Apple is putting iTunes on Samsung TVs(theverge.com)
theverge.com
Apple is putting iTunes on Samsung TVs
https://www.theverge.com/2019/1/6/18170797/samsung-2019-tvs-itunes-support-airplay-2
13 comments
I just never connected my TV to the internet. There’s plenty of other ways to make your tv “smart”... but you’re right, a PiHole would be useful to block the ads on those streaming devices too
The Prime, YouTube and iPlayer apps work just as well on the TV as the Chromecast (the TV just appears in the cast to list) and overall does a very good job.
I just dislike the ads from Samsung. They weren't there for the first six months after I bought the TV and were released in a firmware 'upgrade' without warning.
Shitty behaviour at best. I'm no longer going to buy anything Samsung and ever time a Samsung TV related post is made here or on Reddit, I'll post my link.
I just dislike the ads from Samsung. They weren't there for the first six months after I bought the TV and were released in a firmware 'upgrade' without warning.
Shitty behaviour at best. I'm no longer going to buy anything Samsung and ever time a Samsung TV related post is made here or on Reddit, I'll post my link.
Is this a sign that Apple might be preparing to kill the Apple TV box? Perhaps they see the future as being native smart apps inbuilt into the TV.
I really hope they won’t kill the AppleTV. Yes the device is expensive (it’s an Apple product after all...) but it’s so refreshing to use a TV OS that is performant, responsive, and doesn’t have ads in it. And I personally love the trackpad remote. Apple’s stance (and track record) on privacy also gives me peace of mind that it’s not sending back unwanted data.
I love the remote too but the bluetooth seems more sensitive to RF interference on the 4k Apple TV than it did on the previous model.
Why kill it, Apple TV is one of their best products, amazing video and sound quality and the best remote, if you have a home cinema like theatre and spend a few hours a day watching TV, the additional cost of $125 is irrelevant. Apple should use their chip making expertise to develop a native 4k Laser Projector at affordable prices, Sony at $5000 still too expensive, Texas Instruments have been slow to innovate and get to 4k. A true native 4k apple tv with laser projector at say $2000 is quite doable and would be a very attractive product, to get 150 inch viewing screen plus options to link to several smart speakers for surround sound.
Or maybe they are just trying to separate their content selling business from their hardware businesses? They could get additional revenue from users using iTunes to rent movies or TV shows even if they don’t buy their hardware.
Bingo! I bought a Roku to avoid the Apple-Amazon war (back when Amazon did not have video apps for iOS and tvOS). iTunes isn’t on Roku, so I don’t use iTunes when I purchase videos. Know what is on Roku? Amazon!
I have 3 Roku TVs and a Roku stick attached to a fourth and I also recommend Roku products to almost everyone.
I also have two 4K AppleTVs (free with DirecTVNow.)
But Roku is everything I hate about non Apple consumer electronics. It’s not a hardware product where the business model is I give them money and they give me stuff. Half the home screen is an advertisement and the shortcuts on the remote go to the highest bidder. I have one remote with a shortcut to Rdio (defunct) and one with CBSnews.
I also have two 4K AppleTVs (free with DirecTVNow.)
But Roku is everything I hate about non Apple consumer electronics. It’s not a hardware product where the business model is I give them money and they give me stuff. Half the home screen is an advertisement and the shortcuts on the remote go to the highest bidder. I have one remote with a shortcut to Rdio (defunct) and one with CBSnews.
I really hope not. The Apple TV far outpaces 'smart TVs' and other set-top boxes in terms of UI and stability.
There's no need to kill good and successful products.
https://media.thinknum.com/articles/google-chromecast-sales-...
https://media.thinknum.com/articles/google-chromecast-sales-...
And yet some call this the innovator's dilemma.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Innovator%27s_Dilemma
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Innovator%27s_Dilemma
How does this relate? Having a product that requires little attention and brings in cash doesn’t diatract from innovation, it enables it.
