LIVEdigitally

Tag Archives: apple tv

The most dangerous media company in the world

Posted on by

Apple.

Yes, Apple.

Even Apple is afraid of this company (I think). If they weren’t, then why would they let them come standard on the new AppleTV and offer a service that is essentially a competitor to their iTunes movie rental business?

The company I’m talking about is Netflix. If there is one company that should have everyone from Apple to the cable companies quaking it is Netflix.

The announcement that Netflix is standard on AppleTV solidified the company’s position as the default service to get content over the Internet. Over the past 10 years or so, while content producers, cable companies and others fiddled with Hulu, pay walls, and other ideas, Netflix built  the library and the audience and to take over the steaming content market the same way Apple took over the gizmo market.

Sure, Amazon and HuluPlus also have interesting offerings but they are more a compliment to an existing Netflix account, not a replacement. Yes, Amazon and HuluPlus offer some content you can’t find on Netflix, but there is also a lot of overlap (Why do I need to watch 30 Rock on HuluPlus with commercials when I can watch it commercial-free on Netflix?)

Even the bankers are getting in on deal! The other week CrediteSuisse pretty much called out Netflix as one of the main (among the many) nails in the coffin of cable companies. They estimated that a third of viewers age 25-34 use Netflix to cut their cable. While sadly I’m no longer in that prized demographic, I am among the Netflix-powered cable cutters.

Netflix is more than just a clever movie streaming service, it is defining the new content distribution model. When the history of online content is written Netflix will be lauded as one of the main agents that dismantled the old system and founded the new.

The difference between Fragmentation and Disparate Products, a counterpoint

Posted on by

My friend Louis Gray wrote a piece tonight mostly about the new Apple TV, but focusing on how he believes Apple is introducing fragmentation into their ecosystem.  Go ahead, give it a read.

I was writing the following as a long comment, and just as I was wrapping up I thought it would serve better as a blog post.  Please consider it a counter-point, and you should definitely read Louis’ arguments first.  Go ahead, click there, then read all the way through the comments until you get to…

“I’ve yet to see anybody dispute the facts about each device running a different flavor of the OS, which is the crux of the issue.”

The reason nobody’s disputing it is because it’s not actually an issue.  Apple does not, for the most part, have fragmentation in their platforms (other than tiny exceptions, which I’m sure someone will point out snarkily in the comments).  This is about disparate products, not a fragmented operating system implementation (though I do completely agree that the iTunes experience is woefully out of date within the overall product line Apple sells).

First, all the comparisons about what does/doesn’t play on Apple TV on day 1 of shipping are irrelevant – the wide swath of Americans who will buy the device will pick it up later this year (you know, November-ish), by which time the content library will be different.

Second, it’s not as if there’s any cross-product features, other than the few apps which happen to run both on an iPad and on an iPhone/Touch.   When we talk about Android fragmentation it’s because all the products are being labeled as having a common platform, yet there is MASSIVE discrepancy between user interface, app compatibility, features, etc.

Third, Apple isn’t out there marketing “iOS 4 devices” other than when it needs to in re updating iPads/iPhones.  And even then, it’s highly product-specific.  Android, on the other hand, *is* a promise/value expectation (and I’ll avoid commenting on the quality at this point).  When Google touts new Android features and someone with a Droid Eris (my former, sad sad sad phone) hears about them, they have *NO WAY* of knowing they will never ever get them.

Fourth, and last, is about the developers.  Ultimately fragmentation is most keenly an issue to them (even more than consumers), as it impacts their livelihood.  So if you are developing for Android, yet your app won’t run on the mega-phone Evo, and runs poorly on a Droid X, but is nice on the HTC Incredible (my current, much better, but still lacking phone), how are you supposed to communicate that to consumers, who will inevitably write poor reviews, not trust your brand, and ultimately not spend money with you.

That’s the problem with fragmentation.  Now let’s look at developers for iOS – they know exactly (1) how big their market potential is, (2) where the money is flowing, (3) how to build apps within the ecosystem, and (4) with 100% certainty, which devices their apps will run on.  A bad user experience is utterly the developers’ faults, not due to some random hardware maker poorly implementing an OS.  And if/when Apple TV gets iOS 4 (my prediction is it doesn’t happen until the next version of the device, but I’m getting a lot of these wrong these days, so who knows???), developers will have a clear path to build whatever apps they can, knowing exactly how they will perform.

Rooting for Roku

Posted on by

Hello,

I’m a longtime fan of LiveDigitally but a first time contributor. Jeremy has been kind enough to invite me to write for the blog whenever the mood strikes and today seemed like the perfect day for my inaugural post.

Picking up on previous posts on what makes a great Google TV or Boxee app, I thought I’d jump in with some thoughts of my own on one of my favorite devices, the Roku box.

I got my Roku about four months ago and I love it, I really do. It gives me about 75% of the content I would want on my TV, which was enough to get me to “cut the cord” and cancel my cable subscription. So for the past few months, Roku has been my rocket ship to the TV universe.

