Apple Renames 'Apple TV+' to 'Apple TV'
48 comments
·October 13, 2025teovall
CharlesW
> There's already an Apple TV device and an Apple TV app.
This telegraphs that (1) Apple's priority is the service above all else, and (2) that they're about to rebrand their flagship device which supports the service. We'll know very soon, since the updated device is imminent.
zamadatix
It's been a PITA enough searching for Apple TV to only have hits about Apple TV come up for years now. I really hope it's all part of some master plan now coming together, as you say, but I feel like it's just as likely they want to keep the naming "simple" as they have in the past on this regard and that's just the way things are going to stay.
laborcontract
or perhaps it means that they plan to expand their TV offering so as to merit being something more than just a "plus"
i don't know if i like the rebranding or not – it's such a minor thing that idk if it even warrants an opinion. But they should now be obliged to next rebrand Apple Carplay to Apple Car.
CharlesW
> or perhaps it means that they plan to expand their TV offering so as to merit being something more than just a "plus"
That's an interesting point. One potential reason to simplify the service's base name is to allow for segmentation, e.g. Apple TV Ultra.
I think there's a reasonable possibility that they'll introduce a <$100 device in an effort to 10X their living room user base, in which case we might see something like an Apple Theater Pro and an Apple Theater mini.
brookst
I think you're right that this is a partial story. I hope so at least.
jakereps
The article itself even shows just how confusing it is:
> Apple TV is available on the Apple TV app in over 100 countries and regions, on over 1 billion screens, including iPhone, iPad, Apple TV, Apple Vision Pro ...
How did anyone think "this is fine" in a proofread here when coming up with this rebranding?
tw600040
//Apple TV is available on the Apple TV app
What's confusing about this?
Netflix is available on Netflix App. HBO is available on HBO app. Normal people don't care.
It's perfectly normal for Netflix the company to run Netflix the service on Netflix the app on Netflix device if they release one. It's not confusing at all. What would be confusing is if they all had different names.
II2II
The only time I can see this being confusing is when referring to the Apple TV box by the same name, and even that can usually be figured out by context.
andybak
Except you'd never say that. You'd say "The Netflix app is available on [...]"
Because the app is the service. Which isn't the case with Apple TV hence the potential confusion.
gbil
This gives me Apple Aladeen[1]vibes /s
teeray
There's so many apple varieties they could have chosen too. Honeycrisp comes to mind. They even did this already with Macintosh!
raphaelcosta
> *Apple TV* is available on the *Apple TV* app in over 100 countries and regions, on over 1 billion screens, including iPhone, iPad, *Apple TV*...
elicash
It wouldn't surprise me if the device gets a new name in the upcoming Apple event.
Like it becomes rebranded as a type of HomePod. Or something like Apple TV Hub.
To me, this is a signal they are moving away from the app's attempt at trying to be where folks go for ALL the streaming apps. It's more a recognition that MOST (not all) people prefer to go to Netflix for Netflix content, for Disney+ for Disney content, etc. They weren't able to pull off being a competitor and also the neutral place for everything, which is maybe good. I'm expecting a redesign.
CobrastanJorji
"Apple TV is available on Apple TV" suggests that Google's naming guy must've left for Apple.
sunaookami
yo dawg, I heard you like Apple TV...
crazygringo
It does sound dumb.
On the other hand, it's generally crystal-clear from context whether you're talking about the susbscription service, hardware device, or app.
It honestly seems less confusing than trying to remember which one has the '+' and which one doesn't. I don't mind it.
The real question now is, will Disney+, Paramount+, ESPN+, etc. follow suit? It always was a weird way to identify streaming.
micromacrofoot
not that bad really, you either have an Apple TV subscription or you don't... the dedicated device likely won't be around much longer anyway
zoeysmithe
Honestly, Jony Ive/Steve Jobs minimalism is as much as a bust as it is a boon. It sort of becomes this unquestionable corporate religion and corporate terror.
Imagine being able to speak this truth to power at Apple. I imagine its just easier to let everyone do the weird minimalist thing, make confusing names like this, and let support handle the angry and confused phone calls. The C-suite keeps the "Of course we kept true to Steven's vision," PR thing, but imho, the product suffers.
I really would love it if Apple went more towards the middle, at least on naming products. What Macbook do you have? Who knows! Even putting the model number on it seems like an affront to this aesthetic and people have to literally either squint or zoom in using their phone's camera to be able to read the tiny text printed on these devices.
It sometimes feels like Apple went from minimalism inspired industry leader to a weird cargo cult-esque over-correction.
PedroBatista
Big Tim has been killing it lately, and by killing it I mean being the Brian Krzanich of Apple.
The jury is still out if Apple TV will ever make a significant profit. Tim had a dream.. an expensive one but Apple was and is swimming in cash and running out of people to sell an iPhone. I get the "being a media & services company" hustle, selling overpriced hardware can only get you that far, but burning so much money on actors and production to get some -> limited <- catalog of good movies and shows, I don't get it. "Media" is actually a very though business.
qgin
Apple Music
Apple TV
Makes sense to me. The plus just gave it a vibe of being "bonus content" or something extra, which is a weird thing to emphasize.
t1234s
I wish Apple TV (the box) would let you uninstall Apple TV (the app)
sharts
Who are these people that come up with these ideas? And who are the people that encourage it or don’t provide some semblance of constructive criticism?
zuInnp
After Atlassian renaming products to apps (and anything else to "work"), I thought it cannot become worse this year. I was wrong.
Apple TV+ was already confusing enought ... "No you don't need an Apple TV, it is just a name" ...
0x457
Hmm, I never referred to it as Apple TV+. I wouldn't say it's any more or less confusing now.
amelius
Let me guess, I cannot watch this on my Android devices.
Smells like Nespresso selling machines that only accept Nespresso cups.
My personal advice: stay the hell away from this because it can and will only get worse.
sjm-lbm
just FYI you can watch on your Android device now. It took them a long time (seriously, I think more than four years after AppleTV+ launched), but they did finally release an Android app.
ano-ther
The header still says "Apple TV+ Press".
If they rename it to the same as their device and app, it will be a bit like calling everything Copilot 365.
sehugg
Hopefully the "+" is the thing causing the periodic skipping when I stream music via AirPlay from my Mac's SSD to my TV.
The-Bus
The PR site as well as the main site refer to it as Apple TV+, so not sure where the renaming announcement is. But it's un-Apple to have the + missing on the press release for F1...
Kwpolska
Last paragraph above the about blurb:
> Apple TV+ is now simply Apple TV, with a vibrant new identity. Ahead of its global streaming debut on Apple TV, the film continues to be available for purchase on participating digital platforms, including the Apple TV app, Amazon Prime Video, Fandango at Home and more.
Apple TV+ needed to be renamed but they went with the absolute worst option.
There's already an Apple TV device and an Apple TV app. Neither of which are required for using Apple TV+ and both of which have functionality other than using Apple TV+.
Some people think that Apple TV+ requires an Apple device to use it and just dismiss it as an option. Apple should have come up with a new brand without Apple in the name. That would broaden their potential market and get their foot in the door with people who don't own any Apple products.