5 ms·

Netflix won't have a Vision Pro app, compromising the device's appeal

28 points by rurp 3y ago

pipeline_peak 3y ago
Netflix is missing a big opportunity by not supporting all 200 Vision Pro users. The Vision Pro REEKS of Post-Jobs. It’s too tech savvy to be a consumer Apple product. Part of the magic of Apples brand is they’ve never really been one to jump the bandwagon. This feels more like a Microsoft product, like that table surface thing from 15 years ago.
- kromem 3y ago
  I agree, that they are missing a big opportunity not supporting all 200 Vision Pro users with built in eye tracking. Especially as they are moving into showing ads.
  - mensetmanusman 3y ago
    Every heart palpation will be analyzed and monetized!
    - kromem 3y ago
      You jest, but I know of a company that does just that very thing using smartwatches in marketing research.
  - blessedwhiskers 3y ago
    https://www.apple.com/apple-vision-pro/ https://www.apple.com/apple-vision-pro/ under Privacy and Security: "Eye input is not shared with Apple, third-party apps, or websites. Only your final selections are transmitted when you tap your fingers together."
    - kromem 3y ago
      We'll see. I remember when the iPhone wasn't going to support native code apps in favor of web apps for privacy and security reasons. That turned out differently.
      - pipeline_peak 3y ago
        Where and when did you find that?
        kromem 3y ago
        In the Jurassic age. More info if you are curious: https://9to5mac.com/2011/10/21/jobs-original-vision-for-the-iphone-no-third-party-native-apps/ https://9to5mac.com/2011/10/21/jobs-original-vision-for-the-...
        pipeline_peak 3y ago
        That was great I'd like more info. I'm not sure how Jobs figured web apps would've been practical given a lot of things were still using flash at the time. We didn't have frameworks like React back then, as far as I know there was pretty much JQuery. But considering how a lot of projects are moving to web technology these days, it sort of showed how forward thinking he was...
mensetmanusman 3y ago
Will force Apple to implement a good web experience. From the 30% tax apple enforces, why would anyone give apple more power by building on a new platform versus a reasonable web app?
- pipeline_peak 3y ago
  Agreed, Apple has yet to prove why companies need to support their niche luxury platform. I guarantee the best Vision Pro experience will be exclusive to their own apps and nearly everything third party will be second class at best. If they can’t make their device effortlessly seamless with existing apps, it’ll be a total failure.
  - Someone 3y ago
    > I guarantee the best Vision Pro experience will be exclusive to their own apps Apple must know they need third party apps at launch and that those apps have to be good, so I expect they’ve worked with/pampered quite a few companies in the last year, helping them build a good Vision Pro app. Because of that, I expect to see more third-party apps than Apple ones at launch, and I expect all of them to be good or at least very impressive to demo. > and nearly everything third party will be second class at best. If we interpret “nearly everything” as “the overwhelming majority”: that is the case on any App Store, so that’s not surprising.
    - pipeline_peak 3y ago
      What’s in it for these developers to support such an unpopular platform, where’s the money?
      - Someone 3y ago
        Firstly, Apple’s help may have made it fairly cheap for them to create their app. Secondly, I guess some CEOs will fall for the status/prestige or for “if the neighbors have it, so must we” and for now, care less for the money. Thirdly, there almost certainly will be few customers, but all buyers will be rich, even for iPhone users, and quite a few likely will be decision makers. If, say, Zoom has a good Vision experience, but MS Teams doesn’t, and that swings a CEO of a large company to switch to Zoom, that’s worth a lot of money for Zoom. So, even if you’re completely rational and think it isn’t worth it, your fear that having a Vision app out will make some other CEO make the irrational decision that, therefore, your smartphone app is better, may be enough to make you decide to invest in a Vision app.
nothercastle 3y ago
Why bother supporting such a small user base. Linux has more users than Vision Pro will for years to come
- mey 3y ago
  A Netflix app in the Steam store that is SteamDeck verified would be nice. Edit: What is the over/under on the Vision Pro supporting SteamVR. :D
dghlsakjg 3y ago
The whole point of the Vision Pro, to me, is to add interactivity to the broader world. Passive consumption of content made for a different form factor is a pretty hard thing to make interactive. The way I see it, the only way to make this interactive is to make it so I can scroll on my phone while half-ignoring a netflix show.
- hffgj 3y ago
  I just don’t see interactivity with the larger world with the current form factor and battery life. I hope it gets there in later versions, but for v1 I’m hoping for a nicer in-hotel movie experience. That’s about it.
FireBeyond 3y ago
Om Malik (https://om.co/2023/12/14/why-vision-pro-will-change-photography/ https://om.co/2023/12/14/why-vision-pro-will-change-photogra...) wants us all to believe that family movie nights will be with everyone sitting in the couch all watching on their Vision Pros. He sees it as an existential threat to the movie theater. How do you share popcorn on the couch all plugged in? And that’s after your average American home with its 2.2 children lay out $14,000+ for their Apple tax. Sorry, Om, I’m not seeing that.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- astrange 3y ago
  I don't see anything about family movie nights in that article, but there is a way private viewing is good for families - it doesn't hog the TV! Only one person can use a TV at once. > Or just having a cable car approaching slowly closer to me. I just took a spatial video of a mountain cable car if anyone wants it. Is it emotional? I dunno, I don't have a way to watch it.
  - Someone 3y ago
    > but there is a way private viewing is good for families - it doesn't hog the TV! Only one person can use a TV at once. Nothing prevents people from watching tv together. Back in the twentieth century, families bonded by doing that. So, I’m not sure that’s good for families.
    - astrange 3y ago
      You don't always want to do that. I don't think the whole family wants to watch one kid playing video games on it.
- malshe 3y ago
  > wants us all to believe that family movie nights will be with everyone sitting in the couch all watching on their Vision Pros. Did you just make that up? That article doesn't say any such thing
lopis 3y ago
I mean, nothing prevents Apple from setting up a shortcut to the Web version of Netflix.
bookofjoe 3y ago
What's the Over/Under on how long until Netflix capitulates? 6 months? A year? Never? It's not never.

28 points by rurp 3y ago

Netflix is missing a big opportunity by not supporting all 200 Vision Pro users. The Vision Pro REEKS of Post-Jobs. It’s too tech savvy to be a consumer Apple product. Part of the magic of Apples brand is they’ve never really been one to jump the bandwagon. This feels more like a Microsoft product, like that table surface thing from 15 years ago.

kromem 3y ago
I agree, that they are missing a big opportunity not supporting all 200 Vision Pro users with built in eye tracking. Especially as they are moving into showing ads.
- mensetmanusman 3y ago
  Every heart palpation will be analyzed and monetized!
  - kromem 3y ago
    You jest, but I know of a company that does just that very thing using smartwatches in marketing research.
- blessedwhiskers 3y ago
  https://www.apple.com/apple-vision-pro/ https://www.apple.com/apple-vision-pro/ under Privacy and Security: "Eye input is not shared with Apple, third-party apps, or websites. Only your final selections are transmitted when you tap your fingers together."
  - kromem 3y ago
    We'll see. I remember when the iPhone wasn't going to support native code apps in favor of web apps for privacy and security reasons. That turned out differently.
    - pipeline_peak 3y ago
      Where and when did you find that?
      - kromem 3y ago
        In the Jurassic age. More info if you are curious: https://9to5mac.com/2011/10/21/jobs-original-vision-for-the-iphone-no-third-party-native-apps/ https://9to5mac.com/2011/10/21/jobs-original-vision-for-the-...
        pipeline_peak 3y ago
        That was great I'd like more info. I'm not sure how Jobs figured web apps would've been practical given a lot of things were still using flash at the time. We didn't have frameworks like React back then, as far as I know there was pretty much JQuery. But considering how a lot of projects are moving to web technology these days, it sort of showed how forward thinking he was...

mensetmanusman 3y ago

Will force Apple to implement a good web experience. From the 30% tax apple enforces, why would anyone give apple more power by building on a new platform versus a reasonable web app?

