Sabtu, 02 November 2019

Here's how Fitbit can help fix Wear OS - Engadget

Sponsored Links

Now that Google's acquisition of Fitbit is official, the question is what the search giant will do with it. When the news broke on Friday, Google's Rick Osterloh said the company sees the deal as an "opportunity to invest even more in Wear OS, as well as introduce Made by Google wearable devices." For the time being, then, it looks like Google plans to leverage Fitbit's expertise to another push into wearables.

Earlier this week, we speculated on some of the ways in which Google's purchase of Fitbit would be bad for wearables. However, there are a lot of things Google could learn from Fitbit to make Wear OS a compelling platform. The important thing here is that Google doesn't do what it has seemingly done in every other situation like this, which is to change its mind after only a short while.

Make fitness fun and easy

fitbit

It's fair to say that Wear OS is already a competent smartwatch platform. What it lacks is a strong fitness component. There's a lot Google could learn from Fitbit here. To start, the most important lesson is to make the experience fun. For a lot of people, working out is a chore. What Fitbit has always done well is add a sense of whimsy to something as mundane as walking 10,000 steps a day. Anytime you finish your step goal or walk after a long period of sitting, Fitbit makes it a cause for celebration with splashy graphics and words of encouragement.

Robust heart rate tracking is a must

If the first new wearable Google releases doesn't feature Fitbit's PurePulse heart rate tracking technology, then the acquisition will have been a missed opportunity. More so than any other hardware feature, PurePulse is the reason to buy a Fitbit wearable. After some initial foibles, the feature feels both consistent and accurate. Moreover, one of the smartest things Fitbit has done in the last few years is make the tech more affordable. What used to be a feature limited to the company's more expensive trackers is now something you can get on the $100 Inspire HR. Reliable heart rate tracking should be a standard feature on Wear OS devices, not a nice add-on.

There's a lot of ways in which Fitbit's PurePulse heart rate tracking could make Wear OS a more compelling platform. One example is Fitbit's Cardio Fitness Score feature, which leverages the company's heart rate tracking to provide you with an easy to understand way to improve your fitness level. Heart rate tracking should be at the center of any attempt Google makes to try and create a compelling fitness platform because it would allow the company to most directly match the Apple Watch's more advanced fitness features.

Fitbit is more than just Fitbit

Fitbit Inspire and Inspire HR

In 2016, Fitbit purchased smartwatch startup Pebble's talent and intellectual property. It's hard to say what came out of that purchase other than the Fitbit App Gallery, which was created with help from some of the talent Fitbit acquired in the deal. The fact Fitbit seemingly never did more with Pebble's tech seemed a missed opportunity. Pebble had a lot of interesting ideas about how smartwatches could complement a smartphone, particularly as it relates to notifications and user interface.

In addition to Pebble, through Fitbit, Google has also acquired talent and technology from Vector, Coin, Fitstar and Twine Health. Between Friday's acquisition and its Fossil purchase earlier this year, the company now has a wealth of talent in the field. It should leverage that talent in a way that allows the company to improve the ecosystem with better software, hardware and features.

Battery life and Bluetooth performance need to go hand-in-hand

Fitbit Versa Lite review

One area where Fitbit trackers have always excelled is battery life. Even taking advantage of features like heart rate and sleep tracking, you can still get close to a week of battery life on most Fitbits. And battery life is an obvious area where Wear OS can improve.

But Google shouldn't only focus on the battery life of its smartwatches. If you've used a Fitbit in conjunction with an Android phone -- particularly one of Google's Pixel smartphones -- you'll know that they absolutely destroy your phone's battery. The same is not true with iOS devices. If wearables are going to be a major aspect of Google's Android strategy moving forward, then Bluetooth performance needs to be as good or better than it is on iOS. Likewise, Bluetooth performance and battery life can't be an afterthought on Pixel smartphones. Part of the problem with a lot of wearables is that they're a burden on the most important device in people's lives, that's something Fitbit has, for the most part, been able to avoid.

