Slashdot Mirror


Amazon To Cease Sale of Apple TV and Chromecast

Mark Wilson writes: As of 29 October, shoppers will no longer be able to buy Apple TV or Chromecast devices from Amazon. Citing compatibility issues with Prime Video, Amazon emailed marketplace sellers to inform them it is not accepting new listings for the two media devices, and any existing listings will be removed at the end of October. The move indicates not only the importance Amazon places on its streaming Prime Video service, but also that it views Apple and Google as serious rivals. The two companies have yet to respond to the news, but it is unlikely to be well-received.

223 comments

  1. Amazon Fire? No, thanks. by ErikTheRed · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Their terms of service and privacy policy make Google look downright disinterested in collecting its users data by comparison.

    --

    Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
    1. Re:Amazon Fire? No, thanks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm sure if Google started dropping Amazon from their searches there would be alarm at Amazon and threats of lawsuits

    2. Re:Amazon Fire? No, thanks. by thrillseeker · · Score: 2

      "for compatibility"

    3. Re:Amazon Fire? No, thanks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You cannot look at that data collection in isolation. Amazon has information on my shopping habits. Google can read my emails, follow my web searches, track my location, analyze which Android apps I have installed, connected my to my contacts, etc.

      Therefore, I'd rather give data about what I do in the living room to somebody other than Google, even if that party collects somewhat more data.

      Breaking up the services you use over different companies seems less bad to me with regards to data privacy than restricting yourself to one provider.

  2. Dear Amazon by MozeeToby · · Score: 2

    If you want me to use your instant and prime video options, the correct course of action would be to make the available everywhere, not to remove products that you refuse to support (and given that I've seen Chromecast apps knocked out in a weekend there's really no excuses). Oh, and make it so that shared prime actually shares all of the prime features instead of just shipping. It's incredibly stupid that prime videos don't work on my phone because my wife's Amazon account has the primary prime account.

    1. Re:Dear Amazon by sims+2 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Check out amazon family library aka The Amazon Household Program.
      "Family Library lets you share Kindle books, apps and games, audiobooks, Kindle Owners' Lending Library benefits, and Prime Instant Video streaming across your Amazon devices and Kindle reading apps after linking your Amazon account to that of another adult in your household. Each adult chooses what they want to share: they can share all of their Kindle books, apps, and audiobooks, or they can choose to only share individual titles."

      http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/...

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    2. Re:Dear Amazon by mi · · Score: 2

      the correct course of action would be to make the available everywhere, not to remove products

      The announced product-removal is means to the end of making the service available everywhere.

      There is nothing magical or exceedingly hard about Amazon Prime Video. My 2008 Sony can play it. If Google and Apple aren't offering it, it is because they don't want to, not because they can not.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    3. Re: Dear Amazon by taxman_10m · · Score: 1

      Is it blocked from the Play store? I thought it was Amazon's choice to only make it available in the Amazon Marketplace.

    4. Re:Dear Amazon by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      In theory you can have Amazon Instant Video on pretty much any Android device now. In practice it requires having Amazon App Market (or wtfever it's called) installed, which is an annoyance.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Dear Amazon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Check the same page on Amazon UK
      http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=201620400

      Family Library only shares Kindle books outside of the US

    6. Re:Dear Amazon by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      was that the point? i think he's saying it doesn't make sense to withhold amazon video from the google play app store and chromecast?

    7. Re:Dear Amazon by sexconker · · Score: 2

      And the reason for the lack of the Android app is because...? (Amazon doesn't want to.)
      And Amazon doesn't want to because...? (Amazon had a competing Android-based platform - Kindle.)

      Amazon doesn't want their service on everything, they want everyone on their platform. Their service is the carrot. Not having an Android app while they had an iOS app and general web access was a stick. Further locking down the web access with Silverlight DRM was a stick. Removing these fairly niche products from their store is a stick.

      Amazon will apply just enough stick to get people to consider buying a Kindle device without driving people away from the service.
      Apple users would never leave iOS for a Kindle, so they got the App and Android got the stick (no App).
      Web users didn't cancel prime when the DRM got cranked up a notch and they lost HD on certain things, so they were able to apply more stick with stricter DRM (blocking HD or more things, blocking other things from the web version entirely).
      People won't cancel Prime if they can't buy a Google Whatzit or an Apple Whoozit from Amazon.

      They're trying to be Sears Roebuck.

    8. Re:Dear Amazon by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      Sorry I was unaware amazon offered amazon instant video in the uk. The last I checked the uk only had lovefilm and netflix.

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    9. Re:Dear Amazon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the correct course of action would be to make the available everywhere, not to remove products

      The announced product-removal is means to the end of making the service available everywhere.

      There is nothing magical or exceedingly hard about Amazon Prime Video. My 2008 Sony can play it. If Google and Apple aren't offering it, it is because they don't want to, not because they can not.

      Google and Apple can't create apps that access Amazon's service. Amazon hasn't published the information required, or given them permission. On the other hand, Chromecast's API has been public for almost to years, and hundreds of developers have built apps for it. Amazon could easily enable Prime Video on Chromecast. I assume the same is true for Apple TV.

    10. Re:Dear Amazon by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Since when has Google been responsible for producing the apps to access third party content distributors on Chromecast? They publish an API for a reason you know.

      I also doubt that Amazon Instant Video has an API that's fully documented. Your Sony plays it because Amazon wrote something for that platform, not because Sony independently wrote an app to play videos from Amazon. If it were as easy as you're suggesting, Android would have a hundred third party Amazon Instant Video apps.

      • Slow Down Cowboy! Slashdot requires you to wait between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment. It's been 4 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment Chances are, you're behind a firewall or proxy, or clicked the Back button to accidentally reuse a form. Please try again. If the problem persists, and all other options have been tried, contact the site administrator.
      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    11. Re:Dear Amazon by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      The announced product-removal is means to the end of making the service available everywhere.

      How so? The new Apple TV supports third-party apps. As far as I know, there's nothing stopping Amazon from taking their existing iOS app, turning off a few small bits of code (status bar updates, for example), and shipping it as a tvOS app, available on the new Apple TV by the first day that it arrives in customers' hands.

      There is nothing magical or exceedingly hard about Amazon Prime Video. My 2008 Sony can play it. If Google and Apple aren't offering it, it is because they don't want to, not because they can not.

      Yes and no. Supporting additional content providers adds complexity that often results in a less reliable product. That's why Blu-Ray players that support all those content providers tend to have more bugs and be less usable than the simple, dumb players. The whole point of opening up Apple TV to third-party app developers is so that all of those companies like Amazon can create their own apps, so that they, not Apple, are responsible for debugging support for their particular service. If history is any indication, in a few releases, Apple will drop support for Hulu and Netflix and will require those companies to provide their own apps, too, just like they did with Google Maps.

      The difference is that when they do that, Hulu and Netflix will have an app out within a week, because they already have working iOS apps that don't suck, and it usually requires only minimal effort to add tvOS support to an existing iOS app (unless you depend on features that tvOS lacks). By contrast, Amazon isn't making their app available on tvOS. This isn't surprising. After all, Amazon also deliberately disabled support for mirroring their instant video app on Apple TV even from iOS devices, and for many years, didn't even allow you to watch Amazon Instant Video over cellular, much less do offline viewing, reserving those features exclusively for use on Amazon-branded hardware.

      To me, it looks like Amazon is playing dirty, deliberately creating a substandard user experience on iOS in a naïve attempt at coercing Prime streaming users to buy Amazon-branded hardware. I'm not sure whether they are really so clueless that they don't recognize the importance of the iOS market, or are just so crazy that they honestly believe people will drop their Apple products in favor of Amazon products rather than just dropping Amazon Prime for Netflix. Either explanation leads me to seriously question whether the Amazon management's heads are screwed on straight. Jeff Bezos needs to seriously reorg that entire part of the company, and bring in people who actually have the spine to create a great product that stands on its own, rather than bowing to pressure from other parts of the organization to sabotage their own product in a misguided attempt to use the poor experience as a stick with which to beat their customers into submission.

      Want iOS users to actually switch to Amazon products? Create a first-class user experience with the Amazon app on iOS so that users will see it and think, "Wow. Amazon writes great software. I wonder if their tablets are just as good." By doing the opposite, you pretty much guarantee that no iOS user will ever take your products seriously, including your streaming service.

      Then again, for Amazon, this is nothing new. At last check, KF8 flowing books (Kindle books with actual support for CSS) still don't work on iOS devices after how many years? It seems like Amazon does its best to make their iOS experience as subpar as humanly possible. So when it comes to them pitching a fit and refusing to create an app for tvOS, let me be the first to say, "Don't let the door hit you in the a** on the way out."

      Good riddance to bad rubbish.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    12. Re:Dear Amazon by jaseuk · · Score: 1

      LoveFilm = Amazon Instant

    13. Re:Dear Amazon by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      my blackberry supports it with no added software, just browse to the page and watch (use browser in desktop mode, amazon's mobile site keeps trying to shove you to the app) (and make sure you are on wifi because holy datacaps batman) buffering takes about 10 seconds, so not outstanding but not terrible either

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    14. Re:Dear Amazon by Wovel · · Score: 1

      Amazon already has a great video app for iOS and they update it frequently. They recently updated it to support downloading and offline viewing of Prime content. Their stance on selling the AppleTV makes no sense. It would be absurd fr them not to make an app for the new AppleTV and the even with current models, airplay works great.

      It also goes against a core cultural direction the Bezos described years ago. Amazon keeps retail, content and hardware businesses all separate. It is why kindle books are available on every platform you can think of. It is why Amazon video is also available on all those platforms. This decision makes no sense and probably won't last long.

