. That's just one of them. I still think the final incarnation of the first gens UI was the best 
TV UI. I miss the support for the "Show" tag in movie & TV show lists. Etc.First gen had many great features that were "improved" upon by deprecation
TV so far and wish that a number of things it did from day 1 were still available in the 4th generation I have now. Innovation by subtraction can sometimes work but I miss some of what has been jettisoned.At times, yes. And he flip-flopped regularly.
But whether one agrees or disagrees with that, I (personally) still feel the first gen was the overall best
TV 3 where your own non-purchased movies were given front page status with the newest added appearing up to & as for searching go way back to original TV where it was one big grid you scrolled through artwork, much like window on itunes.Steve jobs decided that he didn't want users to manage their own media.Well SJ decided that users didn't want to manage their own media. Was the supreme, all knowing Steve Jobs incorrect?!??
TV? Is Apple willing to make the same discounted deal with Amazon that is rumored to be associated with getting Netflix on TV?TV if Apple's cut is just too much? I suspect it's in that line of questioning where one will find the real reason Amazon is not yet on TV. Yet- and as usual- we only cast the other guy- Amazon in this case- as the "villain"... apparently because they just do not want upwards of millions of customer's money.You keep casting Amazon as the bad guy in every thread about this particular topic. Logically, WHY would they refuse to make more money by not being on a device in millions of homes? What you leave out is the answer to that "why?" Hint: it is not some conspiracy or some Amazon vs. Apple emotion. Instead, it is in simple economics of revenues & profits. Better hint: how much does Apple want to take right off the top to "allow" Amazon to offer this service on
Again, Amazon wants to make as much money as it can. Can it make money under Apple's demanding terms? Will Apple bend to get that service on
Not sure you understand the situation. Just like on the iPad Amazon could put an App on the Apple and not loose 1 cent. Just like on the iPad you would pay your subscription on amazon.com web site. So simple. Which you already do if you have a Prime Account. Right? Again, Amazon would not loose 1 cent. Not millions as you are trying to promote. If you want to make an accurate argument you could say Amazon wants to ALSO allow for IN APP Purchase and not give Apple or Google a share of that sale. AND, if you follow things you will know that Hulu charges extra when you purchase via Apple TV or iOS to cover the cost they share with Apple. So yes, Amazon is the bad guy here when they refuse to easily have an App on the Apple TV for the "Prime" customers. Amazon has increased the price of Prime to support this kind of stuff. They should reduce the cost of Prime dropping these add-ons or support them on other (every) platform but like Netflix does.You keep casting Amazon as the bad guy in every thread about this particular topic. Logically, WHY would they refuse to make more money by not being on a device in millions of homes? What you leave out is the answer to that "why?" Hint: it is not some conspiracy or some Amazon vs. Apple emotion. Instead, it is in simple economics of revenues & profits. Better hint: how much does Apple want to take right off the top to "allow" Amazon to offer this service on
Again, Amazon wants to make as much money as it can. Can it make money under Apple's demanding terms? Will Apple bend to get that service on
TV owners money because Bezos is mad at Apple. Bezos doesn't understand how to make money at B2C retail sales. Perhaps the Saint can show him the way?
OK. Amazon is 100% the Villain and Apple is the Saint. Amazon just doesn't want millions of us
You guys just kill me with this stuff.
For the rest of you, here's a few breadcrumbs offering a little support for my obviously and completely wrong guess:
http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...x-inc-score-a-discounted-deal-with-apple.aspx
and
http://www.theverge.com/2015/10/2/9439281/amazon-ban-apple-tv-chromecast-why
Put 2 & 2 together and think for yourselves. Obviously, I don't think it's purely Saint vs. Villainy here.
One of your links completely made my point. Netflix did not allow IN-APP Purchase because Apple was charging 30% and once they dropped it to 15% Neflix felt it was in their best interest to offer IN-APP Purchase. My point about Hulu was that they simply added a 15% up charge for the convenience of subscribing via Apple TV. They do not charge it if you subscribe vis Hulu web site. It is up to the customer. Amazon is in a much better position then either of these two. Their customers have already signed up for Prime 2 day shipping via the Amazon web site. To somehow paint Apple as a villain is silly. Apple is out to make money just like everybody else. Apple is not preventing Amazon just like they are not preventing Netflix, Hulu, HBO and the rest. Apple simply says, have your customers sign up via your web site and you handle all of the billing yourself or allow your customers to use iN-APP Purchase via the Apple Store but we require a piece of it. As a paying customer of Prime I feel that Amazon should lower the cost of Prime or allow access to the Prime App on the streaming box of my choice. Again, this would cost Amazon NOTHING. I am already paying and I am already registered. This is no different then the iPad / iPhone Apps.OK. Amazon is 100% the Villain and Apple is the Saint. Amazon just doesn't want millions of us
You guys just kill me with this stuff.
For the rest of you, here's a few breadcrumbs offering a little support for my obviously and completely wrong guess:
http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...x-inc-score-a-discounted-deal-with-apple.aspx
and
http://www.theverge.com/2015/10/2/9439281/amazon-ban-apple-tv-chromecast-why
Put 2 & 2 together and think for yourselves. Obviously, I don't think it's purely Saint vs. Villainy here.
TV, my "streaming box of choice." Since Apple can't make a nickel from Amazon not being on the device... and, in fact, might be losing some sales by not motivating Amazon to put their app on the box, this might cost Apple net NOTHING. I've already paid for Apple products and for many Apple services, so why can't they bend to give me what I want and/or benefit the other player in this arrangement?TV.TV. Apple plays no role in preventing it. And we consumers should just deal with it... and blame Amazon exclusively for it.TV people. Apple loses sales of TV via what is probably the best online retailer on the web.OK...
As a paying customer of Apple products, I feel that Apple should lower the cut they demand from Amazon- or even waive it- to motivate Amazon to bring Prime to my
Let me guess: not the same at all. We only favor Apple making every possible dollar at anyone and everyone else's expense. We cannot possibly see it any other way, especially where Apple might not maximize their take. All companies should bow to the mighty Apple and give it anything it wants just for the privilege of association. Who cares about their business objectives? Only Apple matters. Even if we consumers must do without... or spend more... what matters most is that Apple gets their way in all matters. All others who challenge that concept are wrong.
I can grasp your points but they are so extraordinarily biased pro-Apple and con-(anyone else) Amazon (in this case). Personally, I like to buy lots of stuff from both Apple and Amazon. I like BOTH companies. I do not subscribe to the philosophy that everyone else must bend to further enrich Apple. Conceptually, both companies serve us consumers. It's OUR money they both covet. This should motivate them to work together to give us what we want. In this case, Apple is above them and us. Apple is basically saying, give us what we want or tough luck Amazon... and tough luck Apple customers that want access to Amazon via
But again, let me guess: I'm wrong to see it that way too. We consumers should not get what we want if Apple cannot get what it wants first. And Amazon should just comply with whatever Apple wants. Else, it IS Amazon's fault that we can't get Amazon via
[doublepost=1477950519][/doublepost]
While I agree, imagine the situation (purely speculative on my part, I'm not privy to the actual negotiations):
Apple: You can put your app in our store on our terms. No, not at our special deals with Netflix & HBO. (we have our own streaming media we want to sell and yours overlaps pretty heavily with our library).
To try to motivate Apple to compromise what do you do if you are Amazon? Begging doesn't work. How about:
Amazon: Then we'll stop selling this product line in our stores until you give us a deal like you gave Netflix & HBO.
Stalemate: Amazon loses potential revenues & new customers from
While both stubbornly cling to their individual positions, we consumers are the real losers here. But, of course per some of us, only Amazon is in the wrong for this stalemate. They should just give Apple whatever Apple wants... and feel honored to do so.
TV.TV? I'll grant you that it's possible that Amazon just doesn't want to be there, that there is some CEO grudge, etc. However, I personally believe that Amazon wants a better deal than standard. If I was them, I would want at least the same deal Netflix got. Prime is a good service. Lots of US Apple people covet it much like we covet Netflix on TV. Why not seek the same deal Netflix got?If I'm Amazon- where Prime is often referenced in about the same breath as Netflix- I want the same (Netflix) deal from Apple. If I'm practically no-name-flix where I'm just trying to get on the playing field with Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, etc, I might just roll over and let Apple have anything it wants.
I know Apple is always right in your view. You've passionately argued with Apple on everything... in every "discussion" we've had. Of course, you can feel however you want. I just don't agree that Amazon is all in the wrong here and Apple is all in the right. If Amazon wanted to be there, yes, it could just roll over and do whatever Apple demands. If Apple wanted Amazon there, they could offer the same deal they made with Netflix. Or both could meet in the middle. But to cast the non-Apple entity as entirely villain and Apple as saint is just typical... but, IMO, highly unlikely to represent the real reasoning why Amazon is not on
With almost all major video deals, Apple has consistently demanded too much. Where is the infamous Apple subscription service? If you read the Apple press, all the players not named Apple are "too greedy", "afraid of change", etc. However, if you read the objective press, again and again, you'll find players that are pretty pro-Apple sharing comments like CBS Moonves offered "Apple wants everything," meaning demands are too high for deals to get struck. Thus, no subscription service.
So why isn't Amazon on
While Apple continues to stonewall, relatively piddly little players like Roku get such deals done. How can (relatively) cash poor Roku strike such a deal but cash-rich Apple can't? Roku competes with Fire too. It doesn't take much thought to figure out that the oft-spun "it's all Amazons fault" just isn't true. Apple is great. Amazon is great. Either one should not get it's way in all things.
TV than on other company's boxes. But because Amazon is wrong and Apple is right I can't do that.