Why Netflix Won’t Be Part of Apple TV

Proud of Netflix for shaking things up. They’ve got my loyalty. I can’t imagine life without their original content! From dramas to their cheesy Christmas specials. As for Apple, I’ll keep my Apple phone for now because i think it’s the best smartphone (for now) but since they got rid of the headphone jack I’ve been tempted to try a Samsung or Google phone. I probably will in the near future. Maybe it’s a feeling but I feel like Apple is just trying to make money at this point and don’t have me and my experience as the priority anymore.

I find this all really confusing, partly because I subscribe to only one streaming service of any kind, Netflix. I just don't have time to use others, nor do I want to incur yet more monthly costs. (You can spend an awful lot of money $10 at a time.) I also don't understand all the angst here about Apple devices. I have the whole range of Apple stuff, but the only one that's relevant to streaming is the Apple TV. It's plugged into my Samsung television. I almost never watch anything on the ipad or phone. Just because Apple is providing its own content (in which I also have no interest), you won't need an Apple device to watch it. If they remove Netflix from ATV, then I will have to stream it from the computer, but that's no big deal. However, it will have the effect of making the ATV *less* valuable to me, not more. A side note: If Netflix is worried about competition, maybe they should let us people overseas see the same content that people in the US can get. We get a *small* fraction of it for the same cost.

My Apple TV has been cannibalizing my iTunes purchased tv shows lately. Example bought collection 1 of cartoon shorts, liked it and bought collection 2. Well collection 1 disappeared from my library replaced by 2. It has done this 3 times with tv episodic content. Yes I need to call customer service. The $$$$ error is in Apple’s favor and my time to get my “stolen” content back - my loss. I am less than exhilarated about a bundling deal. Love Netflix & Amazon to stream.

Unfortunately I am sick of Apple. Suddenly it seems to me their attitude towards the public and their customers changed radically. For years I was an Apple walking advertisement and it felt as if they turned on me. Every electronic gadget in my house is Apple. Service deteriorated fast. A manager called a cop who pulled his gun on me. Not very smart I would say especially because I am 83 years old I waited weeks to pick up a simple computer repair which took almost 4 weeks. I had been a Apple fan since 1987 but no more. Intimidation is not a good sales method. I no longer enter the Apple stores and have repairs or get help at a much nice computer repair store very close by.

The new television sounds a lot like the old television. The old television is exactly why I stopped watching television. My TV, along with whatever entertainment bundle the major networks are selling, found its way to the dump a long time ago. Not interested. I dropped iTunes when they opened the Apple store. Getting my playlists off an iPod was hard enough. I'm definitely not interested in reliving the experience. I'd say the same thing about all the others. I'm not interested in a digital media network where I have pick and chose between bundled services. I've already lost interest in Netflix. If they keep changing the platform towards more traditional entertainment models, I'll drop the service entirely. As it stands, the account only exists to give family members access to a service I use sparingly or not at all. If this is the conversation business leaders are having, they obviously missed the message. Entertainment sells a lousy product 90-plus percent of the time. Adding more lousy products to the mix is not helping your cause. Adding more lousy products in different places at higher prices is even worse. Owning an Apple device is not going to change this preference. In fact, I probably won't buy an Apple product again after they removed the radio receiver from Apple devices. You now have to download a separate app. No thanks...

I just dumped AT&T's DirecTV Now package. And went back to Hulu. AT&T had way too many technical glitches, freezes, sports blackouts of stations I was paying to receive, a cloud DVR limited to 20 hours, missed recordings, the list of problems was long and painful. In my world, an ideal streaming service is one I never, ever have to talk to. AT&T has trained is reps well. Constant apologetic and empathetic responses from sincere customer service people (AT&T finally got their customer service fixed. Their customer service used to be awful.) I was offered $10 a month discounts and literally begged not to cancel. They always promised the problems would be elevated with high priority, but nothing ever got better. The video quality on Hulu is not as good as AT&T or YouTubeTV (I tried that for less than a month but quit when the service would disconnect me right in the middle of a show and not remember where I was when I logged back in). So I am back with Hulu, which I will be able to watch on Apple's new basic TV app. The 300 magazines plus LA Times and WSJ at $9.99 a month is attractive. I'd probably have to dump the New York Time at $15 a month if I switch. The Apple Card seems especially attractive too with no fees, cash back, low interest and lots of app features making it easy to manage my money and recognize my purchases. Plus their laser engraved platinum card has no numbers, expiration date, CVV, or Signature Panel on it. It will be a status symbol of cool design.

Can anyone say "verticalaly integrated monopoly?" or "uubnfair trade practices?" or "excessive barrier to entry for new startups?" We used to have a government that would stop this kind of stuff. oh well. worse for everybody.

I get leery when it comes to tech companies trying to create an "all in one" service for devices that I use that they make. Kudos to the ones that haven't signed up. I am a NYT subscriber and am glad they are getting all of my fee that I pay each month not just a percentage of one. Same for Netflix, Hulu, Amazon and the upcoming Disney+. Yes, I know, they are all giant media companies, but its my choice to see where my dollars go for content and not my device maker. Also, this goes beyond Apple Iphone devices. None of my home entertainment devices are Apple.

Are millions of Apple product users really going to watch video content on those little tiny smart phone screens? It doesn't sound like a quality of life entertainment experience.

"[Netflix is] a service that aims to serve up shows for all kinds of viewers.." Well, then they had better get moving on vastly improving the interaction and functionalities of their extant interface, if they want to promote enjoyable (browse/search/view) experiences and recruit/maintain users. Just my $.02.

So I'll spend $5 on Hulu for my son and $10 on Netflix for me and $X on Apple for husband and suddenly have dozens of little bills replacing (and perhaps adding up to more $ than) my one cable bill. Kinda makes me miss the cord I'm cutting.

I believe it comes back to Steve Jobs vision of plug and play. At his time, it was hardware Plus software... now it is hardware plus software plus contents or services... Amazing, how Steve transform our lives...

Let's not forget that out of that 1.4 billion apple users, a lot are from China whose Apple store is quite different from outside China. Having lived in China for years, the apple store is a sidenote to its other vast android stores, where most of the content is being viewed from. Sure they have a lot of users but are most people willing to use their phones to binge a 10 hour ultra HD show? I would argue no, the vast majority will still want to sit on a couch and watch it on a TV. And if you want to argue that you can connect your phone to a TV or use Apple TV or whatever, sure but it's still a miniscule amount of people who do these. Its interesting that Apple is expanding into the entertainment industry, I am curious how it will play out.

Putting it simply, Apple is becoming a monopoly that seeks to minimize my choices in the purchase of computer devices, operating systems, Apps, navigation, data storage, payment for goods and services, entertainment and news systems and content. To make matters worse the company abuses trust, violates privacy, manipulates choice and exploits government regulations all while profiting excessively from all of the above. No company should not be allowed to pursue/establish a monopoly that interferes with customer access to competitor information, content or purchase options.

I use an iPhone, but do not subscribe to any of Apple's services, as they lock you in to a single vendor. I try to maintain the ability to move between devices and systems. The issue with this service is that the content services do want the consumer to remain in their brand. They want access to the data generated by the use of their service, and they would like to keep all or most of the revenue generated by the use of their service. Apple typically wants a large cut of the revenue; they want to subsume the brand, so that you think of Apple, not the service; and they like to keep the data private, since, after all the user is Apple's customer since they signed up in the Apple Store. I believe this is why the NY Times is not participating in Apple's news service. If the terms are similar, I do not see any services with brand recognition jumping on the Apple bandwagon.

Never been an apple fan, always leaning toward more open platforms. If there is a netflix app for apple, then the argument of all of those apple devices is mute, because they can also stream netflix. If they can connect video out via hdmi cables, then count all of the tv sets as potential netflix devices. My hope is that Roku is the big winner in this space, as they are the most source agnostic devices out there and are appearing in more of the smart tvs than any other. They support Netflix, Hulu, Amazon and a host of other channels such as Crackle which stream free content with commercials. Roku is an open platform which welcomes any streaming service (dozens of them, including lots of very old content not carried elsewhere.)

Recently I changed my phone plan with Verizon and got free Apple Music on my phone. I really don't want to use Apple for anything, but sooner or later we won't have a choice. I have Amazon Prime and have never looked at its shows or movies. I love Netflix, but rarely watch it. The only people who have time to watch these new programs and Live streams are TV Journalists or Media Critics. Most of the time I am watching regular TV or cable, or listening to the radio. When I come home from work, I just want to relax and veg. Most of the channels Apple are selling, I already have. Why pay for CBS, MSNBC when it's now free. I don't blame Netflix for not joining Apple's bundle. If Apple won't share the data with them, then Netflix can't see who is subscribing to their service, meaning a major loss of revenue for Netflix and extra stuff pockets for Apple. I agree with the person from Canada, "Apple and Amazon are killing the golden goose," and we the consumer will suffer the consequences.

I have been a mac user since OSX first came out and an iphone user since the first iphone. I did not transition to Apple Music when it first came out, even when I was offered three month free trials. There was no real benefit to switching at that time. Apple music was the same songs curated a bit into the same stations and playlists that I could find on all the other music streaming apps. And then I got a notice that Apple Music would be free continually, not just a free trial, with my Verizon phone. I then made the switch. It is difficult to see just what Apple is getting out of my free subscription. Some data perhaps, but the fact that they do not offer me recommendations suggests they don't know what to do with that data. I guess they get something from Verizon for my subscription, a fee that is a fraction of their subscription price. I see Apple's video streaming service going much the same way. Apple is late to the game and does not understand what to do with the data it collects. They will have to partner or discount the service heavily to get true adoption.

I have a cluster of Apple products such as an iMac, iPhone, iPad, etc. However, I'm not really inclined to wed my viewing choices to the Apple ecosystem. I'll probably keep the Amazon Fire and still stream Netflix, Amazon Prime >>> HBO, Showtime and Starz,, etc. while seeing how Apple, AT&T and everyone else shakes out over time. Or the array of choices may just be too overwhelming, and I'll pick up a good book or go for a walk instead.

Apple has always been a pain in the neck when it comes to sharing technology. For example, I am almost positive Netflix engineers are the people that came up with the 4K Ultra imaging for so called "Smart" televisions. What did Apple do? Nothing. In fact, whenever you have an issue with an iPhone or similar, if it's under warranty they give you a "re-manufactured" replacement; even if it's a tiny, simple issue. If it is broken by the user (say, dropped in water), they charge you a $100 and give you a re-manufactured replacement. Getting the picture? Yes, the first iPhone I bought (the week it came out) at the Prince Street Apple store in Manhattan for $600 made me feel like Einstein after only a weekend. Since then, however, I bought them until good, competitive Android models came out. I stopped, and starting using Samsung models. The thing that concerns me the most is Disney buying Fox Film Studios. It mean the bulk of films will be owned by Disney, and that spells the end of the artist directors. There are only a small handful now who can have final cut on their films. It used to be only the Man; Stanley Kubrick, who had such power. There is no one out there any more that comes close to what he did in making only a dozen films. On most of these he had final cut because Warner Brothers recognized he was a "man born to push the envelope"; a quote by the former Warner exec who was CEO when Kubrick died in March, 1999. He had final cut. Now, it's all comic book films.

Competition is good for customers. NetFlix has upended the complacent Hollywood business models. Apple is the creative pioneer and so is NetFlix for a digitally connected world. It remains a question mark whether Apple can succeed as a bigger imitation of NetFlix, however.

The key difference between Apple's program and all the others is the (hardware and software) captive audience - all Apple hardware users must use Apple/iTunes if they want apps or software updates. While Netflix & Co. are okay for now, Apple has previously shown that they have no problem using their control over Apple devices to keep competing services out. It will be very interesting to see how far Apple is willing to go to make their streaming video services the only game in town in Appleland. With our FTC asleep at the wheel, I believe it'll be the EU's enforcement of open markets that will see the first legal battle here.

Kanopy free streaming service available through my public library is good enough for me. 5 free movies from the whole history of film per month. Non-addictive.

With all the programming now being offered the biggest reason not to cut the cable is sports.

Netflix sees Apple's dismal track record with content businesses and probably sees little benefit. Apple has yet to demonstrate success in any business other than designing electronic devices. Probably, this latest service will follow the Apple pattern -- the product will be underwhelming, overpriced, and tied to Apple hardware. Apple's dedicated fan base will buy it -- which will make some money for Apple but it won't exactly threaten Netflix.

The consumer will lose. More content, more inane content, but fragmented with little monopolies on the few good programs and films, necessitating multiple subscriptions in order to see the stuff you really want. Netflix was an innovator and well worth its tiny fee. Apple and Amazon are killing the golden goose in their quest for sustained profits. A pox on both their houses.

Netflix is literally the only reason I own apple TV....

At least now we know why Spielberg was so dead set against any Oscar for a Netflix production: he wanted to save those for his projects with Apple. Creative concerns indeed!

Competition is good. Netflix, Amazon prime, Hulu, now Apple. Our Samsung TV that we just purchased can still access Netflix. It also seems to have it's own list of stations(many from South Africa, of all places). I just cut back my Spectrum digital service to Spectrum Choice- all the usual major networks plus 10 other stations, like Comedy Network, Food Network, MSNBC, National Geographic. Still way more TV choices than I need. Best to limit screen time to 2 hours per day and read, go for a walk and practice a hobby.

I find the figures for paying subscribers to these streaming services to be surprisingly small. Like many things in our country, TV seems to have moved toward a haves/haves not structure.

There's already so much streaming content available that separating the wheat from the chaff is a chore unto itself. This article just makes me want to read a book...

I don't know why the author keeps emphasizing that Apple has 1.4 billion devices around the world, but only gives Netflix numbers for U.S. customers. Netflix has a worldwide audience too. And I think that most people would watch most streaming shows on TV's, not 6" phone screens or 15" laptops.

So why don't all Americans, and the whole world for that matter, give up their jobs and stop doing anything, except watching streaming movies? Who will have time for anything else with all these wonderful, "brilliant," video offerings. Forget about Twitter and e-mail. Let's just spend our entire lives watching those streaming videos. It seems to be happening already to some extent so why not make it a reality?