Apple TV+ needed to be renamed but they went with the absolute worst option.
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.
> There's already an Apple TV device and an Apple TV app.
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.
Yeah, this all makes sense if the intention is to change the name of the device.
Netflix (the service) has an app named Netflix. You access Netflix via Netflix on... XYZ. Same goes for basically every other streaming service.
So Apple TV the service on Apple TV the app makes perfect sense if you are thinking about accessing their streaming service via other set tops where Apple TV the app is available.
My guess is that the Apple TV set top will be renamed to something else, perhaps "Apple Home".
Then it would be "Access Apple TV via the app on your Apple Home device" and the merging/conflation of "Apple TV subscription via the Apple TV app" will make perfect sense the same way you would say "Access Netflix via the app on your Apple Home device".
My guess is that "tvOS" will be renamed "homeOS" to go with it.
Apple Home is already the name of their app for smart home stuff.
The Netflix comparison doesn’t quite work with Apple TV. I have an Apple TV (the device) and I don’t just use Apple TV (the app) to access Apple TV (the service). Apple TV (the app) is also where I need to go to buy/rent movies from the iTunes Store, watch Apple keynotes, and it can also be a place to aggregate content in a single UI from a bunch of different streaming services (notably not Netflix, they opted out). Apple TV (the service) is just one feature of Apple TV (the app), at least when it’s running on Apple TV (the device).
These distinctions do matter, due to Apple trying to consolidate everything into that single app. They sunset multiple other apps with its release. I actually find the app pretty hard to use as a result.
It's been a PITA enough searching for Apple TV to only have hits about Apple TV come up for years now. I really hope it's all part of some master plan now coming together, as you say, but I feel like it's just as likely they want to keep the naming "simple" as they have in the past on this regard and that's just the way things are going to stay.
or perhaps it means that they plan to expand their TV offering so as to merit being something more than just a "plus"
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.
> or perhaps it means that they plan to expand their TV offering so as to merit being something more than just a "plus"
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.
The article itself even shows just how confusing it is:
> 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?
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.
Not sure if you’re cutting my quote in bad faith to fit your rebuttal, or just didn’t read it fully. How is this not confusing?
> Apple TV is available on the Apple TV app … on … Apple TV …
Watch Apple TV in Apple TV on Apple TV.
Why choose Netflix as your example as well when both Google and Amazon already have streaming services that don’t have an identically named hardware device. Do you honestly think if Netflix put out a device they would name it Netflix.
The only time I can see this being confusing is when referring to the Apple TV box by the same name, and even that can usually be figured out by context.
It wouldn't surprise me if the device gets a new name in the upcoming Apple event.
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.
Honestly, Jony Ive/Steve Jobs minimalism is as much as a bust as it is a boon. It sort of becomes this unquestionable corporate religion and corporate terror.
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.
Some of the naming trends in the industry are mind-boggling. Half of the major streaming platforms appending themselves, or a premium package, Plus was often not only nonsensical, but derivative. And before that it was putting One at the end of names.
Living+ from Succession was a funny take on the branding.
This is the biggest gaffe I've heard since this one time at work when I was told "you have to use the Windows app".
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.
Worse are the movies and tv shows apps. They don’t even work anymore, they are just deep links to the Apple TV app. It’s been this way for years now.
Of course finding these in the Apple TV app is not obvious, at least for me. It’s under Store and Library. It took me long than I’d care to admit to figure that out.
Then there is the Apple Events app, which can be deleted, but it seems unwise to do so. Using the Apple TV app gives a button which deep links to the Apple Events in the Apple TV app. I can’t for the life of me find this page organically using the TV app. I probably spent 45 minutes one day looking.
Big Tim has been killing it lately, and by killing it I mean being the Brian Krzanich of Apple.
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.
My immediate assumption is this is to preface an Apple box rebranding, especially being announced right before new hardware is this is is the first of additional rebranding to simplify and avoid confusion. The Apple box/hardware could renamed Apple Hub and then the one with a display rumored could be Apple Hub+ or Apple Hub Display etc. Lots of options just hopefully it’s not keep everything the same name.
I thought Apple TV+ was a paid subsection in the Apple TV App?
>Apple TV+. Watch series, feature films, kids’ entertainment, and more from the most creative minds in TV and movies — with new Apple Originals added every month.
The PR site as well as the main site refer to it as Apple TV+, so not sure where the renaming announcement is. But it's un-Apple to have the + missing on the press release for F1...
> 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.
just FYI you can watch on your Android device now. It took them a long time (seriously, I think more than four years after AppleTV+ launched), but they did finally release an Android app.
Who are these people that come up with these ideas? And who are the people that encourage it or don’t provide some semblance of constructive criticism?
IMO just rename the hardware iTV instead, I assume they were holding back this name because back in the original cinema display days there was a rumor that they were making something more like a TV sized imac.
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.