Actually this is true. While I am in the process of dumping all Apple mobile products, I continue to buy on the dips (RSI<40) and sell at the peaks (RSI>65).
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.
iTunes Chief Eddy Cue: 'We're All In' on Original Content
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Actually this is true. While I am in the process of dumping all Apple mobile products, I continue to buy on the dips (RSI<40) and sell at the peaks (RSI>65).
Apple Music is doing what it's supposed to do too. They've only added a few streaming shows as a test until Apple Video has enough original shows ready to launch. Otherwise, Music is just the logical extension of iTunes. It's not streamlined but iTunes hasn't been that in 15 years.
How are other TV streaming boxed not niche products? They all do the same thing and Apple TV does even more with apps and airplay. I don't think the AppleTV apps are that great but they've definitely helped sell a few extra million units.
[doublepost=1520956675][/doublepost]
I'm not talking about Netflix's budgets and revenue per show. I'm just talking about the size of their catalog and their marketing of shows. Netflix is aiming for a full buffet and not even telling anyone where each type of cuisine is located. Some viewers want curation but Netflix does not offer that. Apple will almost certainly offer curation of some kind but Apple's tastes are to for everyone either.
Last edited:
When the Beats deal closed Jimmy and Dre became major players working in conjunction with E.C. It's one big family making the moves and iTunes/Apple Music is not up to par and their Original Content announcements have been lackluster at best but who is ultimately responsible is debatable. Apple seems complacent and out of touch while buying into their own hype and the competition is certainly not sweating.
Last edited:
iPad Pro 10.5" and updated 12" was released less than 12 months ago. Apple is showcasing AR in a very decent way right at their headquarters. I'd say their hardware is up to date.
Then again if you're talking about hardware accessories to iPhone and iPad ... I doubt that's a play Apple will make, as it would cut into third party's market segment and just tick off partners, not something Apple will want to do. They've learned that lesson after the OG Macintosh with just 2 expansion ports.
I find it funny that people seem to think the smartwatch is a recent (4yr) bandwagon. The closest cousin to the modern day smartwatch was ushered in by SonyEricsson some 8yrs+ with their MBW-100/150/300 (Analog/Digital: Bluetooth, Remote Music playback, Alarm sync, sms display/read/delete, watch and phone battery power accept/deny/initiate calls). You could go way back to the Casio Calculator watches - man I have to find those for nostalgia reasons (rocked it when I was 8yrs old).
I'm curious to see your tacked on solution is.
[doublepost=1520977069][/doublepost]
Well spoken.
Sure I may have jumped on those three other members, not intentionally to be a jerk, but to ask them to place some substance with their opinions (or state their reasoning) else it's just to end up derailing a thread beyond it's intended purpose. No I don't know Eddie Cue in any way (not even as a third), I don't know of anyone working at Apple in any function, and I'm not a current shareholder.
I just believe that if a person's tenure and responsibilities over the length of that tenure and increased responsibilities means they're working, good at it, and should deserve some level of respect by those going to comment and/or use the products/services of their efforts.
Cue has been the lead and behind the scenes of:
Apple's web front
Apple's Forums
Apple's iTunes software
App Store
iTunes Store
Apple TV
Apple Services: .Mac, MobileME, iCloud (the latter the best iteration yet),
Apple Pay ... the most successful international digital payment system ... (although China's Tencent and Alibaba are really pushing to leapfrog Apple in this regard using QR Codes of all things, or in-app purchases/payment/fund sharing).
These are very BIG moves ... and each has survived and or evolved into a better version of it's former self. Apple TV deals can increase of course (just like all competitors), and iTunes on iOS needs a revamp with music controls front and centre at all times, imho.
The deals Eddie has made have really pushed Apple forward so that they can grow in other areas even if services revenue have only begun taken off in the last 4 quarters (est).
But just commenting on a thread about anything he's highlighted on and stating "he should be thrown out of Apple" or "he's useless" etc etc with no details to make a sound opinion actually sound vs just internet verbatim or without even suggesting a worthy replacement that has the skills, education and experience to back up such a debate seems very disrespectful ... and reflecting on why the threads have dropped in quality for dialog overall.
