You like live events, some people don’t.
I would prefer to watch an event in the comfort of my home via Vision Pro. If the Vision Pro can give the feeling of being there without being there I’m all for paying a premium.
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 Not Developing App for Vision Pro Because Headset is 'Subscale' and 'Not Relevant' to Subscribers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I would prefer to watch an event in the comfort of my home via Vision Pro. If the Vision Pro can give the feeling of being there without being there I’m all for paying a premium.
If you pay for a Netflix subscription, you make criminals rich. Netflix pays criminals millions for their help on a documentary about their crime.
I wonder if one day a criminal will only commit a crime to get a Netflix deal later.
Netflix also pays annoying people like Harry and Meghan.
Monetarized content pretty much destroyed the internet.
It worked for my iPhone/iPad/Mac app. Sure, I went and tweaked one part of the display to suit my tastes, but that was totally optional. But then, I adhered to Apple's standard UI elements and didn't reinvent any wheel that was already capable of rolling. Given the NIH culture that inhabits most valley denizens, perhaps Netflix just has a very crappy implementation of their app.
Half the time the shows pick up from the wrong place after a commercial break. Then when you adjust the slider, you have to watch even more commercials.
"Production-ready" for what? What precisely does that mean? And who are the "many people" to whom are you are referring with such certainty? Did "they" all hit you up after purchase?
And as for "they expect every company" is doing a great deal of work here. One either develops an app for this, if interested, of you don't. This sentence makes it seem as though Apple was impatiently stamping its little feet and expecting people to fall in line. Utterly nonsensical.
Ballmer was absolutely correct to knock the launch prices of the iPhone. The fact that a 15 Pro starts at $999 today (with no contract requirement) is irrelevant as his reaction wasn't about where new features, sizes, technologies, inflation, etc. would bring prices many years in the future, it was about the 2 year contract launch prices in 2007. The price (with 2 year AT&T contract) of an 8GB iPhone went from $599 at launch in 2007 to $399 less than three months later to just $199 in 2008 for the next generation iPhone 3G. So, yeah, Ballmer was right about the too high launch prices.
And then spend time supporting it when it doesnt work right and all five users with an Apple Vision complain.
FWIW: I've got a few items left to watch on Netflix (and will pay that 4k upcharge for 2 months)... then maybe resubscribe in a year or two when the backlog of stuff to watch keeps me busy for another few months (then cancel, repeat cycle).
It's the same with ATV+, but that's part of my Apple bundle so net cost is much lower.
I've actually gone to paying for YouTube Premium for less than Netflix and frankly watch that a lot more on a weekly basis.
I'm guessing many folks have realized this and I'm just late/lazy in getting into this usage model.
It's the same with ATV+, but that's part of my Apple bundle so net cost is much lower.
I've actually gone to paying for YouTube Premium for less than Netflix and frankly watch that a lot more on a weekly basis.
I'm guessing many folks have realized this and I'm just late/lazy in getting into this usage model.
Makes sense that your experience is ok if using Apple TV app rather than the website or iOS app. At least for me, I signed up for paramount+ multiple times and reported the bugs. At the end I found it pretty frustrating.
He didn’t just talk about the price. He was wrong about the lack of physical keyboard.
I'm not sure what was considered the closest competitor to the iPhone at launch in 2007 but at the time, AT&T was offering a BlackBerry Pearl (with 2 year contract) for as little as $99.99. The Nokia E62 was available for the same or even less than that (with 2 year contract) in 2007. The starting launch price of the iPhone (with 2 year AT&T contract) was five times that or more.
As far as the Vision Pro goes, I'm also not sure what would be considered the closest competitor but Meta's Quest Pro is currently $999.99 thereby making the Vision Pro 3.5 times more. When it launched, the Quest Pro was $1,499.99 which would've made the VP “only” about 2.3 times more. Both less of a difference than the iPhone in my above comparison.
I understand that which is why I specifically stated he was correct about the PRICE in my posts. I did not bring up the keyboard or anything else.
Cool anecdote. But most people understand that a live event is meaningful while a virtual one is not.
If we’re talking about parallels with the AVP here, the devices capabilities or design aren’t one of them. The issue is pretty much only price.
iPhone subsidy was probably $200, which is about what the subsidy for other phones were at the time. This would put the full price of the iPhone at around $800. The E62 was $350 full price. That’s 2.3 times higher. Of course Apple dropped the price to what would be $600 unsubsidized just over 2 months later. That’s 1.7 times the price. Apple realized they had overpriced the iPhone. The question is, how long will it be until Apple realizes the AVP is too expensive, where it’s priced at 3.5 times its closest competitor and 7 times its average competitor.
HBO/MAX is a pretty crappy applications as well. Periodically crashes on me, weird audio issues will sometimes happen where sound drops to near-inaudible until you close the app and reopen it; and the horrible navigation menu…it’s hard to find anything they‘re not pushing at you as new or ‘interesting’ (usually not!).
Netflix aren’t wrong. Why spend millions developing an app when such a tiny amount of their subscribers will be buying such an expensive and niche device? Best to see how popular it is first and see what type of market develops.
A Netflix app (or lack thereof) will not decide the success of the Vision Pro…
It wouldn’t cost millions to modify the iPad app, but, an app to view 2D content is meh anyways imho
And I agree, to build content to take advantage of the VPro capabilities doesn’t make sense for Netflix
I’d rather they spend the money on the content in general. I have no interest in a Vision Pro so it makes no real difference to me. I think Netflix need to see how the market evolves rather than spend money at this stage.
Isn’t this all kind of pointless until we see these in the wild. The biggest concern should be if the avp can be worn comfortably long enough to watch a movie in the first place before worrying if all the apps will be there.
Last edited: