Amazon Follows Through: Drops Apple TV, Chromecast 233
Hot Hardware notes that Amazon has stopped selling two pieces of hardware -- Apple TV and Google's Chromecast -- that compete with Amazon's own streaming business. (They promised to drop them a while back; not everyone though they actually would.) From the article: While some have likened this move to being anti-competitive, it's hard to grasp whether the legal system would agree. Amazon's defense is that since these devices don't support Prime Video, it doesn't want to sell products to its customers and have them assume that they will."
Don't or Won't support Prime Video? (Score:5, Insightful)
Amazon's defense is that since these devices don't support Prime Video, it doesn't want to sell products to its customers and have them assume that they will.
Never mind the fact that Amazon seems to intentionally not be developing for either device, when smaller streaming services support Apple TV and the Chromecast API is open?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I'd strongly suggest that there's a large iff of anti-trust about this move. Leveraging a strong market position in one sector to gain in another?
Re: Don't or Won't support Prime Video? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's okay bro because rich people.
Re:Don't or Won't support Prime Video? (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't know that it's legally anti-competitive. It's not like Amazon is preventing people from buying competing products or locking those products out, it's just isn't stocking them. Can a store be required to sell certain products?
Re:Don't or Won't support Prime Video? (Score:4, Interesting)
Well, Amazon allows people to sell stuff in the Amazon store. I wonder if they'd forbid me from selling a used Apple TV or Chromecast there.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
(I don't have one, I have a Roku, but I can't help but wonder if that's next. Yeah, Amazon has actually bothered to write an app for it, but given the ease they could have done so for at least one - perhaps both - of the devices here, I'm not believing that's the reason. If they drop Roku, bye-bye Prime membership.)
Of course they could. It's probably simple for the Chromecast, but for the AppleTV it's trivial . They've already got the app for iOS, so submitting it for TtvOS is not a lot of work - if they actually wanted to support it.
Re: (Score:3)
Can a store be required to sell certain products?
A company can be compelled to sell a product if doing otherwise would be abuse of monopoly power. But Amazon does not have a monopoly in retailing, in on-line retailing, or in video. So it is unlikely if there is any legal basis to compel them to sell anything.
Re: (Score:2)
Weird, that really doesn't make sense. As long as you're watching Amazon Prime video, why would they care that you're using an LG smartTV to do it? They want you to fumble around with an additional piece of equipment that needs its own separate remote just so you can watch their video?
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's just because they don't like ecosystem competitors. Reason I say that is because they don't seem to have taken any action against any video players other than Chromecast, Nexus Player, or Apple TV. You can still buy an Nvidia shield, which does basically the same thing as Nexus Player. The only reason Roku is still available is because their installed base is simply too big for Amazon to ignore, so Amazon is already paying them anyways.
Although I have Amazon Prime, I got so annoyed with the "th
Re: (Score:3)
Weird, that really doesn't make sense. As long as you're watching Amazon Prime video, why would they care that you're using an LG smartTV to do it?
It's all about locking down every possible bit of the market, basically their "ecosystem" of products. And there's no room for a competitor in their ecosystem. This isn't a compatibility issue, this is a "how much can we earn" issue.
Re: (Score:3)
Of course they do! If they control the hardware, that means they're the ones who get to advertise to you, they/re the ones who get to collect statistics on what you watch, they're the ones who get to know your wifi network's password, and they're the ones who get to listen and/or watch (depending on the sensors available) to what's going on in your living room. Letting a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd strongly suggest that there's a large iff of anti-trust about this move. Leveraging a strong market position in one sector to gain in another?
It's an anti-competetive mode, sure - but Amazon is not even close to being dominant for that to matter in this market segment. So just buy it somewhere else, and keep in mind that Amazon is no longer a store where they sell everything. Start to look elsewhere for most purchases.
Re: (Score:2)
The question is not whether they are dominant in the streaming video sector, obviously they are not. The question is whether the are dominant in another sector, and using that dominance to move into the streaming video sector. Microsoft for example was not at all dominant in web-browsing software when the bundled Internet Explorer with Windows.
Re: (Score:2)
The only sector that would matter is retailers. And since Walmart has about 5x the revenue of Amazon, they certainly are not the dominant retailer.
Re: (Score:3)
The relevant sector is Internet retailers, and Wal-Mart's web presence sucks.
