streaming – Page 3

Breaking down why Apple TVs are privacy advocates’ go-to streaming device

ads, Apple, Apple TV, Apple TV Plus, Features, privacy, streaming, Tech, TVs / Kris Guyer / June 1, 2025

Using the Apple TV app or an Apple account means giving Apple more data, though.

Credit: Aurich Lawson | Getty Images

Every time I write an article about the escalating advertising and tracking on today’s TVs, someone brings up Apple TV boxes. Among smart TVs, streaming sticks, and other streaming devices, Apple TVs are largely viewed as a safe haven.

“Just disconnect your TV from the Internet and use an Apple TV box.”

That’s the common guidance you’ll hear from Ars readers for those seeking the joys of streaming without giving up too much privacy. Based on our research and the experts we’ve consulted, that advice is pretty solid, as Apple TVs offer significantly more privacy than other streaming hardware providers.

But how private are Apple TV boxes, really? Apple TVs don’t use automatic content recognition (ACR, a user-tracking technology leveraged by nearly all smart TVs and streaming devices), but could that change? And what about the software that Apple TV users do use—could those apps provide information about you to advertisers or Apple?

In this article, we’ll delve into what makes the Apple TV’s privacy stand out and examine whether users should expect the limited ads and enhanced privacy to last forever.

Apple TV boxes limit tracking out of the box

One of the simplest ways Apple TVs ensure better privacy is through their setup process, during which you can disable Siri, location tracking, and sending analytics data to Apple. During setup, users also receive several opportunities to review Apple’s data and privacy policies. Also off by default is the boxes’ ability to send voice input data to Apple.

Most other streaming devices require users to navigate through pages of settings to disable similar tracking capabilities, which most people are unlikely to do. Apple’s approach creates a line of defense against snooping, even for those unaware of how invasive smart devices can be.

Apple TVs running tvOS 14.5 and later also make third-party app tracking more difficult by requiring such apps to request permission before they can track users.

“If you choose Ask App Not to Track, the app developer can’t access the system advertising identifier (IDFA), which is often used to track,” Apple says. “The app is also not permitted to track your activity using other information that identifies you or your device, like your email address.”

Users can access the Apple TV settings and disable the ability of third-party apps to ask permission for tracking. However, Apple could further enhance privacy by enabling this setting by default.

The Apple TV also lets users control which apps can access the set-top box’s Bluetooth functionality, photos, music, and HomeKit data (if applicable), and the remote’s microphone.

“Apple’s primary business model isn’t dependent on selling targeted ads, so it has somewhat less incentive to harvest and monetize incredible amounts of your data,” said RJ Cross, director of the consumer privacy program at the Public Interest Research Group (PIRG). “I personally trust them more with my data than other tech companies.”

What if you share analytics data?

If you allow your Apple TV to share analytics data with Apple or app developers, that data won’t be personally identifiable, Apple says. Any collected personal data is “not logged at all, removed from reports before they’re sent to Apple, or protected by techniques, such as differential privacy,” Apple says.

Differential privacy, which injects noise into collected data, is one of the most common methods used for anonymizing data. In support documentation (PDF), Apple details its use of differential privacy:

The first step we take is to privatize the information using local differential privacy on the user’s device. The purpose of privatization is to assure that Apple’s servers don’t receive clear data. Device identifiers are removed from the data, and it is transmitted to Apple over an encrypted channel. The Apple analysis system ingests the differentially private contributions, dropping IP addresses and other metadata. The final stage is aggregation, where the privatized records are processed to compute the relevant statistics, and the aggregate statistics are then shared with relevant Apple teams. Both the ingestion and aggregation stages are performed in a restricted access environment so even the privatized data isn’t broadly accessible to Apple employees.

What if you use an Apple account with your Apple TV?

Another factor to consider is Apple’s privacy policy regarding Apple accounts, formerly Apple IDs.

Apple support documentation says you “need” an Apple account to use an Apple TV, but you can use the hardware without one. Still, it’s common for people to log into Apple accounts on their Apple TV boxes because it makes it easier to link with other Apple products. Another reason someone might link an Apple TV box with an Apple account is to use the Apple TV app, a common way to stream on Apple TV boxes.

So what type of data does Apple harvest from Apple accounts? According to its privacy policy, the company gathers usage data, such as “data about your activity on and use of” Apple offerings, including “app launches within our services…; browsing history; search history; [and] product interaction.”