Make it social

Fitbit Versa Lite review

One of the underestimated strengths of Fitbit's platform is its social hooks. If you've ever bought one of the company's trackers for a family member, then you'll know how much your parent or sibling seeing your daily stats can motivate them to reach their own goals. Fitbit wisely built a lot of functionality that encourages people to engage in healthy competition.

For example, one of the things you can do in the Fitbit app is take part in something called Adventure Races. These essentially see you doing the digital equivalent of a tough mountain hike. Along the way, you can see how you're doing against your friends and family members. They can be easy to overlook, but more so than any feature Fitbit offers on its trackers, it's the social ones that keep people hooked. Studies have found that fitness trackers can help people with their physical health, but the main issue is that most people stop using their devices a couple of months after buying them. By making the experience social, Fitbit has been able to turn some users into dedicated fans. That's something Google shouldn't underestimate.

More than anything, what Google needs to learn from Fitbit is that Wear OS doesn't need to be everything to everyone. The reason so many people love their Fitbits is that they do one thing and they do it exceptionally well. Apple eventually came to the same realization with watchOS. It was only after the company stopped trying to create the "next big thing" and focused on how the platform could help people with their health and fitness goals that the Apple Watch became more compelling. A similar focus is essential for Wear OS if it's to have any chance at denting Apple's hold on the wearables market.

All products recommended by Engadget are selected by our editorial team, independent of our parent company. Some of our stories include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, we may earn an affiliate commission.
Comment
Comments
Share
68 Shares
Share
Tweet
Share
Save

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.engadget.com/2019/11/02/fitbit-google-wearos/

2019-11-02 14:26:28Z
52780425223999

Here's how Fitbit can help fix Wear OS - Engadget

Sponsored Links

Now that Google's acquisition of Fitbit is official, the question is what the search giant will do with it. When the news broke on Friday, Google's Rick Osterloh said the company sees the deal as an "opportunity to invest even more in Wear OS, as well as introduce Made by Google wearable devices." For the time being, then, it looks like Google plans to leverage Fitbit's expertise to another push into wearables.

Earlier this week, we speculated on some of the ways in which Google's purchase of Fitbit would be bad for wearables. However, there are a lot of things Google could learn from Fitbit to make Wear OS a compelling platform. The important thing here is that Google doesn't do what it has seemingly done in every other situation like this, which is to change its mind after only a short while.

Make fitness fun and easy

fitbit

It's fair to say that Wear OS is already a competent smartwatch platform. What it lacks is a strong fitness component. There's a lot Google could learn from Fitbit here. To start, the most important lesson is to make the experience fun. For a lot of people, working out is a chore. What Fitbit has always done well is add a sense of whimsy to something as mundane as walking 10,000 steps a day. Anytime you finish your step goal or walk after a long period of sitting, Fitbit makes it a cause for celebration with splashy graphics and words of encouragement.

Robust heart rate tracking is a must

If the first new wearable Google releases doesn't feature Fitbit's PurePulse heart rate tracking technology, then the acquisition will have been a missed opportunity. More so than any other hardware feature, PurePulse is the reason to buy a Fitbit wearable. After some initial foibles, the feature feels both consistent and accurate. Moreover, one of the smartest things Fitbit has done in the last few years is make the tech more affordable. What used to be a feature limited to the company's more expensive trackers is now something you can get on the $100 Inspire HR. Reliable heart rate tracking should be a standard feature on Wear OS devices, not a nice add-on.

There's a lot of ways in which Fitbit's PurePulse heart rate tracking could make Wear OS a more compelling platform. One example is Fitbit's Cardio Fitness Score feature, which leverages the company's heart rate tracking to provide you with an easy to understand way to improve your fitness level. Heart rate tracking should be at the center of any attempt Google makes to try and create a compelling fitness platform because it would allow the company to most directly match the Apple Watch's more advanced fitness features.

Fitbit is more than just Fitbit

Fitbit Inspire and Inspire HR

In 2016, Fitbit purchased smartwatch startup Pebble's talent and intellectual property. It's hard to say what came out of that purchase other than the Fitbit App Gallery, which was created with help from some of the talent Fitbit acquired in the deal. The fact Fitbit seemingly never did more with Pebble's tech seemed a missed opportunity. Pebble had a lot of interesting ideas about how smartwatches could complement a smartphone, particularly as it relates to notifications and user interface.