Re:Don't or Won't support Prime Video? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is all on Amazon - they just are hoping people won't notice.
There's an Amazon Video app on both my phone and iPad. I can watch Prime video there, although I rarely do since Prime Video largely sucks (most of what is there is obviously intended to drive the purchase of other Amazon video - it's all about "the first one is free").
Meanwhile, my Apple TV has had Netflix, Hulu, HBO, etc. for years.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
prime offered a few episodes from each season for free, and than wanted to charge 2.99 per episode for the rest
for those who arent in america bob ross was a painter on PBS (you know that free channel?) and literally all the episodes are avail for free in a number of legit places, youtube for one.
i have yet to find a single time on my roku w
Re: (Score:2)
Amazon on demand rentals of current and new movies is good. But you are right I don't watch much "prime video" there
Re:Don't or Won't support Prime Video? (Score:5, Informative)
Actually PBS asserts copyright on everything it owns, and they make a LOT of money off of DVD and streaming licenses. Don't assume that nonprofit means that its owners don't make a profit.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They are only limited by how they can book those profits. Does it matter if somebody profits through salary, benefits and bonuses or as a shareholder in practice?
... and if that doesn't work, there's always the possibility of having the non-profit buy from friendly suppliers, which hugely overcharge their services, and split the proceeds.
Re: (Score:2)
I hope you know about Twitch TV's Bob Ross channel. They've been streaming a marathon of his shows the past few days.
http://www.twitch.tv/bobross [twitch.tv]
They've been getting 50-60,000 viewers almost round the clock. The comments have been pretty funny, too.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Don't or Won't support Prime Video? (Score:2)
If you still want to watch bob Ross, twitch is streaming all of the joy of painting for the next week or so www.twitch.tv/bobross
Re: (Score:2)
prime offered a few episodes from each season for free, and than wanted to charge 2.99 per episode for the rest
Sure, but Netflix doesn't even have bob ross, except for a DVD you can rent via the mail. So on what basis are you complaining?
literally all the episodes are avail for free in a number of legit places, youtube for one
And Stargate and Dark Matter are included with Prime, but not with youtube or even netflix. (Stargate was on netflix, but apparently Amazon paid them more.) I don't want to watch Bob Ross, and if I did, I'd watch him on Youtube. Problem solved. We got Prime for a year when they knocked a third off of it, and it's been a better source of material than I imagined. They also have a lot
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize Amazon already has a video app for iPhones and iPads, right? And that the app lets users watch Prime video in their iPhone or iPad?
Amazon could pull the app if they wanted to... funny how they haven't done so.
Re: (Score:2)
I was quite annoyed to find that I could not use google play with firetv.
Google play doesn't seem to work with much of anything really.
Re: (Score:2)
There really isn't an excuse for Chromecast, but not supporting or selling Apple TV makes perfect sense.
Only a complete Apple Fanboy could complain about a streaming service not supporting Apple TV as an ANTITRUST issue, since the main reason streaming services don't support Apple TV is that Apple wants to take 30% of their GROSS on every transaction if they do "support" it.
Re: (Score:2)
There really isn't an excuse for Chromecast, but not supporting or selling Apple TV makes perfect sense.
Only a complete Apple Fanboy could complain about a streaming service not supporting Apple TV as an ANTITRUST issue, since the main reason streaming services don't support Apple TV is that Apple wants to take 30% of their GROSS on every transaction if they do "support" it.
That's only if you buy the service through the apple store. Just use it for existing customers signed up elsewhere, or increase the prices if you sign up there. Problem solved. And they're already doing some variation of this on iPad/iPhone, as there is an app there.
Re: (Score:2)
iOS != tvOS (jeez, what an inspired name, Apple - almost as inspired as "Apple TV"...) And regardless of the APIs, it's a totally different screen/UI and input method.
Plus, the fact that Amazon Video is not only on iOS but supports AirPlay Streaming means there isn't all that much more gained by an Apple TV app - you can already watch Amazon streams on Apple TV (of course, you just have to buy them somewhere else).
Anyway, your post was not so much Devil's Advocate as Devil's Public Defender. You don't see
Re: (Score:2)
iOS != tvOS (jeez, what an inspired name, Apple - almost as inspired as "Apple TV"...) And regardless of the APIs, it's a totally different screen/UI and input method.