Other types of data Apple may collect from Apple accounts include transaction information (Apple says this is “data about purchases of Apple products and services or transactions facilitated by Apple, including purchases on Apple platforms”), account information (“including email address, devices registered, account status, and age”), device information (including serial number and browser type), contact information (including physical address and phone number), and payment information (including bank details). None of that is surprising considering the type of data needed to make an Apple account work.

Many Apple TV users can expect Apple to gather more data from their Apple account usage on other devices, such as iPhones or Macs. However, if you use the same Apple account across multiple devices, Apple recognizes that all the data it has collected from, for example, your iPhone activity, also applies to you as an Apple TV user.

A potential workaround could be maintaining multiple Apple accounts. With an Apple account solely dedicated to your Apple TV box and Apple TV hardware and software tracking disabled as much as possible, Apple would have minimal data to ascribe to you as an Apple TV owner. You can also use your Apple TV box without an Apple account, but then you won’t be able to use the Apple TV app, one of the device’s key features.

Data collection via the Apple TV app

You can download third-party apps like Netflix and Hulu onto an Apple TV box, but most TV and movie watching on Apple TV boxes likely occurs via the Apple TV app. The app is necessary for watching content on the Apple TV+ streaming service, but it also drives usage by providing access to the libraries of many (but not all) popular streaming apps in one location. So understanding the Apple TV app’s privacy policy is critical to evaluating how private Apple TV activity truly is.

As expected, some of the data the app gathers is necessary for the software to work. That includes, according to the app’s privacy policy, “information about your purchases, downloads, activity in the Apple TV app, the content you watch, and where you watch it in the Apple TV app and in connected apps on any of your supported devices.” That all makes sense for ensuring that the app remembers things like which episode of Severance you’re on across devices.

Apple collects other data, though, that isn’t necessary for functionality. It says it gathers data on things like the “features you use (for example, Continue Watching or Library),” content pages you view, how you interact with notifications, and approximate location information (that Apple says doesn’t identify users) to help improve the app.

Additionally, Apple tracks the terms you search for within the app, per its policy:

We use Apple TV search data to improve models that power Apple TV. For example, aggregate Apple TV search queries are used to fine-tune the Apple TV search model.

This data usage is less intrusive than that of other streaming devices, which might track your activity and then sell that data to third-party advertisers. But some people may be hesitant about having any of their activities tracked to benefit a multi-trillion-dollar conglomerate.

Data collected from the Apple TV app used for ads

By default, the Apple TV app also tracks “what you watch, your purchases, subscriptions, downloads, browsing, and other activities in the Apple TV app” to make personalized content recommendations. Content recommendations aren’t ads in the traditional sense but instead provide a way for Apple to push you toward products by analyzing data it has on you.

You can disable the Apple TV app’s personalized recommendations, but it’s a little harder than you might expect since you can’t do it through the app. Instead, you need to go to the Apple TV settings and then select Apps > TV > Use Play History > Off.

The most privacy-conscious users may wish that personalized recommendations were off by default. Darío Maestro, senior legal fellow at the nonprofit Surveillance Technology Oversight Project (STOP), noted to Ars that even though Apple TV users can opt out of personalized content recommendations, “many will not realize they can.”

Apple can also use data it gathers on you from the Apple TV app to serve traditional ads. If you allow your Apple TV box to track your location, the Apple TV app can also track your location. That data can “be used to serve geographically relevant ads,” according to the Apple TV app privacy policy. Location tracking, however, is off by default on Apple TV boxes.

Apple’s tvOS doesn’t have integrated ads. For comparison, some TV OSes, like Roku OS and LG’s webOS, show ads on the OS’s home screen and/or when showing screensavers.

But data gathered from the Apple TV app can still help Apple’s advertising efforts. This can happen if you allow personalized ads in other Apple apps serving targeted apps, such as Apple News, the App Store, or Stocks. In such cases, Apple may apply data gathered from the Apple TV app, “including information about the movies and TV shows you purchase from Apple, to serve ads in those apps that are more relevant to you,” the Apple TV app privacy policy says.

Apple also provides third-party advertisers and strategic partners with “non-personal data” gathered from the Apple TV app:

We provide some non-personal data to our advertisers and strategic partners that work with Apple to provide our products and services, help Apple market to customers, and sell ads on Apple’s behalf to display on the App Store and Apple News and Stocks.

Apple also shares non-personal data from the Apple TV with third parties, such as content owners, so they can pay royalties, gauge how much people are watching their shows or movies, “and improve their associated products and services,” Apple says.