I haven’t seen Roku’s latest offerings, but here are some thoughts on what I have seen and heard about their current boxes:

  1. Roku wins universal praise for its ease and setup, but not so much fanfare for its UI; I can’t disagree. The box is dead-simple to set-up and use, which is great. But the UI is uninspired and doesn’t really encourage you to really delve in to what is on offer
  2. Another piece of high praise is reliability, my box hardly ever flakes and we put it through the ringer. It is hard-wired into my router so I can’t vouch for the wifi capability, which appears to be improved in the new boxes launched today
  3. Content: At the outset, Roku was essentially a Netflix box. That was great a year-or-so ago but now, everyone and their brother is a Netflix box. Roku has some nifty content like MLB, Pandora, Amazon and a few others, but they need to continue to expand with more mainstream stuff.  Apple has Netflix and just scored ABC and FOX. It isn’t a huge leap forward, but it may be enough to peel off Roku users.
  4. Developer community: Related to the content problem, I know from some developer friends that Roku isn’t the easiest platform to develop on. Obviously this is a problem as competitors, both large and small have strong developer communities. Difficult development platform=difficult to get the choice apps/content.

Some of the pet peeves that are missing from my current box have been addressed by the new ones, the biggest being previously a lack of USB. With my current XR, I don’t have USB to view my own content, which is frustrating. Happily, that has been solved with the XDS

But even as it evolves, Roku is firmly staking ground in the low-end market, which I think is a good move.

The big battle around media-streaming boxes will be around price/performance; Google TV seems to be on the highest end, with estimates that their box will be in the $200-$300 range, Boxee is next at under $200, with Apple TV and Roku coming in at the sub $100 range.

GoogleTV and Boxee promise a more active experience, with more features, web surfing  etc., but also with a more complicated remote/UI. AppleTV and Roku look to be more of lean-back experience of just watching content via a simple remote/UI.

My money is on the lean-back experience, which I think is more viable for the short term. A simple box that lets people access most of the content they want will be the gateway drug to media-streaming boxes. Boxee and Google TV look/sound great on paper, but I wonder if they may be too complex too early in the lifecycle of this product segment.

Why the Mac Mini is not, at all, an Apple TV

Posted on by

Lots of musing yesterday that the new Mac Mini is a “Apple TV in disguise.”  It’s not.  Here’s why:

  1. Price
    There’s a world of difference between seven hundred and one or two or even three hundred dollars.  This is even more the case in the icing room as opposed to the ipad or mobile devices, where theres no precedent or parallel for the product.  Further people evaluate living room stuff extremely differently, and seven hundo is like buying two xbox 360s.  Too much.  In fact, you can truly skip the entire rest of this piece, since this price is an utter non-starter for this discussion.
  2. But what about HDMI?
    Just because the product has hdmi doesn’t mke it a living room product.  Sure front row or Boxee will have that effect, but there’s a radical difference between a purposeful and incidental use case for a device like this.  Hdmi is there because it’s replaced dvi as the digital video standard, and because a huge screen does make a beautiful monitor.  An interconnect does not alone a product make, otherwise I’d be comparing the Mac Mini to a router because it has an Ethernet port.
  3. Software
    Per the above comment, today it’s front row or nothing, from apple direct.  Yes, users can download Boxee or plex, but to think consumers en masse will throw down seven hundred dollars for this solution is way off the mark.  For that purpose, they’d just buy an apple tv, or a roku or a wdtv, etc.
  4. But what about New Software?
    Okay, it’s fairly naive of me to say the future of this scenario is the existing version of front row.  Obviously they’ll rev it, and lets assume the rev is solid.  Per all the above points, it doesn’t matter how much better it is.  It’s not about a “better experience” when we are talking the price point.
  5. The Apple Way
    Apple makes products with high margins, mass appeal, and excellent software.  A seven hundred dollar apple tv is only one of those things, and at best can get to two.  Why would they make such a bizarre strategy shift here?  It’s not, at all, the apple way.  Far from it.
  6. Consumers and boxes
    Most consumers don’t buy extra boxes for their living rooms.  They buy TVs, game consoles, and media playback devices (the cheapest of the bunch).  When they do buy add ons, they tend to be under $300, such as the slingbox, roku, or wdtv.  In these cases, the value add for the price point is clear.  So looking at the new Mac mini from the lens of ‘what new content or services does this bring to the living room?’ the answer is practically nil.
  7. Consumers and content
    Cable tv (and by that i include satellite and other existing offerings) is, on average, pretty good.  The average American has access to tons of content, both on broadcast and on demand systems, not to mention whatever they are dvring.  Throw in a dvd player and a game console, and the content universe is quite outstanding.  The quantity of people who truly want to throw away their existing stuff is really really small.  Its not to say there isn’t room to add in more, but its not seven hundred dollars worth more in any consumers’ eyes. For a box that expensive to earn a spot in the living room, it must supplant existing content offerings in such a way that consumers clearly perceive the value.  So not only is a brand new software package a requirement, but a massive increase in content, especially free content, is as well.

But What If?

If apple discontinued the apple tv line, this would have a shift, but only a minor one.  In that scenario, I’d imagine the opportunity truly shines for google tv products and the Boxee box by dlink (full disclosure: I consult with dlink), as they will offer similar value propositions but at steeply discounted prices.  And unlike the comparisons between the iPad and the janky tablet rivals, these other products are far more likely to show promise and value.  Still doesn’t add up.
And now for something completely different.
A man talking about the same topic, in video form:

Google TV vs Apple TV? I don't think so…

Posted on by


Watch live video from Jeremy Toeman on Justin.tv

Stories I referenced: