Apple can and does reject apps for all kinds of reasons, and I think one of those reasons should be using video players whose controls disable tvOS’s accessibility and other important native UI features.
Some of those, like subtitles-on-rewind and easily switchable Voice Isolation, are core tvOS features that users buy the device to use -- but then half-assed video players break those features? I just don’t see why that’s allowed.
It's certainly debatable; I'd expect that some people will think Apple should have strict requirements here while others think developers should pick their technologies and let user engagement dictate success.
A few relevant memories:
The pre-tvOS Apple TV was
very strict. There were a handful of apps total, they were pretty much all just for watching video, and each was the result of a special arrangement, and an unknown deal, with whichever company. tvOS could have been that too, but it seems Apple had this debate over 10 years ago and decided tvOS would specifically
not be that; it would instead be this full-breadth platform with the same open-endedness and flexibility for pretty much every developer who wanted to make something for it.
The Amazon Prime Video app for tvOS. They were a huge holdout while Apple and Amazon were seemingly struggling to come to an agreement; apparently lots of customers were asking and waiting for it. When it was finally launched, it was all Amazon-style UI. It felt like suddenly switching from an Apple TV to an Amazon device; or even just to an Amazon site in a slow browser. It seems entirely possible the long disagreement was partially over the interface; evidently it was either Amazon's design or no tvOS app. No doubt the folks at Apple still remember this.
Netflix has always been a holdout too. Subtitle recaps and voice isolation are certainly nice features (though the latter isn't even supported on all Apple TV models). Are they "core features"? Certainly what
is a core feature for TV apps is accessibility from the main "TV" app. And Netflix has never been there. If Apple had ever required that, it seems conceivable tvOS would never have had Netflix.
The main other situation I can think of where Apple has been heavy-handed about a software framework is requiring WebKit for all iOS browsers. The justification? Better for users. The result? Increasingly undeniable controversy and a verdict this was illegal in the EU.
So: I get that you and others think alternate video players shouldn't be allowed. But I trust such people who are also Apple enthusiasts are at least capable of seeing it's a decision with factors to weigh.
This way, I imagine we'll have a shorter kerfuffle and a more permanent settling of the issue. Your way, I think we'd likelier get short-term placation and a longer-term kerfuffle.
"That’s what a lot of customers pay us to do, is to try to make the best products we can. And if we succeed, they’ll buy ’em. And if we don’t, they won’t. And it’ll all work itself out."
If that speaker understood this of Apple, presumably he could fathom the merit of affording the same among developers on a platform birthed to let every developer compete.