Sure, there is nothing clever about the name "Apple TV". Or about "Apple Watch", for example. But potential customers know immediately that it is an Apple product, and it has something to do with TV or Watch. Just like "iPhone" tells you it is a phone. And not just _any_ phone, but an iPhone. There are fewer people saying "That's a clever name", but more people saying "I'll buy that".
Must I Subscribe to Amazon Prime? (Score:2)
Re:Must I Subscribe to Amazon Prime? (Score:5, Funny)
What if I buy a Prime-capable device, but I'm not a Prime customers. Won't I be confused?
Too late.
anti-competitive (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You also need a valid case. The fact that your local Ford dealership doesn't sell Chevys isn't a basis for a lawsuit.
Making a valid case is what lawyers do. Anti-trust law is vague enough that your local Ford dealership can start to look like a cartel colluding with other car dealerships, for example.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
If there was any tone of pleasure in my post, it was the pleasure with which a scientist observes and investigates a family of ants or termites.
Re: (Score:2)
You also need a valid case. The fact that your local Ford dealership doesn't sell Chevys isn't a basis for a lawsuit.
Indeed. However, if you were the dominant reseller of cars in the country of all brands, e.g. with a 60% market share - and then started selling your own brand cars and stopping sales of some of your competition, you'd be in trouble.
Amazon would be in big trouble if they were a dominant player in the market (and I'm sure lawyers would have a long fight to determine which market...). They aren't, thus no case. Just remember that Amazon sells their own stuff rather than better alternatives, so don't go to
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting Amazon response (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Translation (Score:2)
We have been instructed not to create a record of our communication with you. We realize that this record could be used against in court or in public. Phone calls are less likely to be used against us in court or in public.
Re: (Score:2)
We have been instructed not to create a record of our communication with you. We realize that this record could be used against in court or in public. Phone calls are less likely to be used against us in court or in public.
Except that most customer service calls are recorded "for quality assurance". Which means the recordings could be compelled during discovery anyway. I suppose it's more work to find them.
Re: (Score:2)
I worked as an Amazon customer service rep last year. All calls are recorded and retained, as are emails, web chats and Kindle Mayday video chats. They use the weasel-words "may be recorded" since the recording system might break.
Re: (Score:2)
They use the weasel-words "may be recorded" since the recording system might break.
... and given how these warnings are worded, they may be (mis)understood as a permission for the other party to record. "may" = "there is a possibility that..." or "you are allowed to...". Crafty consumers understand the second, and that's how legally sound incriminating records get into the public domain and into anti-trust court cases... :-)
Retention laws (Score:2)
if you delete things in the course of a regular business policy, then you don't have to produce them
That depends on the minimum retention period laws in effect in your jurisdiction.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or if you're in a one-party consent state, go ahead and record whoever the fuck you want regardless of whether they know it's happening. All you Californians assume that just because your state (stupidly) requires all-party consent, that everywhere else is the same. It's not.
(On a side note, it is total bullshit that services like Google Voice don't have a way to turn the "this call is being recorded" notification off.)
Re: (Score:2)
Those laws refer to records which must be kept. If Amazon chose never to record calls, they would not be compelled to produce them, nor fined under retention laws.
Yes, but this whole conversation thread was proceeding under the assumption that they do record some calls, and that is the safest assumption. It is standard practice in the industry.
Re: (Score:2)
Looks like a fun way to get Amazon to crank call people for you. That's s really weird way for them to get someone on the phone.
Re: (Score:2)
The Bose thing, really? That's just desperate.
Re: (Score:2)
What is interesting?
That actually sounds pretty dam good. A lot of companies, eg Apple, could learn a lot about customer service from Amazon.
Apple is usually a top rated company in customer support [laptopmag.com], Amazon isn't - so while they should learn, it's probably not from amazon.
It would be interesting to see what Amazon customer support would say here, because I have no doubt Amazon customer support isn't trying to actually solve the problem. Either this is automated, or they want a call to make him buy something else.
Consistency? (Score:2)
Is Amazon dropping all other streaming devices that don't support Prime Video? And if not, will that undermine their argument?
All of which is really putting the cart before the horse - in terms of legal arguments, does their rationale actually hold any water to start with?