Sadly, Apple seems more like the company to cut products that "don't produce enough growth". Look at how they killed off the ipod, airport, and time capsule devices. At the moment it seems if something isn't selling like crazy, they either ignore it or discontinue it.
When they last reported iPod numbers they were selling about 1.5 million devices a quarter and most of those were probably the (still available) iPod Touch.
I suppose one could say the same about the AirPort, but those met their demise anyways.
I see it is as a sign of them giving up on making their own TV (I thought it might have been a rumour, but I might be wrong).
What I find more interesting though is the timing: a deal like this would probably have been in the works for months in advance of the Tim Cook investor update earlier in the week. Apple would have also had to make the software for this version of iTunes too. What chipsets do these Samsung TVs have? Is it similar to one for an Android phone? Could iTunes/Apple Music show up on Android next?
What I find more interesting though is the timing: a deal like this would probably have been in the works for months in advance of the Tim Cook investor update earlier in the week. Apple would have also had to make the software for this version of iTunes too. What chipsets do these Samsung TVs have? Is it similar to one for an Android phone? Could iTunes/Apple Music show up on Android next?
I'm not privy to Apple's product strategies, but the Motorola ROKR was not really a sign of Apple giving up on making their own phone…
They just want rent for movies and tv. Lifetime revenue of decades and thousands per person. Licensing deals with Samsung and probably many more is easier than making another Apple TV that people want a lot.
Apple Music is already available on Android FYI.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.apple.andr... :)
It also recently became available on Amazon Echo devices, so I wouldn't read anything special into it becoming available on Samsung TVs (given that Apple's Homepod directly competes with Echo): https://www.wired.com/story/apple-music-on-amazon-echo/
If I'm not mistaken Samsung TVs run Tizen - so quite different to Android.
Can't see how that would work. As that would be like Apple putting Apple Music on Android and killing the iPhone. The samsung method will be a degraded experience but one they are willing to allow to increase growth. Like when they allowed iTunes on PC finally even though they knew it wouldn't be as good of an experience but was there only way to continue to grow. I think it's a great move on their part if they have a chance with competing with Netflix.
Apple Music is already on Android, and has been for a while
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.apple.andr...
I think that was his point- Apple Music on Android doesn't mean Apple is discontinuing the iPhone, and similarly, putting Apple Movies on the Samsung TV doesn't mean they are discontinuing the AppleTV
More like what google has done with chrome cast. Sell a device but also license out the tech to be deeply integrated with other devices.
The Apple TV is also their only HomeKit hub (you can have a; iPad as a hub, but that’s hardly reliable).
Samsung software is really bad. Their screens are really good. This move will deplete Apple's cachet further. We've seen this Apple before, in the 90s.
The problem with Apple isn't the removal of the 50 year old 1/8 inch headphone jack, of which the cords have ripped the buds off my ears more than 100 times. The future is cordless and there are cordless headphones that work great for 20 or more hours per charge. Removing the headphone jack was a strong product decision, likely made by some of the leaders in product design and technology, the world around.
The problem lies in a company that can't make a strong big corporate direction decision.
Apple clearly attempting to shift to services because they can't come up with a new killer device. Services are safe, and safety kills good hardware companies. Their most important software, iTunes and iPhone iPod app has become nearly unusable due to the strong sales funnel aimed at Apple Music. Which I don't use but is trogan-horse-adware that causes popups everyday on my iPhone.
Apple Presents confusing product lines highlighting numerous similar items weakens the entire line. Selling high-quality products and at the same time filling those devices with popup sales for services is indicative of a company that can't commit.
These are clear signs of an Apple devolving to a state similar to where Steve Jobs found Apple Inc in 1997, which is scary.
The problem with Apple isn't the removal of the 50 year old 1/8 inch headphone jack, of which the cords have ripped the buds off my ears more than 100 times. The future is cordless and there are cordless headphones that work great for 20 or more hours per charge. Removing the headphone jack was a strong product decision, likely made by some of the leaders in product design and technology, the world around.
