Satya Nadella pats Tim Cook on the head and says “that’s adorable”
No version numbers either, so you need to reference the style of remote you have to know the approximate age.
https://www.reddit.com/r/google/comments/s2s2ld/all_of_googl...
There's already an Apple TV device and an Apple TV app. Neither of which are required for using Apple TV+ and both of which have functionality other than using Apple TV+.
Some people think that Apple TV+ requires an Apple device to use it and just dismiss it as an option. Apple should have come up with a new brand without Apple in the name. That would broaden their potential market and get their foot in the door with people who don't own any Apple products.
> Apple TV is available on the Apple TV app in over 100 countries and regions, on over 1 billion screens, including iPhone, iPad, Apple TV, Apple Vision Pro ...
How did anyone think "this is fine" in a proofread here when coming up with this rebranding?
What's confusing about this?
Netflix is available on Netflix App. HBO is available on HBO app. Normal people don't care.
It's perfectly normal for Netflix the company to run Netflix the service on Netflix the app on Netflix device if they release one. It's not confusing at all. What would be confusing is if they all had different names.
Because the app is the service. Which isn't the case with Apple TV hence the potential confusion.
This telegraphs that (1) Apple's priority is the service above all else, and (2) that they're about to rebrand their flagship device which supports the service. We'll know very soon, since the updated device is imminent.
i don't know if i like the rebranding or not – it's such a minor thing that idk if it even warrants an opinion. But they should now be obliged to next rebrand Apple Carplay to Apple Car.
That's an interesting point. One potential reason to simplify the service's base name is to allow for segmentation, e.g. Apple TV Ultra.
I think there's a reasonable possibility that they'll introduce a <$100 device in an effort to 10X their living room user base, in which case we might see something like an Apple Theater Pro and an Apple Theater mini.
Apple TV
Makes sense to me. The plus just gave it a vibe of being "bonus content" or something extra, which is a weird thing to emphasize.
> Apple TV+ is now simply Apple TV, with a vibrant new identity. Ahead of its global streaming debut on Apple TV, the film continues to be available for purchase on participating digital platforms, including the Apple TV app, Amazon Prime Video, Fandango at Home and more.
Living+ from Succession was a funny take on the branding.
I was like "What Windows app? How can I use it if I'm on a Mac?" But it turns out, Remote Desktop has been renamed to Windows App...
Geez, Apple. Just call it Gala or something. Steve would have given it some punch. But we live in the worst timeline when Apple is run by a guy who gets excited over, like, supply chains. It's gonna devolve into a slightly more stylish Microsoft soon.
Imagine being able to speak this truth to power at Apple. I imagine its just easier to let everyone do the weird minimalist thing, make confusing names like this, and let support handle the angry and confused phone calls. The C-suite keeps the "Of course we kept true to Steven's vision," PR thing, but imho, the product suffers.
I really would love it if Apple went more towards the middle, at least on naming products. What Macbook do you have? Who knows! Even putting the model number on it seems like an affront to this aesthetic and people have to literally either squint or zoom in using their phone's camera to be able to read the tiny text printed on these devices.
It sometimes feels like Apple went from minimalism inspired industry leader to a weird cargo cult-esque over-correction.
On the other hand, it's generally crystal-clear from context whether you're talking about the susbscription service, hardware device, or app.
It honestly seems less confusing than trying to remember which one has the '+' and which one doesn't. I don't mind it.
The real question now is, will Disney+, Paramount+, ESPN+, etc. follow suit? It always was a weird way to identify streaming.
Like it becomes rebranded as a type of HomePod. Or something like Apple TV Hub.
To me, this is a signal they are moving away from the app's attempt at trying to be where folks go for ALL the streaming apps. It's more a recognition that MOST (not all) people prefer to go to Netflix for Netflix content, for Disney+ for Disney content, etc. They weren't able to pull off being a competitor and also the neutral place for everything, which is maybe good. I'm expecting a redesign.
Smells like Nespresso selling machines that only accept Nespresso cups.
My personal advice: stay the hell away from this because it can and will only get worse.
If they rename it to the same as their device and app, it will be a bit like calling everything Copilot 365.
Apple TV+ was already confusing enought ... "No you don't need an Apple TV, it is just a name" ...
The jury is still out if Apple TV will ever make a significant profit. Tim had a dream.. an expensive one but Apple was and is swimming in cash and running out of people to sell an iPhone. I get the "being a media & services company" hustle, selling overpriced hardware can only get you that far, but burning so much money on actors and production to get some -> limited <- catalog of good movies and shows, I don't get it. "Media" is actually a very though business.
johnthuss•1h ago
It's not the main point of the article, but it is there.
beardyw•1h ago
crazygringo•36m ago