Apple’s policy notes:

For example, we may share non-personal data about your transactions, viewing activity, and region, as well as aggregated user demographics[,] such as age group and gender (which may be inferred from information such as your name and salutation in your Apple Account), to Apple TV strategic partners, such as content owners, so that they can measure the performance of their creative work [and] meet royalty and accounting requirements.

When reached for comment, an Apple spokesperson told Ars that Apple TV users can clear their play history from the app.

All that said, the Apple TV app still shares far less data with third parties than other streaming apps. Netflix, for example, says it discloses some personal information to advertising companies “in order to select Advertisements shown on Netflix, to facilitate interaction with Advertisements, and to measure and improve effectiveness of Advertisements.”

Warner Bros. Discovery says it discloses information about Max viewers “with advertisers, ad agencies, ad networks and platforms, and other companies to provide advertising to you based on your interests.” And Disney+ users have Nielsen tracking on by default.

What if you use Siri?

You can easily deactivate Siri when setting up an Apple TV. But those who opt to keep the voice assistant and the ability to control Apple TV with their voice take somewhat of a privacy hit.

According to the privacy policy accessible in Apple TV boxes’ settings, Apple boxes automatically send all Siri requests to Apple’s servers. If you opt into using Siri data to “Improve Siri and Dictation,” Apple will store your audio data. If you opt out, audio data won’t be stored, but per the policy:

In all cases, transcripts of your interactions will be sent to Apple to process your requests and may be stored by Apple.

Apple TV boxes also send audio and transcriptions of dictation input to Apple servers for processing. Apple says it doesn’t store the audio but may store transcriptions of the audio.

If you opt to “Improve Siri and Dictation,” Apple says your history of voice requests isn’t tied to your Apple account or email. But Apple is vague about how long it may store data related to voice input performed with the Apple TV if you choose this option.

The policy states:

Your request history, which includes transcripts and any related request data, is associated with a random identifier for up to six months and is not tied to your Apple Account or email address. After six months, you request history is disassociated from the random identifier and may be retained for up to two years. Apple may use this data to develop and improve Siri, Dictation, Search, and limited other language processing functionality in Apple products …

Apple may also review a subset of the transcripts of your interactions and this … may be kept beyond two years for the ongoing improvements of products and services.

Apple promises not to use Siri and voice data to build marketing profiles or sell them to third parties, but it hasn’t always adhered to that commitment. In January, Apple agreed to pay $95 million to settle a class-action lawsuit accusing Siri of recording private conversations and sharing them with third parties for targeted ads. In 2019, contractors reported hearing private conversations and recorded sex via Siri-gathered audio.

Outside of Apple, we’ve seen voice request data used questionably, including in criminal trials and by corporate employees. Siri and dictation data also represent additional ways a person’s Apple TV usage might be unexpectedly analyzed to fuel Apple’s business.

Automatic content recognition

Apple TVs aren’t preloaded with automatic content recognition (ACR), an Apple spokesperson confirmed to Ars, another plus for privacy advocates. But ACR is software, so Apple could technically add it to Apple TV boxes via a software update at some point.

Sherman Li, the founder of Enswers, the company that first put ACR in Samsung TVs, confirmed to Ars that it’s technically possible for Apple to add ACR to already-purchased Apple boxes. Years ago, Enswers retroactively added ACR to other types of streaming hardware, including Samsung and LG smart TVs. (Enswers was acquired by Gracenote, which Nielsen now owns.)

In general, though, there are challenges to adding ACR to hardware that people already own, Li explained:

Everyone believes, in theory, you can add ACR anywhere you want at any time because it’s software, but because of the way [hardware is] architected… the interplay between the chipsets, like the SoCs, and the firmware is different in a lot of situations.

Li pointed to numerous variables that could prevent ACR from being retroactively added to any type of streaming hardware, “including access to video frame buffers, audio streams, networking connectivity, security protocols, OSes, and app interface communication layers, especially at different levels of the stack in these devices, depending on the implementation.”

Due to the complexity of Apple TV boxes, Li suspects it would be difficult to add ACR to already-purchased Apple TVs. It would likely be simpler for Apple to release a new box with ACR if it ever decided to go down that route.

If Apple were to add ACR to old or new Apple TV boxes, the devices would be far less private, and the move would be highly unpopular and eliminate one of the Apple TV’s biggest draws.

