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.
Netflix CEO Confirms Netflix Won't Be Part of Apple's Upcoming Video Service
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Except for the whole “Netflix produces so many shows that SNL ran a skit wherein Netflix would literally approve anything pitched to them” thing. Spotify don’t make music.
The acquisition isn’t rumored. The deal is scheduled to close Wednesday morning.
Can’t you use this argument to demonstrate how Apple hasn’t innovated ... at all? They didn’t invent the MP3 player, they produced a desirable product around existing technology. Same for the iPhone.
Realistically, in many situations they took stories that existed and transformed them into something that audiences enjoyed.
I mean, maybe there is a secret manuscript Disney acquired from Hans Christian Anderson that contains the lyrics to Let it Go and drawings of a snowman day dreaming about summer.
Or maybe you’re being thoroughly reductive if what Disney does and has accomplished.
My issue with Disney is that once they take from the public domain they never give it back. They are the poster child of what is wrong with copywrite. Keep in mind that The Lion King should be public domain now, but the mouse takes but doesn’t share.
Well I think the general rule of thumb is once a TV series gets three or four seasons it has enough episodes to go into syndication where it can run for a very long time.
I have found that the majority of the shows produced by Netflix aren't that fantastic to crow about. I might watch it since it's there, but I found myself generally just scrubbing through their shows. And rarely is there a Netflix show I end up rewatching a second time, assuming I even made it through the first time.
I sometimes wonder if Netflix executives greenlight shows just to pad their accomplishments on their work review and make it seem like they are doing a lot to help grow the company, but don't really do anything to ensure the quality of the programmes that is being churned out.
Netflix can keep churning out show after show, but if few people watch them and aren't the main reason why people stay with their service, does it really count for anything?
It also doesn’t seem to include a lot of Disney films I remember in the 70s where they would film a wild animal (which I guess was really trained) and a narrator would tell some story. They were probably made in the 50s and 60s. TCM played one a year or so ago.
i love the idea of the TV app as a way to find stuff but the whole UI of only being able to save stuff in 'up next', not being able to tag stuff that's not currently available for streaming in case it happens later and the flipping apps to actually see stuff is a fail to me.
in my ideal world everything would use single sign in if it's 'cable' based access, the videos would all play in the TV app (with some tweaks to the player UI) and we could set profile choices so we don't have to constantly select which one to use for a service. and yes Netflix would play ball.
Not customers, Fans. Spotify seems to think that if you pay for their service, you are their fan! Poor Spotify!!
I guess this is only partially on topic but I fail to see where the future of video streaming services is going.
Prior to the iTunes Music Store, record companies seriously resisted moving to electronic delivery. They did their utmost to stop people pirating music. Their best success came when iTMS and others starting offering simple, easy, relatively cheap, legal methods of distribution. Of course, there’s been a shift away from download-stores towards streaming these days.
One would have expected video services to follow a similar model but each distributor seems to want to have their own streaming service. Why? We don’t have separate music subscription services for Sony, Universal and others.
Is an average Joe really going to sign up to four or five different streaming services with all the hassle of having to search each one for the content you’re looking for? Or is he likely to sign up for one or two and pirate anything he can’t find?
I, myself, would personally rather pay £20-£25 per month for a single service which offers everything. Indeed, there are always illegal methods of doing so.
Ultimately I think this fragmentation will lead to each distributor getting such a small piece of the pie it might be unsustainable.
Prior to the iTunes Music Store, record companies seriously resisted moving to electronic delivery. They did their utmost to stop people pirating music. Their best success came when iTMS and others starting offering simple, easy, relatively cheap, legal methods of distribution. Of course, there’s been a shift away from download-stores towards streaming these days.
One would have expected video services to follow a similar model but each distributor seems to want to have their own streaming service. Why? We don’t have separate music subscription services for Sony, Universal and others.
Is an average Joe really going to sign up to four or five different streaming services with all the hassle of having to search each one for the content you’re looking for? Or is he likely to sign up for one or two and pirate anything he can’t find?
I, myself, would personally rather pay £20-£25 per month for a single service which offers everything. Indeed, there are always illegal methods of doing so.
Ultimately I think this fragmentation will lead to each distributor getting such a small piece of the pie it might be unsustainable.
You’re mistaken.
First of all, there is room for new players. Second, Apple will come with an impressive list of new content, including an adoptation of Isaac’s Asimov’s masterpiece Foundation. These series will cost Apple millions and can’t be compared, production wise, with show like Planet of the Apps or Carpool Karaoke.
Like it, or hate it, but some show’s will probably gain a fair amount of succes, others won’t. Just like those on Netflix.
Now, for Netflix being succesfull is essential, they need to pay for every piece of content and they need to grow in order to make some kind of profit. To keep it short, it’s quite hard for Netflix to make profits. For Apple it’s a whole other ballgame. They can afford not having succes to begin with. Apple’s TV app will also be used for binding Apple’s customers to Apple’s eco system. Especially ‘if’ Apple could come up with an subscrfiption based plan where a customer would get Apple Music, and access to Apple’s tv content and to some show’s on HBO for example then this could be very appealing for many customers.
I wonder if you would be crying if your Uber cost 30% more because you used their App, or your takeaway cost 30% more because you used the Just Eat app? That’s the difference. Spotify have legitimate arguments
[doublepost=1552978354][/doublepost]
Pathetic
No, it most certainly is not going to be sustainable to most companies.
And you know what the best part is? None of them are profitable, because the only way these services can retain viewers is by constantly churning out new content, which costs money.
Which is why I believe we are currently headed towards a streaming bubble, and the first to go will be the companies who have nothing to fall back on. Companies like Apple, Amazon and Disney have the money to keep going at it forever and basically wait out the competition.
I'm not sure it's a bubble (which implies popping) but I do see a lot of consolidation happening. I especially see Disney and Apple allying...So that's Apple's service and ecosystem, Disney + and Hulu, which as of Thursday Disney will own 60% of, and they're looking to get more of it..
[doublepost=1552984755][/doublepost]
That's not how copyRIGHT (as in, the right to copy) works.
Anything in the public domain that Disney has used, you can use to. You can't use Disney's stuff, because it's Disney's. Disney can't use your stuff, because it's yours...unless they pay you or you release it into the public domain.
Anyone can make their version of the Snow Queen. They can't copy Disney's interpretation, as found in Frozen. And Disney will certainly be watching your version to see if you do violate their interpretation (copyright) or their branding (trademark).
As for Mickey, Mickey isn't in the Public Domain, and yes, Disney spends a hell of a lot of money to change copyright laws to keep it from happening..but ultimately, so what? What are you hoping happens if Steamboat Willy becomes pd?