  3. Closing my Amazon account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I suggest you all do the same.

  4. Got Anymore Of That 4K Content? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Does Aamzon have anymore of that 4K content?
    Does Amazon have any decent Prime Instant Video content?
    Can I "rent" decent/new content 1080p or greater content for $2 or less like I can with RedBox BlueRays?

    No? Then Amazon Prime Instant Video isn't going to happen.

    $10 to "rent" a three year old movie? WTF are you smoking?

    1. Re:Got Anymore Of That 4K Content? by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      Does Amazon have any decent Prime Instant Video content?

      Yeah. Last month they unrolled a huge amount of content.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    2. Re:Got Anymore Of That 4K Content? by RDW · · Score: 1

      'Hey, how about we go back to my place for some Prime Video and Chill? You're not interested? No, it's not just a cheapass Google Play, they have dozens of movies more recent than 2010 and the complete Downton Abbey! Yes, I know Kyle has Netflix but that's no reason to... Oh. Well, see you around.'

    3. Re:Got Anymore Of That 4K Content? by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      as for A+ titles, they have much more than Netflix.

    4. Re:Got Anymore Of That 4K Content? by GrahamCox · · Score: 1

      They'll soon have the replacement for Top Gear (rumoured to be called "Gear Knobs" heheh)

      But actually that's all I have ever heard about Amazon's TV service. Maybe that's because I live in Australia and it's not available here, I don't know. But if it is, and I've just not heard anything about it, that's a massive failure on Amazon's part to market to people who could potentially be interested.

      I'm barely aware it exists.

    5. Re:Got Anymore Of That 4K Content? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No they don't. They just bubble the five they do have to the top of all your search results. Also they seem to consider individual episodes of TV shows as "one media item" so you can fill out the rest of your suggestions with 15 episodes of Orphan Black (which.. I guess got a lot of critical acclaim?) and two other shows. It's all A++ titles, though.

      Netflix on the other hand seems to have purchased all of the hanger-on B-movies and recommends the hell out of them. The still have some actually good things, though they're losing a bunch because one of the rights-holders signed an exclusive deal with Hulu. I guess it's better to be part of the service the media companies (except disney?) want to use to eliminate Amazon and Netflix even though they piss off their users by making even paying customers watch the same stupid ads over and over.

    6. Re:Got Anymore Of That 4K Content? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I have no idea how they treat Oz, but I would be shocked if their catalog were as good down there as it is here. Licensing agreements and whatnot.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:Got Anymore Of That 4K Content? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes they do. See how that works?

    8. Re:Got Anymore Of That 4K Content? by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Don't think that many people care about 4k content.

      The rental prices are daft. Also rentals make things confusing if you have Prime. I don't want to pay per item.

      They have a couple of exclusives that look interesting though, I quite enjoyed The Man In The High Castle. And getting Amazon prime delivery is a nice perk.

  5. Antitrust... by x0ra · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How couldn't this be a base for a an anti-trust lawsuit against amazon ?

    1. Re:Antitrust... by MozeeToby · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because Amazon doesn't have a monopoly on small electronics sales?

    2. Re:Antitrust... by kamapuaa · · Score: 1

      It would be hard to prove that Amazon and Google are being squeezed out of business.

      --
      Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    3. Re:Antitrust... by wile_e_wonka · · Score: 1

      Because it's still selling Roku stuff?

    4. Re:Antitrust... by ooshna · · Score: 2

      unfortunately this just falls under shady business practices

    5. Re:Antitrust... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Amazon has to do more than simply not sell their competitor's devices. Their competitors will have to prove that they were harmed in some way. While Apple and Google might lose some sales, consumers can still get them by going to their Target, Walmart, etc. So only Amazon is hurting themselves by losing many more sales.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    6. Re:Antitrust... by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Agreed.... if someone wants to buy something, they will go where it's convenient to buy it. It's just that simple.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    7. Re:Antitrust... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Really the only people affected are the super-lazy that absolutely must have it delivered by Amazon. I believe that every other store will still ship.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    8. Re:Antitrust... by jedidiah · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      This isn't about "small electronics". It's about streamers and content. And yes, having their own vertically integrated platform does make them ripe for an anti-trust inquiry. The same goes for Apple too.

      There's no reason to lick their boots, either of them.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    9. Re:Antitrust... by MobyDisk · · Score: 0

      Check this part out:

      Amazon emailed marketplace sellers to inform them it is not accepting new listings for the two media devices, and any existing listings will be removed at the end of October.

      Amazon is telling *other stores* what they can sell. Amazon isn't just a store: They are a search engine for goods and an online payment processor. This is not like Best Buy refusing to sell a certain product. This is closer to Visa refusing to broker payments that involved competing products. Or perhaps Microsoft refusing to host web sites that offered products that compete with Microsoft Word. They may not be considered a monopoly in this space, but it sure looks anticompetitive.

      It would be one thing if Amazon refused to sell the item themselves, but telling others they can't even list it on their service is a step further.

    10. Re: Antitrust... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It says Amazon will stop selling them, but not that private sellers "fulfilled by Amazon" will stop. So people can still go on Amazon and buy them.

    11. Re: Antitrust... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amazons content is available on other devices, so it's not exactly a monopoly

    12. Re: Antitrust... by galabar · · Score: 2

      It said "marketplace sellers." So, yes, everyone.

    13. Re:Antitrust... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that necessarily a requirement for an 'Anti-trust' lawsuit? A 'stiffling' or closure of business in direct result of Amazons behavior? I don't think it does. This is a behavior that doesn't have to 'wait', that long.

    14. Re:Antitrust... by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      I bought my Chromecast directly from Google Play. Came in the mail three or four days later. A week later, they had a whole rack of them at Walmart.

      Other than a sort of "no Pepsi in the Coca Cola bottling facility" sort of way, I can't see how this would have any measurable impact on Amazon's competitors. It is typical of the kind of behavior that miserable piece of shit Bezos is known for. A grade A sociopathic prick.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    15. Re: Antitrust... by thrillseeker · · Score: 1

      Yes, but it is now intentionally being made *not* available to their two biggest competitors.

    16. Re:Antitrust... by macs4all · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This isn't about "small electronics". It's about streamers and content. And yes, having their own vertically integrated platform does make them ripe for an anti-trust inquiry. The same goes for Apple too.

      There's no reason to lick their boots, either of them.

      Sigh.

      Yet another Slashtard that is mind-numbingly ignorant if how law REALLY works.

    17. Re: Antitrust... by JimMcc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No. They are intentionally not selling the _devices_ manufactured by their two biggest competitors. Big difference.

      I think Amazon is acting like a spoiled three year old, but it doesn't strike me as antitrust. People can get Chromecast and Apple TV lots of other places. It's not like Amazon was the only outlet.

    18. Re:Antitrust... by William+Baric · · Score: 1

      Microsoft was never a "monopoly" either, but that (rightfully) didn't stop the anti-trust lawsuit against them.

    19. Re:Antitrust... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a know-nothing. Please be quiet and let the adults talk.

    20. Re: Antitrust... by mattpalmer1086 · · Score: 1

      In the UK at least, turns out there is no amazon prime on the roku. There's a lengthy forum filled with annoyed customers cancelling prime because of that. I was one of them.

      And I'm not installing their app store to watch it on Android.

      Bye bye prime!

    21. Re: Antitrust... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why can't I buy an Accord from the Ford dealership???? Sue them!

    22. Re:Antitrust... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Having a monopoly wasn't the problem of Microsoft. It was abusing their monopoly against competitors namely Sun and Netscape through a number of tactics including interfering with their business relationships with 3rd parties. In this case, Amazon is simply refusing to sell a competitor's product. It is loss of sales for them but not anywhere near what MS did.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    23. Re:Antitrust... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Amazon doesn't have to have an absolute monopoly to get into trouble through anti-trust law. Amazon has to be in a sufficiently dominant position in a large chunk of the market (it probably does have that dominance on online sales) and use that position as leverage to push other products (which it appears to be doing). I'd expect legal action if Amazon doesn't back down.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    24. Re:Antitrust... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Refusing to sell a competitor's product in order to push their own is anti-competitive. After all, Microsoft was just packaging the browser with the OS; that's even more innocuous, isn't it?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    25. Re:Antitrust... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Refusing to sell a competitor's product in order to push their own is anti-competitive. After all, Microsoft was just packaging the browser with the OS; that's even more innocuous, isn't it?

      If that's all they were doing, there wouldn't be much of a problem. But people forget all the other tactics that MS did. Against Netscape, MS specifically told OEMs that they would raise their license fees with them if they installed Netscape browsers. OEMs on thin margins couldn't afford it even though it helped their customers. Against, Sun's Java they hinted to Intel that if Intel released a JVM optimized for Intel x86 architecture, MS would "favor" AMD in their next version of Windows.

      Compare this to Amazon: They are not going to sell competitor's products which they are under no obligation to sell. If Amazon interfered with Apple or Google selling to others then you might have more of an argument.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    26. Re: Antitrust... by wile_e_wonka · · Score: 1

      Interesting--I did not realize that. I have several Roku boxes and I do use Prime on them through the official Prime app (side note--I wonder if lack of the app in the UK is due to the movie studios). So, this raises another interesting point, though: could Amazon make the Apple TV and Google thinger (whatever it's called) less attractive to people who have prime and not Netflix by simply pulling its Prime app?

    27. Re:Antitrust... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Except that this is a cross-business-line issue. The part of Amazon that's in the business of selling stuff online doesn't see these as competing products. They're only competing to other parts of Amazon's business.