In addition to Pebble, through Fitbit, Google has also acquired talent and technology from Vector, Coin, Fitstar and Twine Health. Between Friday's acquisition and its Fossil purchase earlier this year, the company now has a wealth of talent in the field. It should leverage that talent in a way that allows the company to improve the ecosystem with better software, hardware and features.

Battery life and Bluetooth performance need to go hand-in-hand

Fitbit Versa Lite review

One area where Fitbit trackers have always excelled is battery life. Even taking advantage of features like heart rate and sleep tracking, you can still get close to a week of battery life on most Fitbits. And battery life is an obvious area where Wear OS can improve.

But Google shouldn't only focus on the battery life of its smartwatches. If you've used a Fitbit in conjunction with an Android phone -- particularly one of Google's Pixel smartphones -- you'll know that they absolutely destroy your phone's battery. The same is not true with iOS devices. If wearables are going to be a major aspect of Google's Android strategy moving forward, then Bluetooth performance needs to be as good or better than it is on iOS. Likewise, Bluetooth performance and battery life can't be an afterthought on Pixel smartphones. Part of the problem with a lot of wearables is that they're a burden on the most important device in people's lives, that's something Fitbit has, for the most part, been able to avoid.

Make it social

Fitbit Versa Lite review

One of the underestimated strengths of Fitbit's platform is its social hooks. If you've ever bought one of the company's trackers for a family member, then you'll know how much your parent or sibling seeing your daily stats can motivate them to reach their own goals. Fitbit wisely built a lot of functionality that encourages people to engage in healthy competition.

For example, one of the things you can do in the Fitbit app is take part in something called Adventure Races. These essentially see you doing the digital equivalent of a tough mountain hike. Along the way, you can see how you're doing against your friends and family members. They can be easy to overlook, but more so than any feature Fitbit offers on its trackers, it's the social ones that keep people hooked. Studies have found that fitness trackers can help people with their physical health, but the main issue is that most people stop using their devices a couple of months after buying them. By making the experience social, Fitbit has been able to turn some users into dedicated fans. That's something Google shouldn't underestimate.

More than anything, what Google needs to learn from Fitbit is that Wear OS doesn't need to be everything to everyone. The reason so many people love their Fitbits is that they do one thing and they do it exceptionally well. Apple eventually came to the same realization with watchOS. It was only after the company stopped trying to create the "next big thing" and focused on how the platform could help people with their health and fitness goals that the Apple Watch became more compelling. A similar focus is essential for Wear OS if it's to have any chance at denting Apple's hold on the wearables market.

All products recommended by Engadget are selected by our editorial team, independent of our parent company. Some of our stories include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, we may earn an affiliate commission.
Comment
Comments
Share
68 Shares
Share
Tweet
Share
Save

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.engadget.com/2019/11/02/fitbit-google-wearos/

2019-11-02 13:30:17Z
52780425223999

Diablo 4's Brutal Combat Is A Return To The Series's Dark Side - GameSpot

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SPcDjR3VyM

2019-11-02 13:00:03Z
52780424351403

Nest Thermostat, Amazon Echo and Philips Hue: The best smart home tech of the decade - CNET

img-1879

The Nest Learning Thermostat was first introduced to the world in 2011 and it inspired many other brands to think about "boring" home appliances in a new way. 

Jon Garnham/CNET
decade-in-review-bug

We're jumping into a time machine to revisit some of best, biggest and the not-so-good in tech from the last 10 years. We've already covered influential people, memorable TV shows -- and even the worst tech trends of the decade. Now it's time to talk about the smart home

Smart home tech refers to a broad range of devices that connect to your phone, TV or voice assistant. While some smart home products existed before the 2010s, like Simplisafe's first-gen DIY home security system (2008), this decade ushered in the modern smart home industry -- an entire tech category comprised of thermostats, lights, security cameras and even fridges that do much more than their non-smart predecessors. 

But 10 products stand out more than the rest. Here are the biggest smart home hits of the decade, ranked in ascending order. 

Belkin WeMo Switch
Ry Crist/CNET

10. Belkin Wemo Smart Switch (2012)

Ah, the humble smart plug. These handy gizmos plug into outlets and make it possible to control lamps, space heaters and other dumb home appliances from your phone -- or with a voice command. It's a simple, affordable entry point into the smart home, and the Belkin Wemo Smart Switch was an early favorite. 

Its $50 price, straightforward app and early adoption of IFTTT, a service that helps devices from different manufacturers work together, made it a popular product recommendation in the early days of CNET's smart home coverage. Belkin replaced this particular switch with the Belkin Wemo Insight Switch (2013) and the Belkin Wemo Mini Smart Plug (2017), but the original Wemo Smart Switch is a legacy smart home product that inspired other brands to introduce easy-to-use app-enabled smart plugs. 

Read more: The best smart plugs of 2019

SimpliSafe Home Security Ultimate Package
Colin West McDonald/CNET

9. Piper (2013)

Piper was the original all-in-one home security system. This self-contained security device, now discontinued, cost $239. It came with an HD security camera, two-way audio and motion, audio, humidity, temperature and ambient light sensors. Piper was outfitted with a siren, so you could scare away potential intruders with a screaming 105-decibel alarm. 

Piper got its start on Indiegogo and expanded to online stores like Amazon after Icontrol Networks purchased the startup. Icontrol then released an improved version of the original Piper with night-vision called the Piper NV. Many other brands followed suit with all-in-one home security systems, but Piper led the charge for this smart home product category. 

Alarm.com purchased the Piper division of Icontrol Networks in 2017 and the Piper and Piper NV products were discontinued. 

Read more: All-in-one home security systems should be much more popular (commentary)

august-smart-lock-product-photos-22.jpg
Tyler Lizenby/CNET

8. August Smart Lock (2013)

The August Smart Lock, first introduced in 2013, was pretty revolutionary at the time. Instead of replacing your entire deadbolt -- a standard step for many smart locks, even today -- August's inaugural smart lock retrofit over most standard deadbolts. The installation required minimal time and effort and you could lock and unlock your door from the August app. August has since introduced next-gen versions of its classic Smart Lock, but the installation and overall simplicity remains the same. In 2017, Assa Abloy, the parent company of lock maker Yale, purchased August

August also sells a smart video doorbell, the square August Doorbell Cam Pro.

Read more: The best smart locks of 2019

samsung-family-hub-two-13
Chris Monroe/CNET

7. Samsung Family Hub (2016)

Most of the large appliances we've seen with integrated smart home tech aren't actually all that smart. The Family Hub fridge by Samsung is one of the few exceptions -- it was the first large appliance that impressed us with its smart tech. 

At $5,600, the Family Hub is an expensive refrigerator -- Samsung has since introduced other, slightly more affordable models. Samsung's goal: to make Family Hub the hub of your house. Not only do the fridges have an app, they have built-in cameras where you can see what's inside when you're at the grocery store. Not sure if you need more milk? Just check the camera. They also come with a giant touchscreen display on the outside, complete with a calendar, music apps and much, much more.  

As there hasn't been much innovation in the category since the Family Hub's debut, Samsung's line of smart fridges still dominate the category today by default. It's not something you need to rush out and buy, but the Family Hub was a good first step for the category that showed us the potential of smart large appliances. 

Read more: 5 mistakes to avoid when buying a fridge

Dropcam_Pro_35828605_04.jpg
Sarah Tew/CNET

6. Dropcam Pro (2013)

The Dropcam Pro influenced the entire DIY security camera industry when it first hit the scene in 2013. Its 2012 predecessor, the Dropcam, was a solid camera, but the 1080p Pro really set the standard for the security hardware to come. Priced at $199, the Dropcam Pro had a straightforward app for live streaming, motion alerts and two-way talk. 

