Skip to main content

Apple TV+ seems OK for serious Apple fans, not so much for everyone else

I want to be excited about Apple TV+. I really, truly do.

As someone who generally loves the sort of prestige programming Apple favors for its streaming video service, has fully embraced cord-cutting for movies and TV shows, and appreciates (but isn’t fully invested in) the Apple ecosystem, the launch of Apple TV+ feels like something I should be eagerly anticipating.

But alas, the more I learn about Apple TV+, the more the service seems aimed at an audience that doesn’t include me.

Set to launch November 1, Apple TV+ has an impressive list of original movies and TV series the company has been touting at every opportunity. An anthology series produced by Steven Spielberg, a sci-fi drama from the creator of Battlestar Galactica, and a shockingly expensive series about a morning news show featuring the A-list trio of Jennifer Aniston, Reese Witherspoon, and Steve Carell are just a few of the highlights of Apple’s programming plans — all for $5 a month.

See logo on Apple TV Plus | Apple September 2019 Event Keynote
Julian Chokkattu/Digital Trends

The recently released trailer for See, a post-apocalyptic adventure series starring Jason Momoa, is like icing on the cake, really — particularly when you consider the gorgeous cinematography and visual effects likely to accompany a $15 million per-episode price tag.

And yet, Apple TV+ still seems to be falling short of its competition in the streaming marketplace in far too many ways.

Beyond the original programming, Apple has announced, the content outlook for Apple TV+ feels surprisingly barren. Of the original series Apple has flaunted so far, only a limited number of shows are expected to be available on the service at launch, and there’s been no mention of the sort of supplemental, licensed content that typically fills out a streaming service’s library (see Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime Video).

If Apple TV+ launches in November with 10 or more original shows — an unlikely scenario, given that most of the projects announced so far are still in production — there’s been no word on what else will be available when subscribers binge their way through those series.

If Apple opts to release new episodes of each series weekly (instead of entire seasons all at once), the situation could become even more dire, as subscribers run out of things to watch on a weekly basis. (“Now that I’ve watched the new episodes of See and The Morning Show, what else is there?”)

Even at $5 a month, that seems like a recipe for disaster — or at the very least, boredom.

As referenced above, major players like Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, and Hulu all boast robust libraries of licensed content to go along with their original projects, while lower-profile streaming options such as CBS All Access still manage to provide a decent enough mix of original and licensed fare (along with other programming perks like on-demand access to network shows) to justify the monthly expense.

Similarly, Disney has repeatedly suggested that its upcoming Disney+ service is putting quality over quantity by offering only in-house projects for the most part, including most of the Disney, Pixar, Marvel, and Lucasfilm libraries to its subscribers — but that’s no small amount of content when you consider the collective output of the studios.

And then there’s Apple TV+, which is currently confirmed to offer as few as four or five original series with A-list casts and creative teams, and … what else?

That could change, of course, but right now it feels increasingly like Apple wants us all to be too starstruck by the names the company is dropping to notice how few shows it will actually be providing subscribers.

During Apple’s September 10 presentation, the company also announced that anyone who buys a new MacOS or iOS device will get a free year of Apple TV+. It’s a nice offer, but when you consider that Apple devices typically cost upwards of $1,000, that $60 savings for a still-uncertain, relatively shallow stream of content becomes a little less enticing.

Given that Disney recently made its own Disney+ service available for less than $5 a month in a limited offer (it’s $7 per month regularly), while Netflix offers its Basic plan (and the massive library that comes with it) for $9 a month and Amazon Prime Video attaches its robust service for free with Amazon Prime, the idea of spending all of that money on an Apple device in order to save $60 on Apple TV+ isn’t viable. Instead, Apple TV+ is just a perk for Apple buyers.

In the end, it’s just hard to get as excited about Apple TV+ as other streaming options out there — either existing or upcoming. From its price point to the amount of confirmed content to the way it’s being marketed right now, Apple TV+ seems like less of a stand-alone streaming service and more of an add-on element for people who are already fully invested in Apple and its ecosystem.

And that’s too bad, really.

Apple TV+ has an amazing amount of potential, and the amount Apple has invested in it so far, along with the creative talent it has attracted to its service, suggests that there’s going to be a lot to like about Apple’s foray into original movie and television content. Unfortunately, it’s just not enough to win me — and very likely the wider pool of potential subscribers — over just yet.

Editors' Recommendations

Rick Marshall
A veteran journalist with more than two decades of experience covering local and national news, arts and entertainment, and…
YouTube TV details fixes for audio sync, better 1080p quality
YouTube TV on Apple TV.

YouTube TV — the most popular live-streaming service service in the U.S. with more than 5 million subscribers — this week gave an update on Reddit on some bug squashing and upcoming features, plus some welcome improvements. It's an interesting bit of transparency in an age in which app changelogs are all but useless.

Probably the most interesting is that YouTube TV is "testing transcoding changes, including a bit rate increase for live 1080p content." Resolution — that's the 1080p number — is just one part of what makes up the quality of the picture on your screen. Bit rate is another. Basically it refers to the amount of data being pushed to make up that resolution — like the difference between a 1,080-piece puzzle with a picture made up of five colors, or one made up of 500 colors. Think of it like that. The higher the bit rate, the better the picture. And as we've discussed before, we'll take a 1080p stream with a higher bit rate over a bad 4K stream any day of the week, particularly when it comes to sports (which is exactly what we've seen with Apple's excellent MLS streams).

Read more
Apple TV’s multiview feature is now live in beta
Apple TV's multiview feature as seen with Friday Night Baseball.

A new multiview feature — by which you can watch multiple games at one time — has hit the beta track o thef Apple TV operating system. It previously was hinted at in code, and it's now available for actual use.

Again, you'll have to be on the beta track of the Apple TV operating system for this to work at all, and as of right now, that's tvOS 16.5. But once it's enabled, it's a pretty simple process to add additional games, and flip between any of them using the Siri Remote. It wasn't immediately clear if Apple's implementation would be available to other applications, or if it would be kept just within the Apple TV app for now.

Read more
Roku bets big on its own TV brand — but is it a good idea?
Roku Plus Series television in a living room setting.

Roku makes TVs now.

If reading that makes you feel a little confused, you aren't alone. So-called "Roku TVs" have been available to purchase for years, and essentially 75% of all new smart TVs in the U.S. run Roku. But while those TVs were powered by Roku's operating system -- the same system found in Roku streaming boxes and sticks -- the TVs themselves were built by Hisense, TCL, and a handful of other brands.

Read more