      Similarly, Google has gotten into trouble for favoring its own other services too much in search.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  6. customers don't like having choices restricted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Unlike on the ebook side of things, Amazon is far from having a monopoly on electronics, but stopping third party vendors from selling certain competing devices definitely leaves a bad taste.

    1. Re:customers don't like having choices restricted by NatasRevol · · Score: 2

      I wonder how amazon would feel if Apple said none of their products could be sold through amazon.com, given that they're often in the top 5 sellers of their areas.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    2. Re:customers don't like having choices restricted by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      Weird, isn't it? Amazon made their name by being 'the store that sold everything'. Now they're refusing to sell some things that compete with them.

      IMHO they've really jumped the shark in the last year or two. I increasingly buy from specialist stores, because Amazon prices are no cheaper, and they keep pushing me to 'third party sellers' instead of selling me things themselves.

    3. Re:customers don't like having choices restricted by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      True - but still worth it for the vast majority of things, especially with free two day shipping.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    4. Re:customers don't like having choices restricted by frovingslosh · · Score: 0

      True - but still worth it for the vast majority of things, especially with free two day shipping.

      Beyond the free trial, the claim of free two day shipping is Bullshit. It is Prepaid Shipping, or shipping that you already paid good money for, not free shipping.

      --
      I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    5. Re:customers don't like having choices restricted by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Like any flat fee product, it's easy enough to make your money back if you use it often enough. That's the real question. It's pretty easy math really. Not something to get at all excited about.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    6. Re:customers don't like having choices restricted by gfxguy · · Score: 2

      Yes, it's not "free" the same way education and healthcare aren't (and never will be) "free." But you end up saving a lot of money and getting the added convenience of 2-day shipping. So if you use it enough, then maybe your first 10 or 12 expedited orders are "prepaid," but everything after that it is free (to the customer anyway - someone's paying). So yes, not quite free, if you want to be pedantic about it, but more like "buy 10, get as many as you want."

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    7. Re:customers don't like having choices restricted by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      the same way education and healthcare aren't (and never will be) "free."

      Which has always meant free to use, not that there is no cost involved. Sidewalks aren't built for free, but they are free to use. Same goes for schools and healthcare in civilized countries.

    8. Re:customers don't like having choices restricted by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 1

      which apple products are that? If you look, Amazon really does not directly sell that many. I found iPhone 5c and a few variants of macbook air/pro. Its not at all clear that losing those sales would materially effect Amazon.

    9. Re:customers don't like having choices restricted by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 1

      So they are taking a play from the Apple playbook, right? Shocking

  7. Huh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That isn't anti-competitive at all, no siree.

    1. Re: Huh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, I'm on my way to Starbucks to get my Dunkin Donut fix. Hope they have them. They should, right, or at least they should offer to help me get them?

  8. Antitrust? by galabar · · Score: 2

    Is Amazon big enough that this will open the eyes of federal regulators?

    1. Re:Antitrust? by MozeeToby · · Score: 0

      Given that I can buy a chromecast from any of several dozen other stores, the answer is a resounding no. That's not how anti-trust laws work.

  9. I have a problem with Amazon Prime Video... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It eats up way too much bandwidth on my Roku. I've been using an average 20Gb per day usage watching prime, vs an average 5Gb per day with Netflix. Netflix has settings to reduce video quality thereby reducing bandwidth. Amazon Prime streams at the highest level the network and device allows with no way to turn it down. I have 70Mbps high speed cable it but has a 350Gb cap, prime would blow through that quickly.

    1. Re:I have a problem with Amazon Prime Video... by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I have 70Mbps high speed cable it but has a 350Gb cap

      I found your problem...

    2. Re:I have a problem with Amazon Prime Video... by x0ra · · Score: 0

      No, the problem is Amazon Prime Video requiring 4 times more bandwidth than what the customer deem acceptable.

    3. Re:I have a problem with Amazon Prime Video... by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      add some QoS policies to your router to restrict the bandwidth of Amazon Prime streaming

    4. Re:I have a problem with Amazon Prime Video... by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 1

      If you have a data cap, then streaming video is probably not for you.

      The point was you need different Internet service.

    5. Re:I have a problem with Amazon Prime Video... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have a data cap, then streaming video is probably not for you.

      The point was you need different Internet service.

      The problem with your advise is in many places it's similar to the following statement: You're too poor you ought to just be rich. Ha! Problem solved! I would say nearly 50% of the area in these united states only offer consumer internet with data caps.

    6. Re: I have a problem with Amazon Prime Video... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That might just make it buffer a lot

    7. Re:I have a problem with Amazon Prime Video... by RubberDogBone · · Score: 1

      I have 70Mbps high speed cable it but has a 350Gb cap

      90Mbps and 300Gb cap. Only had it for about 21 days last month, having just gotten it installed. Still almost hit 300 and that was with only two movies and one hour TV episode on Prime video. No Netflix. No torrenting.

      The more bandwidth you have, the higher the quality of the stream. And wow it does look great but wow it gobbles up data like crazy.

      --
      Sig for hire.
    8. Re:I have a problem with Amazon Prime Video... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, FlyHelicopters must be an idiot. There is no consumer services without a data cap in most areas. There are faster packages but that only gets you an extra 100Gb on the cap. So mr FlyHelicopters, go fly you helicopter into a ditch.

  10. Compatibility issues indeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Compatibility with sales...

  11. Amazon announces new streaming box... by erapert · · Score: 1

    Prediction: next week Amazon will announce a brand new product that is super special-- a streaming device that integrates Amazon Prime called AmazonTVCast.

    1. Re:Amazon announces new streaming box... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      What something to replace the Amazon Fire TV and Amazon Fire TV Stick that have been out... since April 2014 and November 2014 respectively?

      I'm surprised it hasn't happened earlier.

    2. Re:Amazon announces new streaming box... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You mean like FireTV? Or the FireTV Stick?

    3. Re:Amazon announces new streaming box... by sexconker · · Score: 1

      The Gary Busey TV Stick!

  12. So no Prime for AppleTV then by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    I had been hoping Amazon Prime video would be added to AppleTV. Guess this means pretty much no way that's going to happen.

    I had been meaning to order a number of things from Amazon, looks like a great time to explore other purchase options.

    Not gonna lie though; probably will keep Prime.

    I guess Apple (and Google) would be within bounds to pull the Amazon app, and see who blinks first...

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:So no Prime for AppleTV then by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 2

      I had been hoping Amazon Prime video would be added to AppleTV. Guess this means pretty much no way that's going to happen.

      Or perhaps this is Amazon's way of getting it added... AppleTV can come back to Amazon as soon as PrimeVideo is added to AppleTV.

    2. Re:So no Prime for AppleTV then by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure that is more up to Amazon than it is to Apple. Prime video isn't on Apple TV or chromecast for the same reason: Amazon doesn't want to pay Google or Apple their standard app revenue cut. The only reason they pay the cut to roku/Xbox/psx is because they're already too big to ignore, but chromecast and appletv aren't, and Amazon's fear is that one day they might be, so this is their attempt to prevent that.

    3. Re:So no Prime for AppleTV then by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      I will definitely keep prime. The Amazon prime package (mainly free two-day shipping) is worth it on it's own for how much I order. Prime video is just some icing on the cake, but if I want to watch netflix or something, I can do it whether Amazon wants me to or not.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    4. Re:So no Prime for AppleTV then by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Maybe. Frankly, one of the reasons I didn't get a chromecast is because I couldn't watch Amazon prime video with it (I don't know about now, but at the time). I don't even use prime video much at all - the free stuff is mostly crap, but if I was going to get something, I wanted something that I could use for any service I had.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    5. Re:So no Prime for AppleTV then by sehryan · · Score: 1

      Seeing as how Apple has now opened up development to the new AppleTV, I see adding Amazon Video to it as an Amazon problem, not an Apple problem.

      --
      The world moves for love. It kneels before it in awe.
    6. Re:So no Prime for AppleTV then by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 2

      What app revenue cut? The Prime Video app is free.

      Oh, you mean "in-app purchases"? That makes sense for Candy Crush, but no sense for Prime Video.

      Amazon is not going to give Apple 15% of that income any sooner than Apple would do the same in reverse.

      Does the FireTV have an iTunes app?

    7. Re:So no Prime for AppleTV then by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      I had been hoping Amazon Prime video would be added to AppleTV. Guess this means pretty much no way that's going to happen.

      I had been meaning to order a number of things from Amazon, looks like a great time to explore other purchase options.

      Not gonna lie though; probably will keep Prime.

      I guess Apple (and Google) would be within bounds to pull the Amazon app, and see who blinks first...

      Well, for the original AppleTV, Apple works with partners in producing the channels (this is in contrast with Roku where partners simply code it up themselves).

      It's likely Apple has tried to talk with Amazon on bringing Prime Video to AppleTV, but Amazon either rejected them, or refused to provide them assistance (Apple actually coded up all the channels on AppleTV in partnership with content providers).

      This will get interesting later on because the model will be flipped around with tvOS - instead of Apple coding up the AppleTV content, it'll be content providers. At which point, Amazon would squarely be at fault for not supporting tvOS.

      And Amazon's apps aren't on Google Play - they were at one point, then Amazon violated some rule or other and Google removed them. They still remain up on iOS though, and I assume they're useful enough to Apple that they'll remain there. (Remember, apps for iOS are used to sell the hardware, so it's not in Apple's interest to remove apps that are potentially popular, like video streaming apps.)

      Truth be told, given how long Amazon took to get Prime Video up on Android, it's likely Amazon didn't want to work with Apple to get it on AppleTV.

    8. Re:So no Prime for AppleTV then by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 1

      Unless Apple expects a 30% cut of all in-app sales.

