Fall.

    Specifically, Cook knew there are so-called Pro Stock Analysts covering AAPL who are really just AAPL Cheerleaders in disguise, & that they would raise their Pom Poms for whatever AAPL suggests / promotes.

    And course, I'm referring to Gene Munster (aka Herman), & Dan Ives.

    AAPL really didn't announce anything important today.

    But that's NOT the point.

    The point was to do something to take Investors Eyes Off of Poor iPhone Sales.

    IMO, 95%+ of those who make Calls on AAPL on CBNC really don't anything about the company.

    As an App Developer, I feel AAPL is in-deed taking it's Eyes Off the Ball ! ... i.e., the iPhone.

    And, I don't think AAPL planned on trying to pump services so soon ... it was triggered by Poor Product Planning, when they decided to move the iPhone product line so Upscale.

    That would NOT have happened under Jobs !

    If AAPL sales are again trending down 15% Y-to-Y this year, then the AAPL Board should do what they need to do, & force Cook, Schiller, & Cue out !

    BTW, Schiller runs the App Stores, yet has NO software development experience to speak of ! ... Go Figure !
  18. C DM macrumors Sandy Bridge

    Oct 17, 2011
    It really depends on the event. Not every event that Apple has is some sort of brand new revolutionary hardware launch that many seem to wait for. That's basically how it is these days, and how it's been before, and how it will be down the line.
  19. dona83 macrumors 6502

    Nov 26, 2004
    Kelowna, BC
    Apple News app is a lot better than I thought it would be. If only they could come out with an all in subscription price.
  20. rmoliv macrumors 6502a

    Dec 20, 2017
    Lisbon, Portugal
    So Apple is now a bank, movie studio and a magazine publisher. What’s next, food retail business? Apple branded banana?
  21. patseguin macrumors 68000


    Aug 28, 2003
    I'm still not clear on the TV service. Will it be a live TV service like YouTube TV, DirecTV now, Sling, etc?
  22. 69Mustang macrumors 604


    Jan 7, 2014
    In between a rock and a hard place
    Yeah they can negotiate. Which is exactly what I've been saying since the first comment. I'm saying NOPE to your previous comments because they contain no nuance. You were just Apple can do X, which they clearly can't. Being the wealthiest company, and having everyone involved know that you're the wealthiest company isn't the best negotiating position. Hence my original comment:
    The question is how much would Apple be willing to pay for those rights. They ain't gonna be cheap... especially to the wealthiest company.
  23. genovelle macrumors 6502a

    May 8, 2008
    What’s interesting is everything Apple announces is always deemed a failure. From the iPod to iTunes to the iPhone to the iPad to the Apple Watch. When they came out with the Apple TV it was called a hobby and they treated like one. The one thing I can say about the Apple of the last too decades. They have yet to invest a billion dollars into any thing that has failed. Their competitors can’t say that. This is their biggest cash investment in any one thing outside of the beats acquisition. I don’t believe they are expecting an immediate return. This is an investment in the future and with the gaming service (compatible with all Apple devices) and their streaming services available on all devices and especially if they make all of them free to family members, the stickiness will be in the integration.
  24. jeff051177 macrumors member

    Nov 17, 2011
    ^ this.

    This whole event was an apple "me too!". It smacks of a company grasping for more revenue streams vs genuine innovation. The digital equivalent of announcing a different colored watch band.

    I've no real problem with this approach, but trying to sell this as "exciting" and consumer focused leaves a bad taste in my mouth - particularly in the absence of any other genuine innovation, or adequate development of other products/services.
  25. smaffei macrumors regular

    Jun 5, 2003
    Because the media conglomerates that own content will never allow it. If Apple really wanted to change the industry they would have bought a company or 2 like 20th Century Fox instead of letting Disney gobble them up.

Share This Page