pipeline_peak 3y ago
Agreed, Apple has yet to prove why companies need to support their niche luxury platform. I guarantee the best Vision Pro experience will be exclusive to their own apps and nearly everything third party will be second class at best. If they can’t make their device effortlessly seamless with existing apps, it’ll be a total failure.
- Someone 3y ago
  > I guarantee the best Vision Pro experience will be exclusive to their own apps Apple must know they need third party apps at launch and that those apps have to be good, so I expect they’ve worked with/pampered quite a few companies in the last year, helping them build a good Vision Pro app. Because of that, I expect to see more third-party apps than Apple ones at launch, and I expect all of them to be good or at least very impressive to demo. > and nearly everything third party will be second class at best. If we interpret “nearly everything” as “the overwhelming majority”: that is the case on any App Store, so that’s not surprising.
  - pipeline_peak 3y ago
    What’s in it for these developers to support such an unpopular platform, where’s the money?
    - Someone 3y ago
      Firstly, Apple’s help may have made it fairly cheap for them to create their app. Secondly, I guess some CEOs will fall for the status/prestige or for “if the neighbors have it, so must we” and for now, care less for the money. Thirdly, there almost certainly will be few customers, but all buyers will be rich, even for iPhone users, and quite a few likely will be decision makers. If, say, Zoom has a good Vision experience, but MS Teams doesn’t, and that swings a CEO of a large company to switch to Zoom, that’s worth a lot of money for Zoom. So, even if you’re completely rational and think it isn’t worth it, your fear that having a Vision app out will make some other CEO make the irrational decision that, therefore, your smartphone app is better, may be enough to make you decide to invest in a Vision app.

nothercastle 3y ago

Why bother supporting such a small user base. Linux has more users than Vision Pro will for years to come

mey 3y ago
A Netflix app in the Steam store that is SteamDeck verified would be nice. Edit: What is the over/under on the Vision Pro supporting SteamVR. :D

dghlsakjg 3y ago

The whole point of the Vision Pro, to me, is to add interactivity to the broader world. Passive consumption of content made for a different form factor is a pretty hard thing to make interactive. The way I see it, the only way to make this interactive is to make it so I can scroll on my phone while half-ignoring a netflix show.

hffgj 3y ago
I just don’t see interactivity with the larger world with the current form factor and battery life. I hope it gets there in later versions, but for v1 I’m hoping for a nicer in-hotel movie experience. That’s about it.

FireBeyond 3y ago

Om Malik (https://om.co/2023/12/14/why-vision-pro-will-change-photography/ https://om.co/2023/12/14/why-vision-pro-will-change-photogra...) wants us all to believe that family movie nights will be with everyone sitting in the couch all watching on their Vision Pros. He sees it as an existential threat to the movie theater. How do you share popcorn on the couch all plugged in? And that’s after your average American home with its 2.2 children lay out $14,000+ for their Apple tax. Sorry, Om, I’m not seeing that.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
astrange 3y ago
I don't see anything about family movie nights in that article, but there is a way private viewing is good for families - it doesn't hog the TV! Only one person can use a TV at once. > Or just having a cable car approaching slowly closer to me. I just took a spatial video of a mountain cable car if anyone wants it. Is it emotional? I dunno, I don't have a way to watch it.
- Someone 3y ago
  > but there is a way private viewing is good for families - it doesn't hog the TV! Only one person can use a TV at once. Nothing prevents people from watching tv together. Back in the twentieth century, families bonded by doing that. So, I’m not sure that’s good for families.
  - astrange 3y ago
    You don't always want to do that. I don't think the whole family wants to watch one kid playing video games on it.
malshe 3y ago
> wants us all to believe that family movie nights will be with everyone sitting in the couch all watching on their Vision Pros. Did you just make that up? That article doesn't say any such thing

lopis 3y ago

I mean, nothing prevents Apple from setting up a shortcut to the Web version of Netflix.

bookofjoe 3y ago

What's the Over/Under on how long until Netflix capitulates? 6 months? A year? Never? It's not never.