    9. Re:So no Prime for AppleTV then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They sure do, you can get it here: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/amazon-video/id545519333?mt=8

      I usually buy all my movies from Amazon because it works on all my devices. If I buy on iTunes I can only play back on Apple devices. I really don't like this move though, I was thinking about getting a FireTV, but now I don't want to support it.

    10. Re:So no Prime for AppleTV then by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Prime video is just some icing on the cake, but if I want to watch netflix or something, I can do it whether Amazon wants me to or not.

      What's funny is that the Fire TV stick has one of the best Netflix clients around, at least when it comes to the interface. I've used Netflix on my Tegra3 tablet via HDMI out and it's annoying because of the interface.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re:So no Prime for AppleTV then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amazon could still offer an app that lets users view their content but not purchase new content. That's the traditional work around for Apple's demand for a pound of flesh.

    12. Re: So no Prime for AppleTV then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can't you AirPlay from your phones app ?

  13. Inevitable by rickb928 · · Score: 1

    So it's getting serious.

    When the ISPs start outright killing your streaming service because it isn't *theirs*, then it's on. Bigtime. Blood in the streets,

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  14. Only in the US then? by Yaztromo · · Score: 1

    Amazon doesn't offer their Instant Video streaming service in Canada at all, so their reasoning doesn't stand up here in Canada. Will they also be preventing sales of Apple TVs and Chromecast units to Canadians?

    Maybe someone just needs to point them to the Chromecast and (new) tvOS SDKs so they can whip up their own Amazon Instant Video apps instead?

    Yaz

    1. Re:Only in the US then? by pushing-robot · · Score: 0

      Amazon's problem is that Apple and Google want a cut of in-app digital purchases. Amazon has refused so far, going so far as to violate the ToS and have their apps removed from the App Store and Play Store.

      This move is just a new attempt to negotiate lower IAP royalties. If that fails, it's possible Amazon may release an AppleTV app with the same restrictions as their current iOS app, which can play but not purchase videos. Worst case, AirPlay from a iOS device still works fine with no loss in image quality.

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
    2. Re:Only in the US then? by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Well... the devices should just run apps, and there's a prime video app (at least for phones/tablets). It was a long time coming - for a long time, you couldn't watch on any portable devices that were blessed by Amazon - you needed a kindle tablet at the time, despite the fact that the app would have probably run on any android device. They wanted people to buy kindles. Period. I would hope they could make an arrangement that if the other devices had Prime support that then Amazon would allow them to be sold again, but I'm not holding my breath. I fear it will be like with the tablet, where when withholding the app from general use didn't cause people to come running to buy kindles, they finally released an app that would work on most android devices.

      Despite their Emmy wins on their own content, Prime isn't compelling enough for video - the free stuff just isn't all that. Prime video is icing on the prime subscription cake - people don't get it for the video, they get it for the free 2-day shipping.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
  15. "in order to avoid customer confusion" by j2.718ff · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Over the last three years, Prime Video has become an important part of Prime. It's important that the streaming media players we sell interact well with Prime Video in order to avoid customer confusion.

    I really wish companies would drop the BS when announcing things like this. Customers aren't going to be confused. Amazon doesn't want to sell products that compete with their own, fine. I just wish they didn't pretend like they were doing this to make customers happier.

    1. Re:"in order to avoid customer confusion" by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 1

      But its still bull pucky. Amazon doesn't make a huge profit on their hardware devices. They're trying to make (some) money from collecting customer information and creating consumer "lock in" on their services. They can easily create that consumer "lock in" by requiring information transfer on the software/API end, rather than in the hardware. Let Google use their hardware products on their services platform, as long as the firmware conforms with the API. This is that stupid lockin/exclusivity that Microsoft tried to do with their OS back two decades ago. Its utterly unnecessary, and it will only alienate customers.

      Then again, the cable companies haven't learned either. The difference is that if Amazon became successful with their version of lock in, they'll just spend the a fortune and a decade fighting the FCC and DOJ and losing.

      --
      There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
    2. Re:"in order to avoid customer confusion" by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      What's worse is they withheld an android app they had on their android based kindle because they wanted people to buy kindles. When it didn't work, and people kept complaining, after some years, they finally released an android app. They've always made it difficult because they wanted people to buy their hardware, too. So this move is not surprising, but out of complete honesty here, I bought a FireTV because I wanted a separate device (not tied to a tablet or a disc player) that could do both Netflix and Prime.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    3. Re:"in order to avoid customer confusion" by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      ... because Amazon don't want to make a Prime Video app for Android or iOS?

    4. Re:"in order to avoid customer confusion" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It's important that the streaming media players we sell interact well with Prime Video in order to avoid customer confusion."

      Doubt we'll ever get away from that problem. Right now I can buy any media access device I like on any network I like and there's a DAMN GOOD CHANCE come tomorrow it's not going to work because:

      - Rightsholder A had a falling-out with Distributor B
      - Network provider C demands more money from Distributor D
      - Software provider E had a falling-out over a codec with TrollCorp F
      - Hardware provider G had a falling-out over a codec with TrollCorp H
      - Software provider I had a falling-out with Hardware provider J
      - Cloud frontend K demands compatibility with Hardware provider L

      I'm just Customer X looking to rent Content Y - why do I care about this spiderweb of contracts, software, hardware, codecs, devices, purchase agreements and lawsuits? Why are you bringing your gripes, bargaining tactics and outright legal warfare into my living room? At least when we could actually "buy" stuff we stood a pretty good chance of it working day-to-day.

    5. Re:"in order to avoid customer confusion" by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      A device that can do Netflix and Prime? You didn't need a FireTV for that. If anything, Amazon was LAST to the party in this respect.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    6. Re:"in order to avoid customer confusion" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think "reducing customer confusion" could be a real goal at amazon. If it were they could start by not naming everything Fire XXX or Prime YYY.

    7. Re:"in order to avoid customer confusion" by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      There were not many standalone devices - not computers, something cheap (sub $100) and simple (easy to move around) - that could do both. Chromecast still can't. I could have gone cheaper with a FireStick (or whatever it's called), but I liked some other things about FireTV, too (and waited for a sale).

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    8. Re:"in order to avoid customer confusion" by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      It's called a fire TV stick. We got the discounted year of prime, so we got the fire TV stick, as the cheapest way to get Amazon streaming working. Now I regret it, not because it's not working well (it is) but because of this bullshit.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:"in order to avoid customer confusion" by gfxguy · · Score: 2

      I hear you, but if you're going to stop doing business with every company that has done some sort of anti-consumer "trick," you'd be hard pressed to find any companies to do business with (even FOSS).

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    10. Re:"in order to avoid customer confusion" by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I hear you, but if you're going to stop doing business with every company that has done some sort of anti-consumer "trick," you'd be hard pressed to find any companies to do business with (even FOSS).

      Well, I said I regret it, but honestly, it's only slightly. It's here, it's working, we're keeping it. I could probably send it back right now if I wanted, we just got it. Google's not saintly anyway.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re:"in order to avoid customer confusion" by sexconker · · Score: 1

      if you're going to stop doing business with every company that has done some sort of anti-consumer "trick," you'd be hard pressed to find any companies to do business with (even FOSS).

      Slashdot never misses an opportunity to shit on systemd!

    12. Re: "in order to avoid customer confusion" by Karlt1 · · Score: 1

      Amazon Video by AMZN Mobile LLC
      https://appsto.re/us/LB_GG.i

    13. Re:"in order to avoid customer confusion" by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

      How long before they stop selling DVD's for the same reason?

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    14. Re:"in order to avoid customer confusion" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you've never heard of Roku??... By far the better option, since it does netflix, amazon, google, and ten tons of other streaming options. Plus the option of playing local content from SD or USB.. maybe even streaming from a machine on the local network.

  16. The fundamental issue? by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 1

    The fundamental issue seems to be that Amazon is very poorly managed.

    Amazon has junky web pages that try to sell me other things before I've finished reading about the item that interests me. There are many offers on Amazon, by other vendors, that try to take advantage of the customer.

    Should Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos be talking about going into space when he isn't managing Amazon well?

    It seems to me that Bezos is tired and overloaded and should be replaced.

    1. Re:The fundamental issue? by Sir+Holo · · Score: 2

      Perhaps sending Bezos into space is actually a really good idea, along with it being a solution to the problem.

    2. Re:The fundamental issue? by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Well, I'm repeating myself here, but the awkward thing here is that they withheld apps for Prime from other devices while they were trying to sell kindles. I wouldn't buy a kindle for Prime, I doubt anyone would. In fact, people don't buy prime for the video, they just take advantage of the video after signing up for free 2-day shipping, which is what the vast majority of people who sign up for prime are looking for.

      But the point is a few years ago they withheld general android support trying to get people to buy their hardware. They didn't realize prime video wasn't a motivating factor in purchasing a tablet, but nowadays you CAN get a generic android app for Prime. Now it seems they are going back in time to try a similar strategy to sell the hardware - this time by not selling competing hardware at all.

      My magic eight-ball says this will go on for some time, then when it doesn't work, they will start selling these devices again. At the same time, if there are generally available Amazon Prime apps available, why wouldn't Google and Apple try to support them? I get it - competitors for content, but that strategy is not going to work for anybody, it's just pissing off customers. Seems like Amazon wins a few Emmy's and think they can start dictating terms.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    3. Re:The fundamental issue? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      In fact, people don't buy prime for the video, they just take advantage of the video after signing up for free 2-day shipping, which is what the vast majority of people who sign up for prime are looking for.