The problem lies in a company that can't make a strong big corporate direction decision.
Apple clearly attempting to shift to services because they can't come up with a new killer device. Services are safe, and safety kills good hardware companies. Their most important software, iTunes and iPhone iPod app has become nearly unusable due to the strong sales funnel aimed at Apple Music. Which I don't use but is trogan-horse-adware that causes popups everyday on my iPhone.
Apple Presents confusing product lines highlighting numerous similar items weakens the entire line. Selling high-quality products and at the same time filling those devices with popup sales for services is indicative of a company that can't commit.
These are clear signs of an Apple devolving to a state similar to where Steve Jobs found Apple Inc in 1997, which is scary.
Everyone acts as if it’s possible to come up with an electronic product in a category that’s more massive than the mobile phone.
5 years before the iPhone was introduced, it was clear that the world was getting to a point that almost everyone would have a phone.
Since the iPhone was introduced, no one has come up with a product larger than the smart phone.
5 years before the iPhone was introduced, it was clear that the world was getting to a point that almost everyone would have a phone.
Since the iPhone was introduced, no one has come up with a product larger than the smart phone.
Hopefully it isn't just about cellphones, though that was a big one. There are tons of sectors waiting to be disrupted and markets yet to be created.
No one knew they wanted an iMac, iPod, or an iPad. Apple created those markets. meanwhile after Jobs, the Apple Watch isn't doing that well. iPod sold more units in one year than the entire history of Apple Watch. The home pod is a wash. Beyond that, there are no Apple hardware success stories. I think that's because Jobs took huge risks, had huge vision and put huge pressure on staff and the tech and media industries. No one is doing that anymore. except Elon Musk
No one knew they wanted an iMac, iPod, or an iPad. Apple created those markets. meanwhile after Jobs, the Apple Watch isn't doing that well. iPod sold more units in one year than the entire history of Apple Watch. The home pod is a wash. Beyond that, there are no Apple hardware success stories. I think that's because Jobs took huge risks, had huge vision and put huge pressure on staff and the tech and media industries. No one is doing that anymore. except Elon Musk
> No one knew they wanted an iMac, iPod, or an iPad.
Except people had created iPod- and iPad-similar devices before Apple entered the markets. The demand was clearly there.
> iPod sold more units in one year than the entire history of Apple Watch.
Since Apple don't break out sales figures of the Watch, any comparison here is going to be guesswork but, depending on whether you trust UBS numbers[1] or not, that claim will be voided at some point in 2019 (best guesstimates I could find are 17M in 2017, 24M in 2018, predicted 33M in 2019 which would eclipse the best iPod year of 55M[2])
Also this a fairly silly comparison - the iPod is a standalone non-luxury item; the Watch is a (fairly) tethered luxury item. It's, uh, apples to oranges.
[1] https://9to5mac.com/2018/10/31/apple-watch-sales-5/ [2] https://www.businessinsider.com/apple-ipod-rise-fall-chart-2...
Except people had created iPod- and iPad-similar devices before Apple entered the markets. The demand was clearly there.
> iPod sold more units in one year than the entire history of Apple Watch.
Since Apple don't break out sales figures of the Watch, any comparison here is going to be guesswork but, depending on whether you trust UBS numbers[1] or not, that claim will be voided at some point in 2019 (best guesstimates I could find are 17M in 2017, 24M in 2018, predicted 33M in 2019 which would eclipse the best iPod year of 55M[2])
Also this a fairly silly comparison - the iPod is a standalone non-luxury item; the Watch is a (fairly) tethered luxury item. It's, uh, apples to oranges.
[1] https://9to5mac.com/2018/10/31/apple-watch-sales-5/ [2] https://www.businessinsider.com/apple-ipod-rise-fall-chart-2...
> It took Apple two years to sell the first million iPods. It was nowhere near an overnight success. At its height it sold 50 million a year.
The tablet incarnations were total flops, as were the MP3 players.
Demand wasn't there for iPod or iPad, as stated by the other response, the market was created by Apple.