Startup Nest (now owned by Google) purchased Dropcam in 2014 and the Nest Cam Indoor was largely inspired by the Dropcam Pro. But its influence goes far beyond the Nest Cam Indoor. The Dropcam Pro marked the beginning of an era of $200 1080p HD home security cameras. That trend has only recently given way to more affordable models, like the $20 Wyze Cam

Read more: The best home security cameras of 2019

SmartThings Know and Control Your Home kit
Colin West McDonald/CNET

5. SmartThings Hub (2012)

SmartThings began on Kickstarter. The idea was simple -- this single, router-connected hub would control all (or at least, most) of your smart home devices. And the related SmartThings app would be your one-stop spot for monitoring and managing the settings of each device. When we tested the first-gen version, we liked it. It did a decent job unifying devices so you didn't have to switch between a ton of apps and settings menus. Instead, everything was in one place. 

After Samsung bought SmartThings in 2014 it introduced next-gen hubs with similar, updated functionality around the same time as the first Amazon Echo. By comparison, SmartThings and hubs from other companies (like Wink and Revolv) were clunky and hard to use. Even so, the original SmartThings hub, and its competitors (Wink and Revolv deserve honorable mentions here), paved the way for smart speakers and other devices that unite all of your smart home gadgets under a single device. 

SmartThings in its current form is still available as a hub, but has also expanded to Samsung TVs and fridges

Read more: The only way to save the smart home hub is to kill it (commentary)

ringvideodoorbell-product-photos-12.jpg
Tyler Lizenby/CNET

4. Ring Video Doorbell (2014)

Before Ring was Ring, founder Jamie Siminoff launched the Bot Home Automation Doorbot. The Doorbot had a lot of design and performance problems, but the company rebranded quickly as Ring. The $199 Ring Video Doorbell was among the first solid smart doorbells to reach store shelves. It's still sold today, at the reduced price of $100. Ring now offers a variety of other doorbells, security cameras and smart lights

Amazon purchased Ring in 2018. Ring has come under fire for its partnership with local police stations in the United States; customers have the option to share their camera's footage with law enforcement, raising questions about privacy and profiling

Many smart doorbell companies have emerged since Ring, but this brand has been the most prevalent in this still-growing product category. 

Read more: The best video doorbells of 2019

Philips Hue Connected Bulb starter pack
Colin West McDonald/CNET

3. Philips Hue (2012)

Color-changing LED bulbs may not seem like a new thing today, but back in 2012 they were pretty wild -- and Philips was at the forefront of the category. Originally sold for $200 in a three-pack with a required Zigbee hub, the color-changing starter kit now includes four bulbs for the same $200 price. Monitor and manage your lights individually and by room in the app. Set schedules, automations with other devices and more. 

The smart bulb market is much more saturated in 2019, and Philips itself has expanded to meet the growing industry. The company now sells white-light LEDs, Bluetooth-enabled bulbs and even light strips, but they aren't our favorite color-changing bulbs anymore. That title goes to the Lifx Mini.

Read more: The complete guide to Philips Hue

amazon-echo-promo-pic-2.jpg
Tyler Lizenby/CNET

2. Amazon Echo and Alexa (2014)

The original Amazon Echo emerged during a time when we were all trying to make sense of the smart home. Hubs like SmartThings and Wink were important precursors, but it wasn't until the Amazon Echo arrived in 2014 that the smart home really took off. This cylindrical speaker, powered by voice assistant Alexa, would open up the smart home world to entire families in a way that the trickier-to-operate hubs never could. 

Kids could ask Alexa to tell them a joke. Adults could set kitchen timers, play podcasts, get weather reports -- and control their connected devices with a simple command, "Alexa, turn on the kitchen lights." A lot has changed in the smart speaker category since this first product -- Google Assistant and Siri have swooped in with smart speakers of their own. And the Alexa of 2019 has grown up a lot in five years, connecting with thousands of different skills, creating thousands of potential ways to interact with the newest, ever-growing lineup of Amazon Echo products.

There are privacy concerns associated with owning and using smart speakers. Amazon has been in the news for keeping transcripts of your Alexa conversationsThe company has since announced privacy updates, making it possibly to automatically delete Alexa recordings, as well as a "Home Mode" for Ring cameras that turns off audio and video recording when you're home. 

