Skip to main content

Why Apple (still) shouldn’t make a streaming device for cheapskates

The Internet — that is folks who likely spend too much time on it — loves nothing more than to speculate about what Apple may do. Or even better, what Apple should do. The more foolish among us are sold bold as to say what Apple will do.

Today, let us be so bold. (And possibly foolish.) There has been a decent amount of scuttlebutt regarding the possibility of a low-cost Apple TV dongle. And on one hand, that makes a whole lot of sense. Apple’s current TV-centric hardware, the aptly named Apple TV 4K (not to be confused with the Apple TV app, which we’ll come to in a second, or the Apple TV+ streaming service, which we’ll also touch on) is a fine piece of kit, as they say in the biz. It’s overpowered for what it does, meaning that it streams shows and movies and the like really well, without any sort of lag or hesitation. It has just about every spec you could want. It serves as a HomeKit hub. It plays music and shows photos and allows you to seamlessly mirror your iPhone or iPad or Mac to your TV. The only problem is that it is several times more expensive than what most folks are buying these days, edging toward $200.

Recommended Videos

So, yeah. Folks perhaps are right to want Apple to have something much less expensive.

It absolutely should not make such a device. And chances are it’s not. Because it still doesn’t have to.

Apple TV, Roku, Amazon Fire TV and Chromecast With Google TV.
Phil Nickinson/Digital Trends

The truth is that Apple doesn’t need a less-expensive piece of hardware connected to a TV. Not to make money, anyway. Such devices almost certainly aren’t generating any sort of profit, at least not by selling the hardware itself. Google has the $50 Chromecast with Google TV. Amazon Fire TV Stick 4K (which is the Fire TV Stick we recommend for most folks) is the same price. Neither company gives us much insight into how many they’re selling, or what the profit margin might be.

Roku, however, is a different story. Roku “Players” — that is, the hardware apart from Roku TVs — range from $30 to $100, and that’s before any sort of sale prices. And it’s said in the past that the majority of what it sells is in the sub-$50 range. What’s that mean for the bottom line? Put it this way — hardware hasn’t turned a profit since the first quarter of 2021 when it brought in $14.8 million on $107.7 in revenue. Since then, it’s seen gross profit losses of $6.7 million, $14.6 million, $45.9 million, and $15.1 million in the following four quarters. (Don’t feel bad for Roku — those same four quarters saw more than $1.5 billion in gross profit on the “Platform” side, which basically means everything but hardware.)

Apple already has low-cost hardware. It’s called Roku and Fire TV and Chromecast.

So we have a pretty good idea that cheap hardware isn’t a money-maker — and Apple very much is in the business of making money.

It helps a little if you think of hardware in terms of the greater platform. Google makes hardware not for hardware’s sake, but so that it can expand its search ecosystem that much more. The same goes for Amazon, though in that case, it’s e-commerce leading the way, with a secondary dose of search for good measure. Roku always has been a little different. Its simplistic operating system has (mostly) been platform-agnostic, meaning that it was made to run all the apps from all the services. It’s pivoted away from worrying about the money it makes on hardware and more than makes up for it in advertising revenue.

Let’s bring things back to Apple, then. It doesn’t rely on its nearly $200 Apple TV (hardware) to do much of anything, really, because the Apple TV app — and the Apple TV+ streaming service — is available on pretty much every other piece of hardware. You can watch it on Roku. You can watch it on Amazon Fire TV and Google TV and Android TV and in a web browser.

In other words, Apple already has low-cost — revenue-negative, really — hardware. It’s just that someone else is making it, and someone else is likely taking the loss on the balance sheets. And that someone is Roku and Amazon and Google and everyone else that allows the Apple TV app on its platform.

That won’t be entirely satisfactory to those who have been hoping for a $50 Apple TV experience. Is it possible Apple may choose to make something? Sure. Apple certainly has the cash to burn. But it shouldn’t. And while this isn’t a new idea — we thought through it in 2018 and came to the same result, just with different math.

You can get Apple TV (the app) and Apple TV+ (the service) in 4K and in Dolby Vision on someone else’s $50 dongle. The overall experience isn’t as good as what you get on Apple TV (the hardware), which is why we still consider it to be the best streaming hardware you can buy. But it’s good enough for Ted Lasso, and that’s why it’s good enough for Apple.

Phil Nickinson
Former Digital Trends Contributor
Phil spent the 2000s making newspapers with the Pensacola (Fla.) News Journal, the 2010s with Android Central and then the…
Should you buy an obsolete Apple TV?
An Apple TV 4K set-top box and remote control sit on a media stand.

This 2022 Apple TV is not obsolete and will last for years. Phil Nickinson / Digital Trends

This probably should go without saying, but we're going to say it anyway: We cannot recommend that you buy tech that's considered to be "obsolete," or what's entered a phase called "end of life." Even if it's cheap. Even if it's a "deal." Even if — or especially because — it's refurbished. That goes for pretty much any tech. But specifically, in this case, we're referring to older Apple TV models.

Read more
Roku and Amazon are so close to making subtitles easy to toggle
The Roku Voice Remote Pro, and the Amazon Alexa Voice Remote Pro.

The idea that remote controls should include a dedicated button for captions is not, in and of itself, a bad one. In fact, it makes a whole lot of sense, whether the remote belongs to a television or a peripheral like Roku or Amazon Fire TV. We acknowledge the fact that it would add complexity and, possibly, cost to a device. (And that it's relatively easy to just flip 'em on and off inside apps as it is.) But we believe it would be worth it.

We didn’t pick Roku and Amazon Fire TV out of thin air in that previous paragraph. They are the two biggest streaming platforms in the world. And as it turns out, they both have remote controls with user-programmable buttons. While that’s not quite the same thing as what we're imploring the likes of Roku, Amazon, Google, Apple, and others to employ, it’s something that’s available now. (Though the remotes in question aren’t shipped by default with every device — you’ll have to spend more to get them.)

Read more
MLS Season Pass on Apple TV shows everyone else how to stream sports
Atlanta-San Jose game page for MLS Season Pass on Apple TV.

I’ve watched a lot of soccer in my lifetime. I played all over the Southeastern United States when I was younger. My kids now play on travel teams. I’m the president of our local youth rec league with 900 kids a season. So there’s a pretty good chance that if a TV is turned on in our house, there’s a game playing.

And this much was clear in the first few minutes of the opening weekend of the 2023 MLS season — and the inaugural run for MLS Season Pass: Apple absolutely nailed its implementation of a streaming sports package.

Read more