The tablet incarnations were total flops, as were the MP3 players.
Demand wasn't there for iPod or iPad, as stated by the other response, the market was created by Apple.
It took Apple two years to sell the first million iPods. It was nowhere near an overnight success. At its height it sold 50 million a year.
When the iMac was introduced, Apple was celebrating selling one million Macs a quarter. In its best year, Apple sold around 20 million Macs in total a year - less than half the number of iPhones they sell in a quarter.
At its height, Apple sold about 45-60 million iPads a year - again about the number of iPhones Apple sells in a quarter.
I’ll consider Elon Musk a “success” when either SpaceX or Tesla is profitable long term.
Going into the phone market wasn’t a huge untapped market. By the time the iPhone came out, the mobile phone was already the next big thing.
As far as the Apple Watch not being a success, it’s a more profitable product than cell phones are for any company besides Apple and Samsung....
When the iMac was introduced, Apple was celebrating selling one million Macs a quarter. In its best year, Apple sold around 20 million Macs in total a year - less than half the number of iPhones they sell in a quarter.
At its height, Apple sold about 45-60 million iPads a year - again about the number of iPhones Apple sells in a quarter.
I’ll consider Elon Musk a “success” when either SpaceX or Tesla is profitable long term.
Going into the phone market wasn’t a huge untapped market. By the time the iPhone came out, the mobile phone was already the next big thing.
As far as the Apple Watch not being a success, it’s a more profitable product than cell phones are for any company besides Apple and Samsung....
I think if there is another segment for Apple to be as successful as the iPhone, it's not obvious yet, which product it is to be.
Another challenge is that there are markets to be disrupted, but they may not necessarily be a 1 trillion dollar market like smartphones have been.
Apple could disrupt an industry that people may absolutely love and flock to, but if its size is 50 Billion dollars, but that would be less than 10% of their current market cap. What would be a 50B dollar successful stand-alone business doesn't necessarily serve as the product that can get Apple to say a 2T market cap.
And it isn't like Apple isn't trying to find a product (e.g. apple car, watch, homepods, etc).
Another challenge is that there are markets to be disrupted, but they may not necessarily be a 1 trillion dollar market like smartphones have been.
Apple could disrupt an industry that people may absolutely love and flock to, but if its size is 50 Billion dollars, but that would be less than 10% of their current market cap. What would be a 50B dollar successful stand-alone business doesn't necessarily serve as the product that can get Apple to say a 2T market cap.
And it isn't like Apple isn't trying to find a product (e.g. apple car, watch, homepods, etc).
That’s the problem. If any other company had a new product that generated $10 billion in profit a year, everyone would be celebrating. If Apple does it, people yawn.
Without realizing that most phone manufacturers can’t even break even consistently....
Without realizing that most phone manufacturers can’t even break even consistently....
> I’ll consider Elon Musk a “success” when either SpaceX or Tesla is profitable long term.
Ehem... I'm sure you applied your stringent earnings requirements to other companies like Amazon as well...
https://qz.com/1196256/it-took-amazon-amzn-14-years-to-make-...
Ehem... I'm sure you applied your stringent earnings requirements to other companies like Amazon as well...
https://qz.com/1196256/it-took-amazon-amzn-14-years-to-make-...
Actually I wouldn’t have. The industry had no idea whether Amazon’s business model would ever be profitable or what would happen if they raised prices enough to be profitable.
In reality. Amazon still hasn’t proven that there original business can be sustainably profitable. All of their profit from 2017 came from AWS.
https://www.zdnet.com/article/all-of-amazons-2017-operating-...
In reality. Amazon still hasn’t proven that there original business can be sustainably profitable. All of their profit from 2017 came from AWS.
https://www.zdnet.com/article/all-of-amazons-2017-operating-...
Funny, the headline I read earlier said "Samsung Smart TVs will add iTunes...."
Simply switching the subject of the sentence makes a huge difference in how the story is interpreted.