      We did. Since it went on sale for one-third off for a day, it's cheaper per-month than Netflix this year. It has a ton of HBO content which is right up our alley, especially stand-up. The two-day shipping is just icing as far as I'm concerned.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:The fundamental issue? by sexconker · · Score: 1

      The fundamental issue seems to be that Amazon is very poorly managed.

      Amazon has junky web pages that try to sell me other things before I've finished reading about the item that interests me. There are many offers on Amazon, by other vendors, that try to take advantage of the customer.

      Should Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos be talking about going into space when he isn't managing Amazon well?

      It seems to me that Bezos is tired and overloaded and should be replaced.

      There's a reason they call him Jeff Bozos, and it's not just because of the "more deals than Black Friday" Prime Day fiasco.
      It's 2015 and Amazon still doesn't have a functioning search or sort system. (Go search for a specific model of video card and then sort by price - you'll get tons of OTHER video cards in there and nothing will be sorted by price. Works for just about any search.)

    5. Re:The fundamental issue? by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 1

      So then don't buy anything on Amazon? Really if you hate the experience that much, just buy direct from Apple or Barnes&Noble or BestBuy or any of the hundreds of other sellers on the web and bricks n mortar

  17. hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by swschrad · · Score: 1

    you migrate to whichever private island your credit cards are more familiar with, and that's how it's gonna be.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
    1. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by jxander · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A critical difference however: neither Fox nor CBS sell the means of access.

      Amazon is showing textbook Conflict of Interest.

      It's getting worse, and Amazon is hardly the only culprit. Netflix original series are a problem, despite many of them being awesome shows.

      How much longer until "meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

      --
      This signature is false.
    2. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by MightyMartian · · Score: 0

      That may all be true, but the fact is, at least at the moment, that whereas a year ago I was paying over a hundred bucks a month for TV, currently I'm paying about $20 for two streaming services, and my old DVD rentals have been replaced by the odd iTunes or Google Play streaming rental. I live in Canada, so at the moment I don't have access to Amazon, Hulu or HBO, but so far as I can tell, even if I did and subscribed to them all, I'd still be paying only 50% to 60% of what I was paying before. And, quite frankly, I'm actually watching a lot less TV now that I've cut the cord, so I'm not chewing through entire five or six season series' in the space of a couple of weeks, so I doubt I'll ever regularly subscribe to anything more than Netflix ever again.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    3. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't see it as a COI. Amazon sells stuff, including streaming services, that is their Primary Interest. If a hardware vendor chooses not to support the streaming service Amazon sells, why should Amazon sell the hardware? My corner grocer stopped selling a cream cheese made from yogurt and that space is now filled by it's own brand of similar (but lesser value) yogurt cheese... that's OK because they own the store, not me. I wish they would sell what I want, but they don't so if really I want it I can shop elsewhere. Not every store has to sell every product. Other stores sell the products, and if the products are good they may soon be selling more of them.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interest

      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    4. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by PRMan · · Score: 1

      I disagree. I have actually seen ads for one chain of networks on another chain of networks. If they pay enough, they will take the ad.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    5. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      citation? really, does google refuse to allow amazon video app on chromecast / google play store?

    6. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by Chalnoth · · Score: 2

      Amazon is free to produce their own app for Chromecast or Apple TV. This is probably more an issue where they want to push people into buying their own devices instead of Apple or Android devices.

      Furthermore, Amazon does not have a fundamental right to refuse to sell anything it wants. Certain refusals similar to this one are outlawed (see here). According to the FTC's website there, if a company is refusing to provide a product in a strategy to acquire or maintain a monopoly, then it's illegal. I don't know whether this applies in this case (IANAL), but it certainly is a practice that harms consumers, and therefore should be outlawed.

    7. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by rtb61 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This has nothing at all to do with selling stuff and nothing to do with appliances or applications. This is all about who gets to be the global publishers of content, who gets the lions share of content profits, who takes 30% for doing fuck all (realistically managing a marketing engine is pretty much doing fuck all except adding massive cost to the end user).

      So they are all in it, the ISPs, the internet backbone companies (may ex incumbent telcos), the online sales companies and existing publishers. The people excluded being the people producing the content, thou shalt not direct publish else thou wilst be destroyed by the DMCA and court costs. They are all fighting for monopoly domination of that 30% for doing fuck all and seeking to extend it out to 50% and even 100% ie huffington post you should be thankful for the exposure and ha ha fuck you.

      Nothing to do with end users or content producers and everything to do with locking in publishing monopolies.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    8. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Amazon is free to produce their own app for Chromecast or Apple TV. This is probably more an issue where they want to push people into buying their own devices instead of Apple or Android devices.

      Furthermore, Amazon does not have a fundamental right to refuse to sell anything it wants. Certain refusals similar to this one are outlawed (see here). According to the FTC's website there, if a company is refusing to provide a product in a strategy to acquire or maintain a monopoly, then it's illegal. I don't know whether this applies in this case (IANAL), but it certainly is a practice that harms consumers, and therefore should be outlawed.

      You don't have to but an AppleTV or Chromecast from Amazon, nor do they have a "Monopoly" on streaming devices nor streaming services.

      IANAL but this sounds douchebaggish; but IMHO, it falls far short of either COI or Monoplistic behavior.

    9. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by macs4all · · Score: 1

      I disagree. I have actually seen ads for one chain of networks on another chain of networks. If they pay enough, they will take the ad.

      I think you usually see that with cable networks that are actually owned by the same Parent Company.

    10. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This is all Amazon. It is up to the streaming service to implement an app on top of the hardware's published API. Google and Apple can't modify Amazon's backends so they connect to the devices and stream data in the correct format. Amazon needs to update their servers and write an app to setup the connection with the hardware.

      Amazon has a Kindle app in the Play store because they'd lose too many ebook sales otherwise. But they won't publish their Android app for video outside of their own store to force people into either installing Amazon Marketplace or buying a Fire tablet, which is textbook bundling.

    11. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How the fuck does it hurt consumers when there is plenty of competition to all of Amazon's services, streaming included? After all, there's Google, Apple, Netflix, and numerous others so how the fuck does the Sherman Antitrust act apply to this scenario when Amazon has a large amount of competition? Chromecast and Apple TV can be purchase from sites other than Amazon as well so if you don't like Amazon then just simply stay away from them, it's that simple. Government anti-trust laws were created to businesses from monopolizing, not to keep people from making choices. If the Sherman Anti-trust act is used in a manner in which you are suggesting then they could actually create a monopoly rather than prevent one

    12. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The problem is if you do a deal with content producers ( or make your own ) and factor a price that will recoup that cost with a modest profit ( and remember your end price has to compete with other options ). What happens when the device provider wants 30% of cost? If your profit margin was 50 cents on and $2 end user cost - and Apple takes 30% of $2 (60 cents). You are now PAYING Apple to let your consumer watch content. It doesn't work.

      Frankly it makes sense that Amazon would have problems with doing an IOS App the "regular app store way". If you cannot negotiate a better deal, such that you can actually make a profit instead of a loss - you'd have to be a moron to continue trying to sell those devices.

      % of in app purchase is just a massive barrier to entry in the services/content market. It only makes sense for a one-off cost, Angry birds, Office App etc.

      +++ to Amazon for this.

      And no - you can't call it a monopoly abuse. You can by metric ( or imperial ) sh*t tons of content from other sources, and can buy a google or apple device just about anywhere within 20 miles in the civilized world even forgetting online.

      Amazon does not want to support a business that is out right hostile to their own.

      Freedom. Murica. :-)

    13. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by slaker · · Score: 2

      Point of order: You can actually install Amazon App store apps through the Amazon (Store) app that IS available via Google Play. And yes I know that is a horrible sentence to parse. I think you do still have to have "third party sources" turned on for your Android device, but the Amazon App store is not 100% required.

      Apple doesn't offer access to its content for non-Apple set top boxes and it doesn't offer even an option of non-Apple hardware for much of anything, but people still eat Apple's shit with a smile on their face.

      I own most of the major STB devices aside from Apple's, but in my opinion the larger, not-Stick FireTV is the best of breed option. It works with services I'd actually want to use. It's responsive in its UI and can be used for light gaming. It's open enough to support non-Amazon apps if you're willing to sideload them. If Amazon wants to push its position in that market,I think I'm OK with that.

      If Google really wants to push the issue, killing Amazon's API key for Youtube access on FireTV devices would probably be a strong bargaining chip, but having used both Chromecast and Nexus Player as well as Google TV hardware, I think STB devices are still an afterthought and besides, there are still plenty of places to buy them.

      --
      -- I wanna decide who lives and who dies - Crow T. Robot, MST3K
    14. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

      I can't comment on Apple TV, but Chromecast is pretty much open, there's nothing stopping Amazon from writing an app to stream to Chromecast. I'm kinda bewildered to be honest they're blocking it.

      (For those who have experience: What is the situation with Apple TV? Is Apple open to any app provider, and do they allow app makers to use their own methods of funding, or do they demand a cut of any payments?)

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    15. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's complicated.

      If the app vendor sells a customer service, and or content, outside of their app, then they can display that content for free by their app.

      If the app vendor uses the apple API to conduct business, then the app vendor pays Apple a percentage.

    16. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by kqs · · Score: 3, Informative

      The amazon video app is only in the amazon app store, not the google play store. But as far as I know, this is amazon's choice. They want to encourage android users to install the amazon app store so they can sell apps to the users; their video app is a carrot.

      I recently tried to get the amazon video app. After 30 minutes of apps pointing at web pages pointing back at the same apps, I deleted the amazon app store and decided that I didn't need to watch amazon prime videos after all.