Amazon isn't the only company updating its privacy policies in an effort to give customers more control over their data. You can now ask Google Assistant to "delete the last thing I said/delete everything I said last week."  

Read more: The best Alexa devices of 2019

img-1879
John Kim/CNET

1. Nest Thermostat (2011)

The 2011 Nest Learning Thermostat, dreamed up by Matt Rogers and Tony Fadell (known as the "father of the iPod), marked the start of the modern smart home industry. Before the $249 app-enabled Nest launched, there were other thermostats (and other devices in general) you could control with your phone. But Nest was the startup that first considered design in a major way. It took something utilitarian and boring -- a thermostat -- that typically hides on the wall in a hallway, and made it a statement piece.

Yes, $249 is a heck of a lot of money for a thermostat, but a lot of people bought it. It's now in its third generation as the Nest Learning Thermostat. Nest also sells the Nest E Thermostat with a similar design as the Learning Thermostat at a more affordable $169 price. Google bought Nest in 2014 and has rebranded to Google Nest, now offering smoke detectors, smart locks, doorbells, security cameras and security systems that work with Google Assistant. 

There are dozens of smart thermostats today and our current favorite isn't even a Nest model -- it's the Ecobee SmartThermostat. But Nest made people excited about buying smart home products and I think it's one of the main reasons the larger category has grown so fast in ten years. 

Read more: Thermostats used to be ugly. Nest changed all that (commentary)

Now playing: Watch this: Nest's Learning Thermostat gets even smarter, easier...

1:40

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.cnet.com/news/nest-thermostat-amazon-echo-and-philips-hue-the-best-smart-home-tech-of-the-decade/

2019-11-02 12:00:07Z
CAIiEIEiiDx842wCxrz2e9Y3Y1oqEwgEKgwIACoFCAow4GowoAgwkRo

Here’s How Much Money The Fitbit Founders Will Get From Google’s Acquisition - Forbes

A dozen years after they started Fitbit, cofounders James Park and Eric Friedman are handing off the company they worked so hard to build. The two men agreed to sell the company to Google on Friday in a deal that values the smartwatch maker at $2.1 billion. Park, 43, and Friedman, 42, who currently serve as Fitbit’s CEO and Chief Technology Officer, respectively, will each walk away with as much as $150 million (before taxes) as a result of selling their shares in the publicly traded company, Forbes estimates.

“More than 12 years ago, we set an audacious company vision – to make everyone in the world healthier,” said Park in a statement. “With Google’s resources and global platform, Fitbit will be able to accelerate innovation in the wearables category, scale faster, and make health even more accessible to everyone. I could not be more excited for what lies ahead.”

Google is paying $7.35 per share in cash for Fitbit shares – markedly less than the $20 price set by the company when it went public in June 2015. Fitbit’s stock sprinted to close at $29.68 on its first day of trading, vaulting Park and Friedman into the ranks of centimillionairesForbes pegged Park and Friedman’s stakes at $600 million each on the day of the IPO. In November 2015, both Park and James made Forbes’ list of America’s Richest Entrepreneurs Under 40 — with each worth $660 million. Park was age 39 and Friedman was 38 back then.

Over the course of the following year, Fitbit’s stock descended into single-digit territory as it struggled to unveil new products and face down competition from rivals including Garmin. The last time the company’s stock closed above $7.35 a share was in June of last year. It then continued to fall until it hit an all-time low of $2.99 in August this year.

Fitbit reported revenue of $1.5 billion in 2018, a 6% drop from the previous year. The company also posted a net loss of about $186 million last year, extending a three-year stretch of losses going back to 2016. A spokesperson for Fitbit did not immediately return a request for comment.

Park and Friedman each own about 8% of Fitbit’s equity, with Friedman controlling a slightly larger stake than his cofounder. The deal is set to close in 2020, as Google looks to take on competitors like Apple and Samsung in the fast-growing wearables sector.