Simply switching the subject of the sentence makes a huge difference in how the story is interpreted.
This is very much related to Netflix pulling out of the iTunes store pay option. Looks like there is a war brewing between Netflix, Apple, YouTube, Amazon to become King of media. I predict when Netflix announces syndication of their content, they are admitting to have lost to the giants.
I hope they allow playback of 4K content... right now they only do that for Apple TV.
I purchased a bunch of movies from iTunes and was excited when they announced they’d upgrade it all to 4K for free (until they said it could only be played on Apple TV)
I purchased a bunch of movies from iTunes and was excited when they announced they’d upgrade it all to 4K for free (until they said it could only be played on Apple TV)
Hm. What device were you looking to play back 4K content, if not a TV? Wouldn’t the viewing distance for a computer monitor need to be quite close to make it discernible?
I want to be able to play back the iTunes movies I bought on my 4K TV without having to buy an Apple TV device.
We just recently got a 4K OLED and the difference between that and my old HD plasma (especially with HDR features) is huge.
We just recently got a 4K OLED and the difference between that and my old HD plasma (especially with HDR features) is huge.
Wait, shitty software from apple instead of the shitty software that's already on the Samsung TVs? No thanks.
So, then I would have to enter my Apple ID into an app on a platform Apple does not control? While Smart TV's are far from hardened devices? While that Apple ID is central and crucial to the security of my Apple devices and services? I think not.
Hopefully this means there's a chance airplay2 support can make it into shairplay/shairport or Kodi as well sometime soon then.
You know something is wrong when Apple gives up control of their experience to Samsung even if it is only a part of it.
Wasn't it Samsung that removed the 3.5mm headphone port from their latest TVs? That's spooky.
Are people still using iTunes?
I am. I bought a bunch of music on it before Spotify was around, and I still have an “ownership” mindset with respect to content that I think I really like. I still have buyer’s remorse on certain albums and tracks, but that’s just the nature of things for me.
Not trying to be snarky, but why would you have to use iTunes to play music you own? Can't you just play it on whatever device with whatever software you choose?
If your player of choice is iTunes then sure, go for it! But I read your comment as a choice between iTunes or Spotify/other streaming.
I also have loads of music purchased from various online stores and (even more) ripped from the many, many CDs I bought over the years. I don't subscribe to Spotify and listen to my purchased music as much as anything else. I still haven't touched iTunes in years.
If your player of choice is iTunes then sure, go for it! But I read your comment as a choice between iTunes or Spotify/other streaming.
I also have loads of music purchased from various online stores and (even more) ripped from the many, many CDs I bought over the years. I don't subscribe to Spotify and listen to my purchased music as much as anything else. I still haven't touched iTunes in years.
Sorry, I should have been more clear. I bought the music using iTunes as well. I also bought many tracks and albums using Beatport. I only really started using iTunes after I got an iPhone because it is easier to sync music to the iPhone using iTunes.
By iTunes I believe they are referring to the ability to watch movies from the Apple iTunes Store which is available on Mac, iPhones, iPods, and AppleTvs. Not referring to the iTunes Mac/Windows software, though yes, still very popular.
not so much for managing content on a device (though I do still have an itunes library) but itunes store is actually very good competitive prices and Im not locked into amazon with all my digital content.
Are there people who allow their TVs connect to the Internet?
I do! It’s easy to do, the features are nice, and it’s convenient.
It is a really easy decision for most consumers these days since many TV's have built in media players. Why buy a TV and a media player when you can just connect the TV to the internet and have a media player integrated?
Another example of “I haven’t owned a TV IN 10 years. Do people still watch tv?”
Yes, it's nice feature on these samsung smart tv. You can login to youtube, netflix hulu...to watch content from these over internet. My mom loves it
Considering I can hardly run iTunes on a new iMac, I can't wait to watch my Samsung "smart" tv burst into flames trying to open it.
https://gist.github.com/peteryates/b44b70d19ccd52f62d66cdd4b...