I'm in no way right on my opinions, statements, or views not always maybe even seldomly ... but I try to base them on reasonable thought at the very least. For the time being I've taken my out advise and chose the ignore button, seems to be the more mature way than attack. I'm grateful for your post quoted above as it'll help me learn for the better.
Cheers.
[doublepost=1520978081][/doublepost]
Carpool Karaoke ... I cannot stand this show (even before Apple touched it) yet I can see the allure that many people and macrumors members like about it. Most former threads show likes and laughs and dialog about those featured over more distaste of it's existence.
Apple Music.
- This streaming business if very difficult and seems to be more of the sign of the times with youth's habits of music very different than the majority of Apple iTunes/iCloud members are used to. I don't have #'s to back that up at all just my opinion based on my own habits and several others posts in various threads. In the music business ... ever since Rock N Roll it's been the youth segment 12-26yrs age demographics that has purchased the most music, followed trends, changed artist as favourites on a dime ... I personally don't see any change to that. I'd wager any on of us here state their age group, taste in genre's and top 5 artists/bands and ask the same of 10 of their closes friends/family/peers to do the same ... and watch the variables change according to age group. What I'm saying if anything at all here is that with Spotify with such an early head start there really isn't much competition other than Apple that can compete - paid or free subscribers. Apple needed to make a purchase to get into the game vs starting from scratch.
- let's compare real numbers of PAID subscribers vs free subscribers from Apple vs Spotify.
- who is the third and fourth closest competitor of streaming music business to Spotify? I haven't a clue ... do you without a google search? My point is with all the bashing about total subscriber numbers ... nobody is looking at the bigger picture here:
Music streaming can lead to purchased music to be owned and listened to anywhere. This potentially can translate to headsets (which Spotify does NOT have), potential sales for movies/TV show content (again Spotify doesn't have), and finally lead to sales of other products (again which Spotify doesn't have). I think Apple is going for a much larger pie here than what is on the table and many may not see this.
PS: Anyone on iOS using free Spotify subscription have any luck transferring to a new device with their playlists intake?
Apple Music needs improvements ... scale back the pricing or offer a LOT more channels beyond Pop and Rap. Spreading out "local" musical content for countries and regions across the globe would be a HUGE differentiator.
No. Siri is the worst. Thank god Eddy Cue no lounger is in charge of Siri. Now, finally, things may go the right way with Siri since years of neglect.
If he's in charge of what I bolded above, then it's amusing.
Apple iTunes software is downright horrific. If I could, I wish I could stop using it and use something else, especially on PC. The PC version of iTunes is an abomination to the Apple brand.
iCloud is mediocre at best. You're better off syncing to Dropbox or Google still after all these years. Apple services generally are years behind its competition. Arguably, even OneDrive is better.
I use AppleTV 4 on a daily basis because I loathe the Roku UX. Otherwise I'd use Roku.
They've only survived because they are almost a forced feature on the Apple ecosystem.
Greetings Deep!
I did not know that E.C. was involved in all the mentioned tasks. I believe that we learn something new everyday until our last living breath and after reading your reply I certainly have and i'm sure others have as well. We also tend to judge quickly and many times without proper thought!
Thank you for the pertinent info. Thats what this Forum is all about!
Peace!
Last edited:
Apple doesn’t need to buy Netflix, and it has never made sense from their POV anyways.
https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2017/2/21/apple-doesnt-need-to-buy-netflix
Another article for everyone’s perusal.
https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2016/10/20/apples-trojan-horse-into-hollywood
Imagine one paid subscription for news, music and video.
https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2016/10/20/apples-trojan-horse-into-hollywood
Imagine one paid subscription for news, music and video.
Many circumstances have changed since that article:
- Apple TV hasn’t made enough inroads to become a viable streaming platform. Instead of the interface of the future, is has become just another video player. Chicken and Egg problem. “Great Apps” grossly failed as THE sales mechanism.
- Cultural differences between Netflix and Apple are no burden - but a challenge. Currently Apple Music (with < 2% coverage) could use the same kind of business acumen as Netflix has. Jimmy conceded it’s business model doesn’t work.
- Lack of a leading video content streaming (ordering, playing, management) platform or app on iDevices (as the iTunes of the 21th century) that would really integrate with AppleTV signals lack of strategy. Instead of pushing both ways, Apple seems reluctant to provide AppleTV internal competition.
Currently, audio/video streaming efforts initiatives have no synergy amongst themselves and don’t work as hardware accelerators.
Seems these challenges are too much for Eddy - who’s losing ground in this industry. Same for Iovine.
Last edited:
The basic argument still stands. Netflix costs too much for too limited gain. There’s a reason why Apple bought beats instead of Spotify. They could easily scale Apple Music using their own platform and it was really Iovine and his connections with the record labels Apple wanted. Spotify’s huge subscriber base was actually more of a liability than a boon.
Netflix has no such benefits. Apple doesn’t need subscribers. They acquire companies for the talent or the technology, not market share or revenue.
If so, they should stop their streaming initiatives as they ‘ll never make money on it with this strategy
You don’t seem to understand anything I stated - especially the synergy element.
Last edited:
I get what you said, and I disagree with it.
There is no synergy between Netflix and Apple. Netflix thrives on scale. Apple uses software and services to push hardware sales (which inherently limits their reach, because the people who would really use them own Apple products).
At the same time, Apple doesn’t need a Netflix clone. They simply need enough original content to add value to their music streaming service and make people want to subscribe to it in addition to any other service they already have.
And it’s not that hard a value proposition, because Apple is able to leverage on its existing music service to promote this video streaming platform. The same way they use Apple Music to promote the Apple Watch and HomePod.
Apple doesn’t need Netflix. Not now, not ever.
Apple is in saturated markets and also seeks scale.
An Apple+Netflix bundle (whether Netflix is owned or not) would certainly make sense. Certainly be a better business model (as Jimmy Iovine doesnt see how to make Apple Music profitable and videocontent is even more complex/costly).
Certainly better than AppleVideo in addtion/competition to/with Netflix.
Streaming music not being profitable is a different issue from making video content. The former is due to record labels taking a fairly hefty cut of the revenue - up to 70%. Just look to Spotify, and you can see it’s not exactly Iovine’s fault that Apple Music has yet to turn a profit. It’s just the way the industry is built, and truth be told, Apple doesn’t exactly need to turn a profit here.
Video streaming entails a completely different set of costs (essentially fixed costs compared to variable costs). You just pay once to create or acquire the content and distribution is essentially free.
And as I pointed out above, Apple video has one advantage over Netflix. Apple can bundle music, video and even news into one tidy subscription package, unlike the others, who must subscribe separately to Spotify and Netflix. Distribution won’t be an issue for Apple. The challenge is finding the right content which resonates with Apple’s viewers while staying true to their image.
Make Siri a "get-s**t-done" machine. - Greg Joswiak
"We're completely all in." - Eddie Cue
"Apple will 'double down' on secrecy on products." - Tim Crook™
Apple speak has devolved to suit the beer swilling, corporate short handed, idiotic masses. These are the words from well educated people in very high, well paid positions at Apple. You Apple fanatics should be glowing with pride. Can't wait to see when Apples brand has been so tarnished by these morons that it's synonymous with Tandy Electronics from Radio Shack.
"We're completely all in." - Eddie Cue
"Apple will 'double down' on secrecy on products." - Tim Crook™
Apple speak has devolved to suit the beer swilling, corporate short handed, idiotic masses. These are the words from well educated people in very high, well paid positions at Apple. You Apple fanatics should be glowing with pride. Can't wait to see when Apples brand has been so tarnished by these morons that it's synonymous with Tandy Electronics from Radio Shack.
Last edited:
On the contrary.
The prominent position that iTunes used to have, demonstrates that revenue sharing with “others” still left room for a viable business. Apple lost that position with AppleMusic (as it only appeals to < 2% of its users) meaning it basically lost the market.
Apple will have to make it profitable or either stop, because it’s cross-subsidizing practices will make it illegal soon (starting in the EU). It’s current competition to Spotify, Tidal a.o. is considered unfair.
You don’t seem to understand what you talk about.
Especially if you’re in content creation - it requires to take all the risk and pay actors, editors, camera operators, etc...., variable costs that will periodically return every season in series, in contrast to paying a musician (a fixed percentage) for a single or album.
