3 ms·
Orrrrr they didn't want to rely on/have to pay the exorbitant costs that 3rd-party (e.g. the incumbent studios) would be charging...?
by slater 3y ago
Orrrrr they didn't want to rely on/have to pay the exorbitant costs that 3rd-party (e.g. the incumbent studios) would be charging...?
- OnuRC 3y agoYes but at core it's tech company? Disney and a lot of other streaming services created by Hollywood make sense, even thou business models are not profitable recently. Without good 3rd party content, it can take a decade or more to create a good library and still that's not enough IMO.
- slater 3y agoAnd we were led to believe Google is a search engine, when it's actually an ad company with a passable search engine side-gig. I'd say Apple has changed to being a content company that just so happens to make actually good devices (as long as you don't fall into the "hurrrr apple bad!" trap). Apple's been at it for ~5 years now re: Apple+ series, and they're not all must-see blockbusters, but getting better.