      This is a dick move by amazon, but it's well within their rights. If they want to try to prop up their video service by not selling competing products, no problem; both apple and google have online stores.

    17. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by KGIII · · Score: 2

      (IANAL)

      As near as I can tell, that's the only accurate statement in your entire post.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    18. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by Solandri · · Score: 1

      Nothing to do with end users or content producers and everything to do with locking in publishing monopolies.

      That's just one specific expression of a general problem. The general problem is vertical integration where you also sell or give away a product which competes. This results in less competition, restricted consumer choice, and higher prices. Other examples of this general problem are:

      • Microsoft bundling IE with Windows for free, thus choking off Netscape's main source of revenue when the browser market was just beginning, all so they could control this new method of disseminating information.
      • Google advertising/pushing their other products on their search engine.
      • Radio stations (ClearChannel) being in cahoots with various music studios to play only their music (payola).
      • Cable companies degrading Netflix service to make their pay per view service more desirable.
      • Cellular service providers locking "your" phone so it will only work with their service, or in Verizon's case refusing to activate phones which are compatible with their network but they don't want people using.
      • (old one) AT&T trying to block sales of third party phones which were plug compatible with their sockets, instead of having to rent an AT&T phone. The courts slapped them down for this one.
      • (not quite so old one) Microsoft refusing to release Office for Android or iOS, so they could use it as an incentive for people to switch to Windows Mobile.
      • Apple prohibiting Google from providing tools to help you transition to Android in the App Store.
      • Quickbooks and other accounting programs only allowing their payroll service to work with their software.

      Unfortunately, there are cases where vertical integration is helpful. (Samsung makes OLED displays which they use in their phones. They also sell the screens to other manufacturers, but they're not very popular so without vertical integration we probably wouldn't see any OLED phone displays.) So just outright banning vertical integration can lead to inefficiencies too. I've been trying to determine some rules or guidelines for predicting when vertical integration is helpful or harmful, but haven't found anything that seems to be universally true.

    19. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amazon may be free to produce their own apps on those respective platforms...

      But likely doesn't want to charge it's users a 30% tax on buying videos. In the platform in question's phone and tablet, it's video app can only play free / annual fee because it would force them to put a $100 video collection every where else at $130 on the app to make the same amount of profit.

      Amazon doesn't want to deal with the customers bitching about it, and telling them the real reason would get all their apps banned from the store. Guess which platform I'm referring to? ;)

    20. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by amRadioHed · · Score: 2

      I had the same experience with trying to try out Amazon Prime videos. I gave up before I got to watch a single video, and I didn't renew after my Amazon Prime trial ended because of video being not worth the effort. Mission accomplished, Amazon?

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    21. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by Kartu · · Score: 1

      Amazon is the biggest online retailer with market share bordering "monopolist" status.
      Amazon also markets its own streaming devices

      This move is very deep in "evil/misuse" territory.

      How on earth could it be OK that it is allowed to BAN competing streaming devices from its store?
      Imagine that Microsoft would refuse to allow browsers, besides IE to be installed on Microsoft Windows, because, say, they aren't compatible with Windows Media Player.

    22. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by Kartu · · Score: 1

      It hurts customers, if Amazon is using its dominant position in one market, to gain advantages in another market.
      Imagine Google banning amazon / amazon product related searches from their database.

    23. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by Chalnoth · · Score: 1

      They do, however, have very large market share for online sales.

    24. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by Chalnoth · · Score: 1

      Considering that Amazon already allows Prime users to stream content to iOS devices, clearly the in-app purchases aren't a limiting factor. Besides, they can just get around these fees entirely, if they so choose, by forcing users to purchase their subscriptions over the web instead of using in-app purchases. Some content providers allow users to use in-app purchases, but increase the prices to make up for the 30% fee.

    25. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It hurts customers, if Amazon is using its dominant position in one market, to gain advantages in another market.

      Again, how the fuck does it hurt them when they have numerous choices? This would hurt Amazon more than it would hurt customers because customers looking for Apple TV or Chromecast will not only look elsewhere for those items but they may drop Amazon like a bad habit. As a result they may reverse their decision on Apple TV and Chromecast.

      Imagine Google banning amazon / amazon product related searches from their database.

      This is a bit different as there are not many players that actually have a search engine of their own. That being said Google would still be well within their right to do so because Microsoft, Apple, et al can still make their own search engine rather than rely on Google for their search results. Plus Amazon has its own search engine for their online "mall." If I want something from Amazon I use Amazon, not Google. If I want something from Newegg.com I use Newegg.com, not Google. I mean who in their right mind use Google to search for an item in Amazon and for what reason?

    26. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing that's the reason then, Amazon doesn't want to give Apple a cut if someone browses their library via an app and decides to buy the video there, rather than use the website to buy it and then switch to the Apple TV for actual watching.

      I'd say both side's positions are wholly understandable under the circumstances.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    27. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by Altus · · Score: 1

      Amazon already makes a streaming video app for iOS so it doesn't seem to be an issue for them. This app does not support chrome cast (neither does the android app).

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    28. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by Unkyjar · · Score: 1

      Imagine if Apple didn't sell Amazon products in their Apple stores.

    29. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by petteyg359 · · Score: 1

      Imagine if you couldn't buy an Amazon Fire phone from Goole Play... Imagine if you couldn't buy an Asus laptop from Dell.com... Imagine if you couldn't buy Target's store brand of clothes at Walmart... Imagine if you couldn't buy Kroger's Simple Truth organics at H-E-B... Imagine if you couldn't buy Corsair power supplies from Antec.com... Oh, wait. You can't do any of those. There's no anti-trust here, you morons.

    30. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by Unkyjar · · Score: 1

      Apparently Poe's law is in full force today.

    31. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by nobuddy · · Score: 1

      https://play.google.com/store/... Amazon FireTv app
      https://play.google.com/store/... Amazon Music App

      google does carry the Amazon apps.

    32. Re: hey, CBS doesn't promote Fox, either by nobuddy · · Score: 1

      For years Prime was good. Entire old series, recent seasons of new series, and a buttload of movies.
      but then one day it all went away/ ld series only have a season or two and the rest are pay-to-play, movies are a paltry selection. I have had prime since the day it launched- i won't be renewing when it expires next month.

  18. Anybody know the answer by willworkforbeer · · Score: 1

    Is Amazon not on Apple TV because Apple refuses to allow it, or because Amazon won't develop the channel? I'm too tired to trust Google for answers, plus you guys are smart.

    --
    Pretending this is my office full of bitter coworkers..
    1. Re:Anybody know the answer by pushing-robot · · Score: 0

      Apple and Google demand a cut of revenues for purchases made via their devices, Amazon refuses, customers roll their eyes.

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
    2. Re:Anybody know the answer by willworkforbeer · · Score: 1

      Apple and Google demand a cut of revenues for purchases made via their devices, Amazon refuses, customers roll their eyes.

      I had never heard that angle, thanks. So it sounds like, in a way, Apple (and Google) shot first? Not that Bezos and Co are the good guys, there are none in this bunch.... but there's more to this than just Amazon deciding to drop some SKUs to be noncompetitive. And your point about the customers is a really good one.

      --
      Pretending this is my office full of bitter coworkers..
    3. Re:Anybody know the answer by Luthair · · Score: 1

      AFAIK Google allows 3rd party payment vendors thus Amazon could simply use its own account. Chromecast I believe is pretty much open to everyone?

    4. Re:Anybody know the answer by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      Chromecast I believe is pretty much open to everyone?

      The Chromecast SDK is completely open: https://developers.google.com/...

      Literally the only reason why Amazon is doing this is because they don't like competition for their own devices and services. It's the same reason why Apple Music does not support Chromecast, because Apple want people to use Airplay and Apple TV.

      --
      Eat the rich.
  19. time to create open market outside of amazon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What will they do next? Ban cell phone sales so their fire phone sells?
    This is one step too far, I do not care about chrome cast/apple tv. I care about fair market. If they play this way, I am switching all shopping away from them.

  20. Wonder which is against this by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    I have to wonder why it is that after all this time Apple does not have Amazon Prime...

    It wouldn't seem like Apple would care, Apple doesn't run a Netflix like service, it would just be another thing that would make AppleTV better.

    Amazon obviously wants people to adopt Prime more and a large vector for that happening would be AppleTV adoption.

    Both have substantial things to win, and very little to lose by Prime Video being on the AppleTV. So who is blocking what?

    I had a second thought about Prime not being on AppleTV though - Since Amazon can just do an app, I think they will be on AppleTV near launch.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Wonder which is against this by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 1

      I would ask why iTunes isn't an app on FireTV...

      I have stuff in my iTunes account that I don't watch/use because there is no app for it and we have FireTV already...

      I might be inclined to use it more if there was an option to do so.

    2. Re:Wonder which is against this by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Nobody expects Apple to play nice with other options it can afford to ignore. No one is surprised by this. They wouldn't have an iTunes client for Windows if Microsoft weren't beast of the desktop for the last 30 years.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    3. Re: Wonder which is against this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Windows wouldn't have iTunes except it was how the iPod was managed.

    4. Re:Wonder which is against this by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      There I can see Apple not wanting to write it.

      But Amazon has already shown it's perfectly happy to be on other devices - the PS4, Roku, etc. So it seems like they would also want to be on Apple TV.

      If Apple didn't want something like Prime Video on AppleTV, then why DO they have things like Netflix, Hulu, HBO on the Apple TV? I just can't see the reason why either side would be against the other in terms of Amazon Prime.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  21. Compatibility issues? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just come out and say it Amazon - you're abusing your retail market dominant position to stifle potential competition for your own shitty service.

    Any "compatibility issues" are entirely of Amazon's own making.