However, Apple reportedly has a growing interest in advertising to streaming subscribers. The Apple TV+ streaming service doesn’t currently show commercials, but the company is rumored to be exploring a potential ad tier. The suspicions stem from a reported meeting between Apple and the United Kingdom’s ratings body, Barb, to discuss how it might track ads on Apple TV+, according to a July report from The Telegraph.

Since 2023, Apple has also hired several prominent names in advertising, including a former head of advertising at NBCUniversal and a new head of video ad sales. Further, Apple TV+ is one of the few streaming services to remain ad-free, and it’s reported to be losing Apple $1 billion per year since its launch.

One day soon, Apple may have much more reason to care about advertising in streaming and being able to track the activities of people who use its streaming offerings. That has implications for Apple TV box users.

“The more Apple creeps into the targeted ads space, the less I’ll trust them to uphold their privacy promises. You can imagine Apple TV being a natural progression for selling ads,” PIRG’s Cross said.

Somewhat ironically, Apple has marketed its approach to privacy as a positive for advertisers.

“Apple’s commitment to privacy and personal relevancy builds trust amongst readers, driving a willingness to engage with content and ads alike,” Apple’s advertising guide for buying ads on Apple News and Stocks reads.

The most private streaming gadget

It remains technologically possible for Apple to introduce intrusive tracking or ads to Apple TV boxes, but for now, the streaming devices are more private than the vast majority of alternatives, save for dumb TVs (which are incredibly hard to find these days). And if Apple follows its own policies, much of the data it gathers should be kept in-house.

However, those with strong privacy concerns should be aware that Apple does track certain tvOS activities, especially those that happen through Apple accounts, voice interaction, or the Apple TV app. And while most of Apple’s streaming hardware and software settings prioritize privacy by default, some advocates believe there’s room for improvement.

For example, STOP’s Maestro said:

Unlike in the [European Union], where the upcoming Data Act will set clearer rules on transfers of data generated by smart devices, the US has no real legislation governing what happens with your data once it reaches Apple’s servers. Users are left with little way to verify those privacy promises.

Maestro suggested that Apple could address these concerns by making it easier for people to conduct security research on smart device software. “Allowing the development of alternative or modified software that can evaluate privacy settings could also increase user trust and better uphold Apple’s public commitment to privacy,” Maestro said.

There are ways to limit the amount of data that advertisers can get from your Apple TV. But if you use the Apple TV app, Apple can use your activity to help make business decisions—and therefore money.

As you might expect from a device that connects to the Internet and lets you stream shows and movies, Apple TV boxes aren’t totally incapable of tracking you. But they’re still the best recommendation for streaming users seeking hardware with more privacy and fewer ads.

Scharon is a Senior Technology Reporter at Ars Technica writing news, reviews, and analysis on consumer gadgets and services. She’s been reporting on technology for over 10 years, with bylines at Tom’s Hardware, Channelnomics, and CRN UK.

Breaking down why Apple TVs are privacy advocates’ go-to streaming device Read More »

Amazon Fire Sticks enable “billions of dollars” worth of streaming piracy

Amazon, Europe, Google, microsoft, piracy, sports, streaming, Tech / Tim Belzer / May 31, 2025

Amazon Fire Sticks are enabling “billions of dollars” worth of streaming piracy, according to a report today from Enders Analysis, a media, entertainment, and telecommunications research firm. Technologies from other media conglomerates, Microsoft, Google, and Facebook, are also enabling what the report’s authors deem an “industrial scale of theft.”

The report, “Video piracy: Big tech is clearly unwilling to address the problem,” focuses on the European market but highlights the global growth of piracy of streaming services as they increasingly acquire rights to live programs, like sporting events.

Per the BBC, the report points to the availability of multiple, simultaneous illegal streams for big events that draw tens of thousands of pirate viewers.

Enders’ report places some blame on Facebook for showing advertisements for access to illegal streams, as well as Google and Microsoft for the alleged “continued depreciation” of their digital rights management (DRM) systems, Widevine and PlayReady, respectively. Ars Technica reached out to Facebook, Google, and Microsoft for comment but didn’t receive a response before publication.

The report echoes complaints shared throughout the industry, including by the world’s largest European soccer streamer, DAZN. Streaming piracy is “almost a crisis for the sports rights industry,” DAZN’s head of global rights, Tom Burrows, said at The Financial Times’ Business of Football Summit in February. At the same event, Nick Herm, COO of Comcast-owned European telecommunication firm Sky Group, estimated that piracy was costing his company “hundreds of millions of dollars” in revenue. At the time, Enders co-founder Claire Enders said that the pirating of sporting events accounts for “about 50 percent of most markets.”