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting (Score:2)
Control (Score:2)
And now Amazon will learn the lesson that attempts to impose control only create chaos and harm. It's a simple and ancient axiom and one the shareholders deserve to have observed.
My toaster doesn't support Prime Video (Score:3)
reversal forthcoming (Score:2)
Right after Black Friday and Holiday sales.
Kind of circular reasoning (Score:5, Insightful)
Since of course the reason those devices don't support Prime Video is that Amazon decided not to provide Prime Video on those devices, unlike say Netflix, Hulu, and every other streaming provider under the sun.
Re: (Score:2)
In their defense, at least in-regards-to Apple TV, it's only with the latest version of Apple TV that they actually can provide Amazon Prime Video without having to beg Apple.
Re: (Score:3)
Which is why it makes perfect sense for them to do this now, after Apple opened up their TV platform to Amazon and others—something about stabbing someone with the olive branch....
Re: (Score:3)
Amazon isn't using Flash for Prime Video DRM on iPhone, iPad, or iPod Touch. There's no good reason that they can't provide an app on the new Apple TV.
My guess is that Amazon cut corners when they built their iOS app, and instead of building a real native UI, they used a web UI, and because Apple TV doesn't provide WebKit or UIWebView on tvOS, they found themselves having to spend way more work than all the other providers whose engineering teams didn't cut corners. And they're pitching a fit now to try
Internet Channel powered by Opera for Wii (Score:2)
Apple TV doesn't provide WebKit or UIWebView on tvOS
In some ways, Nintendo is considered behind the times on Internet policy. Yet it had the web on its TV device eight years ago, when Wii owners could download "Internet Channel powered by Opera" on Wii Shop. So how behind the times is Apple?
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder what would happen if suddenly Apple decided not to let Prime video run on any of it's devices and Google did the same with Android?
Re: (Score:2)
Ironically, that's exactly how Apple wanted everyone to develop for the iPhone in the beginning...
Failures of Capitalism #20896733190411 in a series (Score:5, Insightful)
That's what anti-competitive capitalists really lust after, total lock in and unlimited profit with crappy products. None of this level playing field and competing on price and service. And to a great extent their wishes have been granted. Look at the entire US banking and Wall Street economic sector, pharmaceuticals, telcos, agribusiness, brewing (the two biggest brewing groups in the world want to merge), ad nauseam.
Amazon doesn't own the internet, no more then ABC owns the broadcast bandwidth that they use. Broadcast TV providers are allowed to use a common resource when they follow the rules, pay their taxes and fees, and engage in honest business. So why the hell is Amazon, or any of these other scum sucking pigs, allowed to have their walled garden carved out of the open common resource that is the internet?
It's just more of the DMCA crap, or the upcoming TPP. Corrupt insiders are writing the rules so that they have permanent control, no competition, no oversight and guaranteed high profit margins. The game is rigged, and the less you have the more they have. Out of your pocket, into theirs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It's not your wonderland imaginary version of capitalism that has never happened anywhere in the world, no, but it's what capitalism always results in. Deny the empirical evidence all you want, but unfettered capitalism has always lead to monopolies, lock-in and massive abuses of power.
Apple and Google could yank Amazon apps (Score:3)
Since Amazon has decided to play hardball, maybe Google and Apple should yank Amazon's Shopping app for the app stores.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple is a specialty store, only carrying their own products, or products closely related to them. Amazon in a general marketplace, selling almost everything under the sun. Huge difference.
Hardware Only (Score:2)
Don't forget Amazon still has an Amazon Prime video app in the iOS store - AND that app uses AirPlay just fine to stream to an AppleTV (even the new one).
Re: (Score:2)
I'd think that app is living on borrowed time.
What's the history of Amazon video on AppleTV? (Score:2)
Is Amazon video missing on AppleTV because Apple wouldn't allow them on it, or because Amazon chose not to be on it?
Did it boil down to Apple maybe allowing them as long as Amazon kicked back 5% of on-demand revenue? For prime videos, were they asking for a percentage there, too? Is there some upfront cost to be on Apple TV + percentages?
I can only see Apple's demands for money as being part of the equation, although I don't know how it works for Netflix -- does Netflix pay Apple just for presence? Some
Amazon lies anyway (Score:2)
If you have a US prime account you can stream anywhere. Uh... unless you leave the country. Can't stream in Canada with a US account.