  22. Questionable decision by trollingaround · · Score: 1

    Other than being a bit on the unethical/immoral side, this decision is questionable for the benefit it will give to Amazon. Instead of trying to improve their products to make them better and more lucrative to competition, Amazon is trying to stop people buying competitive products through their store. This will not stop people who want to get Apple TV or Chromcast to get it. The only effect this decision has is to show their true face, and lose whatever faith people had in them. I don't see how the outcome will be good for them by this decision..

    1. Re:Questionable decision by serbanp · · Score: 1

      you really live up to your chosen handle!

    2. Re:Questionable decision by trollingaround · · Score: 1

      you really live up to your chosen handle!

      Ellaborate..? What was in my original post that annoyed you so much?

  23. Goodbye Amazon Prime by thrillseeker · · Score: 1

    I don't want their Fire devices just to watch a damn video stream. Compatibility issues my ass.

  24. It's anti-competitive behavior... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are other laws for this sort of shit.

    1. Re:It's anti-competitive behavior... by joh · · Score: 1

      One could argue that this isn't anti-competitive behaviour but competitive behaviour. Which does not mean I like it, mind you.

      Can you buy an Amazon Kindle in Apple stores? If not, is this "anti-competitive behaviour"? I would call it competitive behaviour.

  25. Dear consumers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Our Firestick sucks, nobody is buying and nobody wants it. So to encourage people to purchase our subpar piece of shit copy cat hardware that has few features, we decided to not sell the competition. Yes, we realize we are going to get sued and lose. We have not discussed this with anyone with a legal background. But then we guess that Google can just not list Amazon in any search performed by the billions of requests per day and then we will see a massive drop in revenue. The good news for all though, we will still remain UNPROFITABLE because we are built on a business model of loosing money on every single transaction, but if you do millions of them, you make up for that, right?

    Amazon, too big to fail (for now). They have 10 year shelf life left and will be completely different in 10 years if they still exist. No business, other than the USPS, or Airbus, can continually be unprofitable and stay in business. BTW, the USPS and Airbus have something very much in common... So unless the US government starts backing Amazon with money, it's not going to end well for them.

  26. Reviews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm going to go leave some bad reviews for the FireTV.

  27. The problem is actually Amazon's DRM system. by tlambert · · Score: 5, Informative

    The problem is actually Amazon's DRM system.

    Amazon Prime uses Adobe FlashAccess for it's DRM to prevent copying of rented and purchased content (forget that I could just hook up an LVDS emulator as my "LCD Display" and copy it all anyway).

    ChromeCast and Apple TV don't support FlashAccess because they don't support Flash.

    On the other hand, I have a friend who just bought a Samsung TV on clearance, and it's Amazon Prime video quit running because it started demanding that the Flash version be updated in the TV, which would be great, but it's an embedded system with no way to do that without updating the browser, and Samsung is somewhat notorious for not updating hardware once it's been sold.

    Mostly because it would cost them their ability to write firmware for a new television set, were they to take their television team, and put them on updating an older product that they're not even manufacturing any more, and that won't get them into the consumer's wallets anyway, unless they started charing about half the cost of a new TV for the firmware updates.

    Amazon needs to drop their proprietary system, or insist that Adobe (1) quit changing their DRM implementation, or (2) provide the updates as plugins that *can* be downloaded to any TV, based on the fact that they are running ARM processors. #2 is problematic, since a port of Chrome is the browser used on most of these (the source code costs Samsung nothing), and Chrome quit supporting non-sandboxed third party plugins not purchased through the Chrome App store and/or Google Play.

    So Amazon is pretty screwed here.

    1. Re:The problem is actually Amazon's DRM system. by heezer7 · · Score: 1

      My LG tv was just removed from the approved list last month. They offered me 1/2 price on their stupid sticks. I don't want yet another device when I already have a chromecast.

    2. Re:The problem is actually Amazon's DRM system. by nnull · · Score: 1

      It's also the reason why Amazon Prime video runs like absolute crap compared to the others.

    3. Re:The problem is actually Amazon's DRM system. by LeonPierre · · Score: 2

      So you're saying that my Roku is running Flash?

      --
      "If it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet"
    4. Re:The problem is actually Amazon's DRM system. by tlambert · · Score: 2

      So you're saying that my Roku is running Flash?

      No, the Roku is using the Adobe Primetime Player SDK, which is capable of content playback as well. It will do HLS streaming playback, but not FLV.

      You can read Adobe's take on it here:

      https://www.overdigital.com/20...

      The SDK can be read about here:

      http://www.adobe.com/solutions...

      You must license it, and it generally only comes in binary form for runtime linking. This allows you to ship a GPL'ed product, but Adobe then does not have to GPL the library for the player SDK.

      Again, it's only for HLS content. Earlier versions of the Android player, as indicated in the first link above, would do bot HLS and FLV, since they used the Clank (Chrome on Android) Flash implementation, and FlashAccess built-in plugin from Chrome builds, which were later redacted when Flash support was removed.

      Adobe is a teensy bit angry over people stopping "unimportant content in occluded tabs" in Chrome, and now Safari.

    5. Re:The problem is actually Amazon's DRM system. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amazon video uses flash on Windows. But the Android app plays videos just fine without flash. The issue is that they want to force you to pick the fire stick over the chromecast. It is just like how for the longest time you could play videos on the fire tablet and phone but not the regular android versions because amazon wouldn't release the app. Now the amazon phone app plays videos, but they still don't allow tablets to. Which is why I loaded the phone app onto my tablet, and just cast the whole screen to my chromecast, it works great.

    6. Re:The problem is actually Amazon's DRM system. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does my PS3 have the same thing? I just use it for Netflix and Amazon Prime these days.

  28. They must be terribly afraid by multi+io · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So Amazon is jeopardising their own reputation as the one-stop online shop where you can buy any popular goods and items in existence -- just because they want to sell more of their own video streaming gadget? They must be terrified of their competitors.

    1. Re:They must be terribly afraid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's more that they'd rather risk irrelevance for a chance to be the next iPod/iTunes de facto media monopoly. Competing in that market is tough. Monopolizing it is where the real money is. Look at Apple, they make money off hardware but it's media that made them a gigantic megacorp with more money than the know what to do with. Similar to Microsoft. Microsoft has had one misstep after another for the last 20 years, but no one is worried they're going to go out of business.

  29. On what basis? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is amusing that Amazon would claim that these devices are not compatible.

    Amazon Prime is not compatible. With just about anything.

    Is Amazon going to quit selling all Android devices? All iPhones? iPads?

    I can't watch Prime on my tablet or my PC. That's Amazon's fault.

    If that's the criteria, Amazon better quit selling... well... just about everything. Smart TVs. Dumb TVs. Laptops. Desktops. Kindles. Books. Musical instruments. Windshield wipers. Smoke detectors...

  30. Hilarious, and possibly anti-competitive... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I find it funny that a service that totes itself as a place to sell almost anything, would ban the sale of several devices which clearly violate nothing except that they 'compete' with a service that Amazon is offering as well.

    Well done Amazon, well done.

    You might as well ban all the other Apple and Google devices you sell as well.

    Whoever made this decision is a COMPLETE idiot and just did the Amazon brand some serious harm.

  31. Try it. by ledow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I watch Amazon Instant Video, using Chrome, pushed across a ChromeCast to my TV.

    When Chrome brought out the new ChromeCast, I bought one immediately just to get the 5GHz version, if nothing else (my 5GHz channels are dead, but the 2.4Ghz are jam-packed).

    Fuck that up for me, Amazon, and I will just cancel the Prime subscription and not trust any software or online service from you again. I won't stop buying physical products, but you can forget all the add-on shit. No way I'm having my video library (which is 50% Amazon, 50% Google Play at the moment) tied into a format that I am denied playing how I like even though there is NO TECHNICAL BARRIER as far as I'm concerned. It works today, it should work tomorrow. If it doesn't, I'll reconsider how I use your service.

    P.S. Why you'd buy a ChromeCast from Amazon anyway, I can't fathom. Bought from the Google website yesterday, have a delivery waiting for me at the post office today - not bad given that everyone was buying them. Same experience when I bought a Nexus for my daughter. Amazon is great, but you don't buy everything from Amazon just because it's convenient. It still has to be a good deal that you can't get elsewhere.

    1. Re:Try it. by iampiti · · Score: 1

      Now that computers (all kinds, including smartphones) are very powerful, it's sad that most times you can't have software/media X on platform/device Y is not because of technical limitations, it's politics/marketing/money.

  32. Why blame amazon? by PraiseBob · · Score: 1

    Amazon sells hundreds of other media playing devices that offer streaming video that directly competes with their hardware, and those devices play streams that directly compete with their service. I think customer confusion is indeed accurate, because I've been considering purchasing a streaming media player to show primarily Amazon Prime video & Netflix. Until reading this article, Chromecast and Appletv were near the top of my list, and I would've been really irritated if I had purchased and they didn't play Amazon video. I would then return the device, which costs Amazon money, and results in a poor customer experience. Nearly every other media device supports Amazon video, so it seems to me that Google and Apple are the ones who are choosing not to support a competitor.

    1. Re:Why blame amazon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I stream amazon from my nexus 7 to my chromecast on a regular basis. There are a few minor work arounds required and it is very stupid that amazon actively tries to prevent me from buying their services.

      Here is what I did:

      I installed the phone version of the amazon video app on my tablet. You have to load the phone version because amazon has decided that people don't watch videos on tablets, only phones.