What a nonsense. It Apple doesn’t buy Netflix or Spotify or another content farm, these (or their nearest competitors) at some point will be merging, forced or not, which then implies that Apple definitely loses its key ambition of being the single UX to the customer (= one-stop-shopping experience instead of hopping around Netflix/HBO/Amazon/Apple/ESPN/... accounts)
So there is little time to be lost, and the latter may even happen anyway - meaning the whole cablecutter’s perspective will be lost and people will return to the cable operator as a one-stop-shop again - instead of account hopping via the internet.
Last edited:
So they have this one tiny questionable advantage that's specific to a Apple user on an Apple ecosystem. The problem is many users have already invested into other replacements:
- Spotify/Pandora/Deezer over Apple Music
- Netflix/Hulu (no current Apple product here)
- Feedly/RSS readers over Apple News
You'll hear this phrase a lot from those working in the industry: "Content is king". Apple's disadvantage at the moment when it comes to content is exactly that. They've bragged about having a lot of cash at hand for several years dating back to the SJ days, but it was evident that they don't know what they are doing when it comes to content. Perhaps their recent hires might change the landscape
How about being "all in" on making iTunes not a perpetual piece of garbage? or improving Siri so that it's sharper than a dementia patient?
You're probably referring to iTunes in it's current (1/2yrs to present day) iteration. I already admitted to Apple Music and Music on iOS needing work. That agreed, I'm talking about iTunes as a whole across it's entire existence ... without it Apple would be relevant for a VERY strong number of users and it's success most likely would've ended back in the late 90's without iTunes. ITunes was the very FIRST service other than warranty that Apple had. You cannot deny it's success and impact on the entire music industry. Give credit where it's due, not complain about the current instance and state that's the reason it wholly stinks throughout history and demean the work of an executive who's clearly did major changes. Jobs sold it ... Eddie laid the ground work with a team.
iCloud mediocr?
Dropbox, Box.net, SugarSync, even Mega.nz (which I love based on largest free storage tier) doesn't compare to iCloud:
Auto phone backup
- does even Google have this for Android (phone content, apps & settings therein, sms/mms, passwords etc)? I honestly don't know.
- Sync back to web accessible interface for documents, email, and soon sms/imessage communications.
- oh yeah on smartphone works directly with the competitions cloud storage platforms, now that must be a first for Apple.
> you were saying how Dropbox is better?? Apple created the Find and Secure phone and online storage/backup for smartphones/tablets ... so what did Google do better?
Roku I've tried ... for 48hrs cannot stand it beyond a basic converter.
> another reason I've stuck to iOS is AppleTV but I can continue to use it without iOS. We're agreed here.
Apple survived because of their ecosystem ... beating the industry to it. Prior to Ecosystem it was called 'the digital hub' and focused on the computer. Nobody else had the vision that iTunes, and iLife apps would evolve as the first pinnacle to keep first and foremost Apple users purchasing apps/devices ... then after .Mac, MobileMe major failures ... DropBox, Mega, Box.net started up and offered that solution to consumers/corporations ... but failed to think outside of the obvious. Since many Apple users have been comfortable and bought into the Ecosystem (iPhone/iPad/Mac/Beats/AirPods, Apps, iTunes Music purchases/subscription, and services AppleCare+/iCloud) there is no reason to "rock the boat" any further.
Dropbox is going for IPO but I doubt without major push to corporations who've already had their own in-house solutions (or went to IBM, HP, etc) have already signed up for Box.net ... I see Dropbox in less than 5yrs being defunct or eaten up by Box.net just for their storage servers/location, not for the consumers. Less than 4% paying consumer subscribers. All those early Android deals have expired no new ones to invoke sales, becoming more irrelevant as time continues ... keep on eye on them. Sure I could eat crow in 5yrs yet based on bloomberg analytics and current business model I don't see it going far.
[doublepost=1521068320][/doublepost]
Very interesting view presented in that Article. I feel Apple can get a better start of trust in India with ...
iBooks & iTunes U (donate Mac's, iPads - clear existing stock of Mini's to Kindergarten to Gr 8, and iPod Touch 6's), incorporate local school learning using iBooks/iTunes U. Connect with local news papers for digital distribution on their platform.
This is a country NOT shy of computing/software ... feed their hunger for it!
