Re: Apple TV (the studios and the content)... it is a bit of mystery: it's very worthy and good - arguably one of Tim Cook's finest achievements - but not a runaway success in a very competitive post-TV market. Steve Jobs shepherded Pixar into the world, and I'm sure he'd consider Apple TV (again the content arm) a comparable achievement.
replySteve Jobs called the original Apple TV a "hobby", and, similarly for now there isn't any pressure for it to massively grow.
I wonder what Apple TV would look like if they didn’t have Ted Lasso to put out during peak Covid. That’s really their only large mainstream success and in my estimation that success was largely a product of circumstance.
replyI love their SciFi material but two seasons of severance in three years won’t keep people subscribed. The only reason I have Apple TV for more than a month or two out of the year is due to the bundle plan math working out with family sharing.
I don't watch much of it but I do think Apple TV could end up a big winner in the TV wars. The shows they put out are quality and you know they are going to be renewed unlike a Netflix. It seems the strategy is to go for HBO's old position as the king of quality but that is built over decades.
replyIt’s not the “walled garden” that’s preventing Valve to write Proton for Mac, it’s the lack of Vulcan support. Apple pushed to its own Metal framework when they deprecated OpenGl, which is probably great for performance, but outright denying support for Vulkan was a killer blow for games.
replyIf Macs were "great" for gaming people would be buying them for gaming.
replyYou can release a phone with desktop-strength hardware running Ubuntu Touch and people will wouldn't buy it to play games because exceedingly few games are made for it
replySoftware support is vital here, you can't just say that if the hardware is good then people would buy it. What good is it if you can't use it?
This is exactly why the hardware + software vertical integration philosophy is fundamentally retarded. What it essentially means for N hardware vendors to each have their own software platform is that as an application developer, instead of having to develop ONE application, you have to develop N applications. Imagine if Apple hardware just used Linux and macOS / iOS / whateverthefuckOS was just a desktop environment project like Plasma / GNOME / COSMIC. You could still keep the exact same particularities / UX flows / ease of use that people expect from Apple products, AND get free access to the wealth of software and content which exists for Linux and ALSO Windows (because of wine).
reply