      Then when I want to watch a video I just cast the entire screen. The main drawback to this is that the video also displays on my tablet screen and it eats the battery quickly. But I keep my tablet plugged in on the coffee table anyway because it is basically my media center and I have a case with a cover that folds over the screen so I can't see it on the tablet.

    2. Re:Why blame amazon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it results in a poor customer experience, then maybe Amazon should write better apps for those devices instead of yanking them from the shelves.
      As others have already pointed out, the Amazon app isn't even on the Google Play Store, it's almost like they don't want people to use their service on other hardware.

      Sorry Amazon, but I'm not gonna go and buy yet another HDMI stick or STB just to play your content. I can live without it, there's plenty of other options out there, so thank you for pushing me towards those instead of your service.

  33. Anti-Trust by SJ · · Score: 2

    I'm sure the DOJ will be filing suit against Apple for this very shortly.

  34. The Sky Is Falling! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OMG! Where am I going to buy my Google Chromecast now??

  35. iOS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    iOS doesn't support Flash either and yet my family watches Amazon Prime on our iPhones and iPad just fine. Amazon may have their reasons for not supporting competitors (some perhaps not so savory with regard to competition), but lack of Flash isn't one of them.

  36. Amazon slime. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they had something better I would buy it.
    35. chromecast is the best product I ever bought cant wait to buy the two new ones.
    But I am cheap xmas sale I wait for.

    1. Re:Amazon slime. by PortHaven · · Score: 1

      Amazon Firestick is a lot nicer than my Chromecast in many ways. Sadly, my kids lost my remote.

  37. Losing Amazon Prime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    no great loss. Netflix is so much better. I subscribe, but for the shipping. and as I order less and less from Amazon that may go also.

  38. Amazon appps incompatible with app stores by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In other news, Apple and Google have removed all Amazon apps from their online stores after it was determined that Amazon was a lying asshole and their apps were actually only compatible with devices located in Uranus. Apple and Google also cited their insurance companies who stated that Amazon's products are a known fire hazard.

  39. Let he who is without sin... by khelms · · Score: 0

    I find this amusing since it appears on the same page as an article about Apple banning an app publisher because the app gave users instructions on how to repair Apple devies. Naturally Apple makes more money if they get paid to do the repairs or if users just toss the broken device and buy a new one. It's the same principle as Amazon makes more money if they only sell devices that can connect to their for-pay Prime streaming.

    1. Re:Let he who is without sin... by tw2k · · Score: 1

      I think you totally failed to comprehend the article to which you refer. The site and app has existed for ages without any issues from Apple. The issue was that they used their developer account to enter a lottery to get a pre-release developer AppleTV so they could begin coding apps (the app now removed even!) for that as yet-unreleased platform. In entering the lottery they agreed to not disclose any details about the software or hardware they would get. They violated that agreement and their account was closed, which means their app is not currently available. Not the same, at all.

  40. Not the First Case of This by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remember when Apple decided to pull all of Fitbit's devices from their stores?

  41. Hatorade Distortion Effect by Uberbah · · Score: 1

    Apple banning an app publisher because the app gave users instructions on how to repair Apple devies.

    NDA? What NDA!!!

    1. Re: Hatorade Distortion Effect by PortHaven · · Score: 1

      No NDA...

      This video entails a company that bought an Apple TV. Then took it apart, and put it back together. So that they could show how to repair it. No NDA involved at all.

    2. Re: Hatorade Distortion Effect by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      No NDA.

      Yeah. There was.

      This video entails a company that bought an Apple TV.

      No. They didn't. This Apple TV is not yet for sale.

      Then took it apart, and put it back together. So that they could show how to repair it.

      No. They didn't. They took it apart so they could grab a story before the rest of the press, but violated the developer's NDA in the process, hence their membership in the developer program getting revoked, hence the app getting pulled from the Apple Store.

      Hatebois have the right to their own opinions, but they don't have the right to their own set of facts. That, and to pretend Apple suddenly had a problem with iFixit taking apart an Apple product, after they've posted hundreds of guides on how to take apart Apple products, is just fucking stupid. If iFixit had waited until they could buy a model online or at retail, there would have been no issue.

      Pull your heads out of the Hatorade, Hatebois.

  42. Tit for Tat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) Google and Amazon drop the Amazon Shopping App from their respective App Stores
    2) Chrome and Safari redirect requests for amazon.com to android.com and apple.com, respectively.
    3) Google ejects all amazon.com search results from their search index.

    Not saying any of these would actually happen, but it sure would be fun to watch.

  43. Who Did Who by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like a Patent Infringement Suite is brewing.

    "Boil Boil Toil and Trouble"

    Ha ha (y) :-D Weeeeeeeee Oh Oh Oh Auk Auk Auk.

    And the Money Fairies Danced In Their Heads.

    $$$$

  44. Stupid Amazon by RubberDogBone · · Score: 1

    They don't want to support Chromecast and Apple TV because they are competitors to the Fire TV (except, they aren't really) and then they have the balls to outright lie about why, even when everybody knows damn well what they are doing.

    I'm henceforth going to throw the Amazon apps off my Android phone and when my Prime sub comes up for renewal, I'll bury that sucker and let it rot.

    Amazon's job in this world should be to provide a place to buy almost anything without regard to bullshit pissing matches like this. But it does seem like pissing is what they spend a lot of time doing AT Amazon. Someday somebody new will come along and take that company down a few notches just as Amazon took down so many others. Nothing lasts forever, especially when you act like a bully.

    Anyway, this is all moot anyway. For MY needs, the Fire TV, chromecast and Apple TV all FAIL to deliver the content I want. Roku does have it, so guess which box I own? Hint: it's not the Fire. I've never like iTunes so none of my content is in it, and so, I have no use at all for an Apple TV. It's irrelevant to me. Chromecast, meh ok but still doesn't do what the Roku does. None of them do. It's that simple and there isn't even a war or battle or choice. There's one choice and wow it works fine so not like a choice of one is a problem.

    Amazon I think wastes too damn much of their energy on doing what everyone else is doing mainly because they want to be me-too players. But it's a lot of ego and flops like the stupid Fire phone and only an occasional hit like the Kindle and Echo. Amazon does e-tailing better than anyone and warehouse logistics and robots like very few. If they stuck only to those things, they'd be doing just fine.

    --
    Sig for hire.
  45. How is this a surprise? by proca · · Score: 1

    I'm surprised Amazon was selling those in the first place. You can just buy them from the company's websites. If I was Amazon, I would sell them either.

  46. So? by jcr · · Score: 1

    Amazon can decide what they will and will not offer to the public. Why is this even news?

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  47. Anti-Trust? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't this blatantly against anti-trust laws?

    1. Re:Anti-Trust? by PortHaven · · Score: 1

      No, nothing requires Amazon to sell a competitors device. That would be like requiring Verizon to sell AT&T phones and contracts.

  48. Odd...Netflix runs on Amazon by PortHaven · · Score: 1

    This seems odd. Netflix runs on Amazon. They're Amazon Prime's biggest competition. AppleTV/ChromeCast are streaming devices.

    Here is what I am thinking. Perhaps the new ChromeCast and AppleTV don't provide Amazon Prime streaming, or have not worked out an agreement for it. And Amazon is actually refusing to sell any streaming device that won't stream it's own Prime service.

    I wager, this does NOT mean you won't be able to buy those items via Amazon's 3rd party sellers and fulfillment. Just that Amazon.com won't sell them directly.

    1. Re:Odd...Netflix runs on Amazon by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      google and apple demand a cut of in app purchases, and so they want a portion of what customers pay to amazon to stream amazon's content from amazon's systems.

      amazon isn't feuding with netflix because netflix isn't trying to extort them.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    2. Re:Odd...Netflix runs on Amazon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amazon just bought the company Netflix was working with to build their own video cloud.(http://www.fierceonlinevideo.com/story/amazon-web-services-snaps-multiscreen-service-provider-elemental-technologi/2015-09-03).
      Bezo's is gunning for Netflix and everyone else. This is the beginning of naked competition for OTT services. Google and Comcast should be very very afraid.

  49. NOT ANTITRUST AT ALL by PortHaven · · Score: 2

    Man, do you guys NOT understand anti-trust laws at all.

    There is NOTHING that mandates a retailer must sell a competitors product. How in the world would that be an anti-trust law. If so, does Verizon have to sell AT&T phones and contracts? Are Ford dealers required to sell Chevy's?

    Goodness gracious the stupidity on Slashdot is enormous today. They're not even trolls, they're more like ignorant orcs.

    1. Re:NOT ANTITRUST AT ALL by Luthair · · Score: 1

      Actually it sounds like you're the one that doesn't understand anti-trust laws.

      One of the restriction of anti-trust law is that a company with a monopoly in one market, from abusing its power to enter another market. If Amazon is considered to have an effective monopoly in online retail (and for most people, it probably does), then this might be argued as using its dominance in online sales to compete in the streaming market.

    2. Re:NOT ANTITRUST AT ALL by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      If Amazon is found to have a sufficiently dominant position in selling things, or perhaps in selling things online (and Amazon has been working very hard to get that position), it is illegal to use that position to anti-competitively promote other products. Google has gotten into trouble by pushing its services too hard in its search engine, and that's comparable.

      In your examples, everybody's operating in the same business. Verizon and AT&T are both trying to sell phones and contracts. Ford and Chevrolet are both trying to sell cars. Amazon, however, is using its position in one business to promote its products in another line of business, and that's a real problem. The devices are not competitor's products with respect to the Amazon business of selling things on-line.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  50. Guess I'll start using Jet by ninerdelta · · Score: 1

    Jet looks cool, prices are a little higher, but they would still have all the products I want. I really only use Amazon for the 2-day shipping and you can definitely get that in other places.