I'm sorry I may be confused. Are you saying Jimmy Iovine conceeded that the digital video (movie/TV) business model doesn't work? I thought Iovine conceded that the Streaming Music (only) business model doesn't work - the reason for the huge offset of Spotify's free user base vs paid subscription user base and why Spotify is pushing for a non-traditional IPO currently on Wall Street. Iovine further iterated that Apple's Streaming Music makes more sense due other products that directly work with that business model and thus can pay for that service to continue to grow. Am I wrong in understanding what Jimmy took a stance on?
Feels like a chicken and egg problem. Apple may not want to invest in improving their services in a country with a low penetration rate of Apple products, and people in that country may not want to buy Apple products if they aren't getting the full suite of services (even here in Singapore, I am missing Apple Pay cash, TV app, Siri support for the ATV remote and Apple news, amongst others).
I'm talking about iTunes since early 2000s. The only reason you had to use iTunes was because it was the only way to get your music onto an iPod/iPhone. I loved the iPod, but I loathed iTunes. I ended up having a workflow where I used MusicMatch jukebox to sort my music before I copied it into iTunes since you had to let it do its naming schema. iTunes on both Mac/PC is also poor at managing NAS libraries. This has not changed at all since its inception
In regards to Google, I actually use a blend of Google Drive/OneDrive/Dropbox for document/photo syncing. Most companies are either on a Google suite of apps or Microsoft suite of apps. It makes it easier to sync and access.
You might want to read some of your favorite "Above Avalon" articles about this. He's talked about this back in 2016. The issue is not just improving services, but most importantly is that Apple's current pricing strategy prices them out. None of those features you mentioned will entice locals (Apple Pay, TV app, Siri, Apple News).
And why do you think Apple's share prices are rising? Precisely because the company is doing well, and it's doing well because tons of people are buying their products. Which means that whatever Apple puts out is clearly resonating with its user base, even if an extremely vocal minority here would beg to disagree.
Apple is following the classic playbook when it comes to AR.
Use the iPhone to popularise a feature like AR, while at the same time exposing its limitations. Proceed to offer a new product which addresses these issues, thanks to its control over both the hardware and software.
Apple releasing AR glasses is pretty much a given, but it's also easily another 2-3 years away, considering how AR is still in its infancy.
I don't understand why people like to argue that any new product Apple launches is immediate doomed if it doesn't take the world by storm overnight. The Apple Watch wasn't an overnight success, but Apple kept updating and promoting it, and it's clearly the most successful wearable device today, and no other product comes close.
Apple Music to me has made incredibly progress. They are nearly neck to neck with Spotify in the US market, which is really where most of their revenue is earned. Apple is in this for the long haul. The critics should be more worried about the long-term financial health of Spotify than whether Apple Music will be a success or not (of course it will be).
[doublepost=1521085122][/doublepost]
Thanks, will go back and reread them. I was a subscriber only recently, so I may have missed out a few back issues, and some do occasionally slip my mind.
[doublepost=1521085401][/doublepost]
I am still not convinced that it's wise for Apple to blow its massive cash hoard on huge acquisitions, such as Spotify, Netflix or even Disney. Apple is more likely to snap up smaller companies with technologies they can easily scale up for the entire ecosystem. Take Touch ID for example. They really just needed the expertise behind it, and once that was settled, it was relatively straightforward to apply it to their entire product line. Whatever Apple paid for that company, it has well earned back many times over.
Good thing you're not a stock analyst. If share prices are only driven by tons of people buying their products, then investors have been doing it entirely wrong.
I agree in that Apple should not blow money on huge content acquisitions. They are not a keen enough company to merge acquisitions well into their ecosystem in addition to acquiring a lot of other types of debt, in this case content debt. My comment was more that Apple is very late to the content game party, and they are playing catchup yet again. Remember when Steve tried to do this many years ago? He was so confident that he could build that uni-platform experience with content providers. That went well! Now given that Tim Cook has more assets to work with, he can probably throw a bit more money and try again. We'll see in a few years how well it does.
Also instead of Above Avalon, you should read Stratechery instead because it covers more than just Apple.
I don't think money alone will solve the problem. The content owners are likely leery of being forced into a similar situation like iTunes and this will likely make it harder for Apple to negotiate successful deals so easily. Apple's success may well be working against it as much as it works to Apple's benefit.
As the saying goes - fool me once...