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.forbes.com/sites/giacomotognini/2019/11/02/heres-how-much-money-the-fitbit-founders-will-get-from-googles-acquisition/

2019-11-02 11:00:22Z
52780425223999

Jumat, 01 November 2019

Apple TV+ is fine - Engadget

The pitch for Apple TV+ is pretty simple: Pay Apple $5 a month, and you'll get access to original shows and movies you won't find anywhere else. It's not a nostalgia play with a huge library of films like Disney+, or an evolution of an existing premium network like HBO Max. Apple TV+ is basically just exclusive content with the power of major celebrities and creatives, like Oprah and Steven Spielberg, behind it.

After spending several hours with it, the best I can say is that Apple TV+ is... fine? New series like The Morning Show, which stars Jennifer Aniston, Reese Witherspoon and Steve Carrell, are a clear sign that the company is investing heavily in talent. And the revamped TV app, which launched in May, makes it easy to find new bingeworthy content and keep track of everything you're watching. The handful of shows launching with Apple TV+, including Oprah's Book Club, the apocalyptic drama See and For All Mankind, an alternate history space race series by Ronald D. Moore (Battlestar Galactica), are all perfectly watchable.

Nothing truly stands out, though. The Morning Show tries its hardest to look like Important Dramatic TV in the vein of Aaron Sorkin, but aside from the litany of stars, the first episode struggles for an identity of its own. It's also very strange that one of its villainous news anchors, played by Billy Crudup, goes into an extended rant about how broadcast TV will be swallowed by tech giants, and viewers prefer less complicated and personalized content via social media. At the end, I half expected him to stare directly into the camera like a character from The Office.

Apple TV+ lacks the innovative spark of Netflix's early streaming service -- we all know that it's possible to make good TV away from the confines of cable and broadcast networks. But, as we noted in September, it doesn't matter if there's anything truly new with Apple TV+, it'll still be a huge success through Apple's marketing might alone. Pricing it at $5 makes it a no-brainer subscription for most consumers, and the company is also bundling a year of service with new device purchases.

Apple TV+

Even though Apple TV+'s selection of content is pretty slim at the moment, we know there's plenty more on the horizon. M. Night Shyamalan's mystery thriller Servant arrives November 28th, and there's more media in the works for next year, like Spielberg's Amazing Stories reboot. And the company has a major footprint advantage, as well. Apple TV+ launches in 100 countries today, whereas Disney+ will only be available in the US, Canada and the Netherlands when it hits November 12th.

Another bid in its favor: Apple customers simply have to open up the TV app on their iOS, Mac or Apple TV devices to subscribe to TV+. Signing up is simple, too, I just had to hit the huge Apple TV+ banner in the app, and it automatically recognized that I had a year of service ready and waiting because I bought an iPhone 11 Pro. After subscribing, you can simply start watching any TV+ show through the app.

The shows launched quickly and looked uniformly excellent on my LG OLED TV via the Apple TV 4K, thanks to broad support for Dolby Vision HDR. Everything worked pretty much like I expected, though Engadget Executive Editor Aaron Souppouris noticed a strange interface quirk while watching TV+ content. The "Menu" button on the Apple TV remote displays an episode description when you hit it once, and you'll have to hit it a second time to go back to the TV app. Everywhere else on the Apple TV, that menu button serves as a universal option to go back to where you were before. I figure most people will get over that quickly, but the interface inconsistency is strange to see from Apple.

And if you don't have any Apple devices, you can still take advantage of the new streaming service through the Apple TV app on some Samsung smart TVs, as well as streaming boxes like Roku and Amazon's Fire TV Sticks. That app will be headed to Sony, LG and Vizio smart TVs later this year. Vizio, LG and Samsung users can also use AirPlay 2 to stream Apple TV+ content from iOS and Mac devices. Finally, you can also watch TV+ shows on the web at tv.apple.com.

Apple TV+ feels more like "Apple TV, too." The company has proven it can craft original streaming content, but that's about it. Then again, that's really all Apple had to do. Build the service, and the viewers will come

All products recommended by Engadget are selected by our editorial team, independent of our parent company. Some of our stories include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, we may earn an affiliate commission.
Comment
Comments
Share
Tweet
Share
Save

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.engadget.com/2019/11/01/apple-tv-review/

2019-11-01 19:15:17Z
52780423934472