Television

4620 readers

72 users here now

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world

automodbeta@lemmy.world

Apple TV+ spent $20B on original content. If only people actually watched. (arstechnica.com)

submitted 6 days ago by GreenEngineering3475@lemmy.world to c/television@lemmy.world

56 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/22226160

Reportedly high budget has brought Apple TV+ a lot of prestige, but not a lot of viewers.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] MimicJar@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

So apps aren't important anymore? Every other streaming platform I pay for has an app and I can easily use it to play all my content.

Also is Apple TV still limited to 1080p when using a browser? Looks like maybe if I use Mac and Safari I can get 4K, but otherwise I'm limited to 1080p.

Also, why am I jumping through all these hoops? How about I pay for something and I get good service?

[–] sxan@midwest.social 2 points 6 days ago

You implied that, as an Android user, you couldn't watch Apple TV without an Apple device. If you really want you, there are several ways without buying Apple hardware. I think the PlayStation has an app.

I'm generally in favor of native apps, but in the case of streaming TV, I'd rather use a browser - it's one less application to install that provides questionable value over a web page, and gives me far more options for viewing content in a variety of situations. At one point we had Prime, Netflix, and Apple all at the same time, and I used a browser to watch all of them; there was almost no difference.

I don't know the answer to the resolution question; we've canceled all of our streaming accounts.

My perspective may be different. Aside from my Android phone, I don't use anything other than Linux. Having access to services through a browser, rather than having to install apps that companies rarely provide for Linux, is a vastly superior accessibility solution.