Hacker News Reader

Comment by teovall | Hacker News Reader

Apple TV+ needed to be renamed but they went with the absolute worst option.

There's already an Apple TV device and an Apple TV app. Neither of which are required for using Apple TV+ and both of which have functionality other than using Apple TV+.

Some people think that Apple TV+ requires an Apple device to use it and just dismiss it as an option. Apple should have come up with a new brand without Apple in the name. That would broaden their potential market and get their foot in the door with people who don't own any Apple products.

View on HN

> There's already an Apple TV device and an Apple TV app.

This telegraphs that (1) Apple's priority is the service above all else, and (2) that they're about to rebrand their flagship device which supports the service. We'll know very soon, since the updated device is imminent.

Yeah, this all makes sense if the intention is to change the name of the device.

Netflix (the service) has an app named Netflix. You access Netflix via Netflix on... XYZ. Same goes for basically every other streaming service.

So Apple TV the service on Apple TV the app makes perfect sense if you are thinking about accessing their streaming service via other set tops where Apple TV the app is available.

My guess is that the Apple TV set top will be renamed to something else, perhaps "Apple Home".

Then it would be "Access Apple TV via the app on your Apple Home device" and the merging/conflation of "Apple TV subscription via the Apple TV app" will make perfect sense the same way you would say "Access Netflix via the app on your Apple Home device".

My guess is that "tvOS" will be renamed "homeOS" to go with it.

Apple Home is already the name of their app for smart home stuff.

The Netflix comparison doesn’t quite work with Apple TV. I have an Apple TV (the device) and I don’t just use Apple TV (the app) to access Apple TV (the service). Apple TV (the app) is also where I need to go to buy/rent movies from the iTunes Store, watch Apple keynotes, and it can also be a place to aggregate content in a single UI from a bunch of different streaming services (notably not Netflix, they opted out). Apple TV (the service) is just one feature of Apple TV (the app), at least when it’s running on Apple TV (the device).

These distinctions do matter, due to Apple trying to consolidate everything into that single app. They sunset multiple other apps with its release. I actually find the app pretty hard to use as a result.

It's been a PITA enough searching for Apple TV to only have hits about Apple TV come up for years now. I really hope it's all part of some master plan now coming together, as you say, but I feel like it's just as likely they want to keep the naming "simple" as they have in the past on this regard and that's just the way things are going to stay.

or perhaps it means that they plan to expand their TV offering so as to merit being something more than just a "plus"

i don't know if i like the rebranding or not – it's such a minor thing that idk if it even warrants an opinion. But they should now be obliged to next rebrand Apple Carplay to Apple Car.

> or perhaps it means that they plan to expand their TV offering so as to merit being something more than just a "plus"

That's an interesting point. One potential reason to simplify the service's base name is to allow for segmentation, e.g. Apple TV Ultra.

I think there's a reasonable possibility that they'll introduce a <$100 device in an effort to 10X their living room user base, in which case we might see something like an Apple Theater Pro and an Apple Theater mini.

I think you're right that this is a partial story. I hope so at least.

The article itself even shows just how confusing it is:

> Apple TV is available on the Apple TV app in over 100 countries and regions, on over 1 billion screens, including iPhone, iPad, Apple TV, Apple Vision Pro ...

How did anyone think "this is fine" in a proofread here when coming up with this rebranding?

It could always be worse... for example Microsoft recently renamed their remote desktop app to just "Windows App" https://adoption.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-app/

But then in some specific cases, that app can't be used, and you end up with gibberish like this documentation https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-app/overview#what-...

//Apple TV is available on the Apple TV app

What's confusing about this?

Netflix is available on Netflix App. HBO is available on HBO app. Normal people don't care.

It's perfectly normal for Netflix the company to run Netflix the service on Netflix the app on Netflix device if they release one. It's not confusing at all. What would be confusing is if they all had different names.

Not sure if you’re cutting my quote in bad faith to fit your rebuttal, or just didn’t read it fully. How is this not confusing?

> Apple TV is available on the Apple TV app … on … Apple TV …

Watch Apple TV in Apple TV on Apple TV.

Why choose Netflix as your example as well when both Google and Amazon already have streaming services that don’t have an identically named hardware device. Do you honestly think if Netflix put out a device they would name it Netflix.

The only time I can see this being confusing is when referring to the Apple TV box by the same name, and even that can usually be figured out by context.

The confusing part is that Apple TV is available on screens which may or may not be Apple TV.

Except you'd never say that. You'd say "The Netflix app is available on [...]"

Because the app is the service. Which isn't the case with Apple TV hence the potential confusion.

If they rebrand the device to iTV it’ll make more sense if they make all non computing devices use ‘iDevice’ and Mac for computing, Apple for services

This gives me Apple Aladeen[1]vibes /s

[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYJ2w82WifU

There's Starlink terminal and Starlink satelitte as well, so it's understandable that Apple trying to gear into that kind of system.

There's so many apple varieties they could have chosen too. Honeycrisp comes to mind. They even did this already with Macintosh!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com