LOL, really? (Score:2)
"While some have likened this move to being anti-competitive..."
Yes, "some" in this case means "approaching 99.99999%". This, to me, seems to be the very essence of what "anti-competitive" means.
Honestly, this is such an obvious anti-competitive move that I can't believe it's even being debated, especially since they were selling Apple TV and Chromecast before they came out with their specific brand-locked bullshit product. But we can't have people buying stuff that might cut into our profits, can we?
So if
Is a retailer obligated... (Score:2)
... to sell any particular product? If someone complains, will Apple be obligated to sell Chromecast devices on their website? When I walk into Safeway, I cannot find any of the Loblaws house brands on sale. Likewise, when I walk into Loblaws, I cannot find any of the Safeway house brands on sale. Yet, in neither case does anyone complain that these companies are being anticompetitive.
No retailer should be obligated to sell any particular product. Apple has both its own website and physical stores. Ch
And the Apple Store Doesn't Sell FireTV (Score:2, Insightful)
Amazon less comprehensive than it used to be. (Score:2)
Honestly, the only reason I shop at Amazon is because they seem to have everything. As I have been noticing that they depart from that, or their prices get higher, I'm starting to look elsewhere. They were the best marketplace option but are becoming less so over the past year or so, and their competition is seeming a little better. But the competition still do not offer a really good comprehensive service... so I'm looking for other options but what I'm finding isn't great.
Outside of US it is worse. (Score:2)
I'm in canada, where prime video is not available on any device unless I lie about my location and/or use a VPN. As such removing from sale devices that do not support a format that I cannot use from their store only succeeds in ensuring they will not get my business for these devices.
DICK move Amazon!
No Wii U or 3DS either (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
not to mention anything that ive actually wanted to watch in the form of a movie prime has wanted me to pay (even when free on netflix)
ive established that my prime membership will not be renewed
Re: (Score:2)
if it was not clear enough that its the same troll posting this on every article, you have shown your hand
try harder next time
Re: (Score:3)
So your analogy is silly.
Re: (Score:2)
To the used dealer network. They don't resell it to the public if they are a 'Chevy' dealer.
Small time used car shops sell all types of cars, manufacture branded dealerships do not.
Re: (Score:3)
source- family owned car dealerships my whole life, worked at a number of them
Re: (Score:2)
We bought a Holden (GM) car from a Toyota dealer.
Re: (Score:2)
that's exactly how it is in the USA
Re: (Score:2)
Many dealers sell used cars of whatever make or model.
A local Nissan Dealer has 51 used Nissans, 5 Fords, 3 Volkswagens, 3 Toyotas, 3 Kias, 3 Jeeps, 2 Chevys, 2 Dodges, a BMW, a Honda, a Hyundai, and an Acura.
Some will just sell what people trade in and some will go to the auctions.
Re:Why should they sell it? (Score:4, Insightful)
Small time used car shops sell all types of cars, manufacture branded dealerships do not.
I keep looking for that "Factually Incorrect" mod option, and I can never find it.
Re: (Score:2)
For factually incorrect posts that have been modded up as informative, you're looking for -1 Overrated.
For factually incorrect posts that haven't been modded up, just find and mod up a post that corrects them.
Re: (Score:3)
That would be a good argument, except for one thing: Amazon owns Internet shopping, Apple does not. That's what anti-trust law is all about: making sure that companies that have a dominant position in the market don't abuse their power.
Apple does have a monopoly on the Apple AppStore. So if Apple decided not to allow any apps that Amazon produces (like Amazon Shopping), then that would be a very similar abuse of Apple's power, the other direction.
The point is, the rules change when you dominate a particul
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple does have a monopoly on the Apple AppStore. So if Apple decided not to allow any apps that Amazon produces (like Amazon Shopping), then that would be a very similar abuse of Apple's power, the other direction.
"Apple AppStore" is not a category where you can have a monopoly that counts legally, because people are free to buy non-Apple phones and do so in masses. But then you are right, it is the same in the other direction.
Re: (Score:2)
No, because then they would look completely incompetent for being pretty much the only major paid streaming content provider that didn't have an app ready on or around the day that the first Apple TV shipped.
Re: (Score:2)
Since a single retailer gained a near monopoly on online product sales. That's when.