Jailbroken Fire Sticks

Friday’s Enders report named Fire Sticks as a significant contributor to streaming piracy, calling the hardware a “piracy enabler.”

Enders’ report pointed to security risks that pirate viewers face, including providing credit card information and email addresses to unknown entities, which can make people vulnerable to phishing and malware. However, reports of phishing and malware stemming from streaming piracy, which occurs through various methods besides a Fire TV Stick, seem to be rather limited.

Amazon Fire Sticks enable “billions of dollars” worth of streaming piracy Read More »

Amid rising prices, Disney+ and Hulu offer subscribers some freebies

Disney, Disney Plus, Hulu, streaming, Tech / Kris Guyer / May 30, 2025

With streaming providers frequently raising prices, subscribers often feel like they’re paying more for the same service—or a lesser version, depending on what’s available to watch that month. In a unique move, Disney is introducing a small, potential financial benefit to Disney+ and Hulu subscribers in the form of some third-party discounts, freebies, trials, and contests.

As of today, Disney+ subscribers can log into Disney’s Disney+ Perks website with their streaming credentials to get access to a revolving selection of discounts and freebies. When I logged in today, I was met with options for several free trials, including a six-month one to DoorDash’s premium subscription offering, a three-month trial to Clear+, and a two-month trial to Duolingo’s premium subscription.

Disney+ subscribers can also get discounts, including to Adidas’ online marketplaces and “select” Disney Resorts Collection hotels (if you stay at least two nights, with most availability occurring between June 29 and July 31). There are also some free virtual rewards for Disney-owned games and the ability to enter sweepstakes, like for going to the premiere of the movie Freakier Friday.

Disney, which announced in November 2023 that it would take full control of Hulu from Comcast, said that Hulu-only subscribers will also get a perks program, starting on June 2. Those perks will differ from those of Disney+ and initially include chances to win tickets to Lollapalooza, San Diego Comic-Con, and Jimmy Kimmel Live, unspecified “perks” from Microsoft, LG, and others, and chances “to win items from and inspired by Hulu” originals, like The Handmaid’s Tale.

Amid rising prices, Disney+ and Hulu offer subscribers some freebies Read More »

Netflix will show generative AI ads midway through streams in 2026

ads, AI, generative ai, netflix, streaming, Tech / Rejus Almole / May 15, 2025

Netflix is joining its streaming rivals in testing the amount and types of advertisements its subscribers are willing to endure for lower prices.

Today, at its second annual upfront to advertisers, the streaming leader announced that it has created interactive mid-roll ads and pause ads that incorporate generative AI. Subscribers can expect to start seeing the new types of ads in 2026, Media Play News reported.

“[Netflix] members pay as much attention to midroll ads as they do to the shows and movies themselves,” Amy Reinhard, president of advertising at Netflix, said, per the publication.

Netflix started testing pause ads in July 2024, per The Verge.

Netflix launched its ad subscription tier in November 2022. Today, it said that the tier has 94 million subscribers, compared to the 300 million total subscribers it claimed in January. The current number of ad subscribers represents a 34 percent increase from November. Half of new Netflix subscribers opt for the $8 per month option rather than ad-free subscriptions, which start at $18 per month, the company says.

Netflix will show generative AI ads midway through streams in 2026 Read More »

Roku tech, patents prove its potential for delivering “interruptive” ads

ads, Roku, streaming, Tech, TVs / Paul Patrick / April 25, 2025

Roku, owner of one of the most popular connected TV operating systems in the country, walks a fine line when it comes to advertising. Roku’s OS lives on low-priced smart TVs, streaming sticks, and projectors. To make up the losses from cheaply priced hardware, Roku is dependent on selling advertisements throughout its OS, including screensavers and its home screen.

That business model has pushed Roku to experiment with new ways of showing ads that test users’ tolerance. The company claims that it doesn’t want ads on its platform to be considered intrusive, but there are reasons to be skeptical about Roku’s pledge.

Non-“interruptive” ads

In an interview with The Verge this week, Jordan Rost, Roku’s head of ad marketing, emphasized that Roku tries to only deliver ads that don’t interrupt viewers.

“Advertisers want to be part of a good experience. They don’t want to be interruptive,” he told The Verge.

Rost noted that Roku is always testing new ad formats. Those tests include doing “all of our own A/B testing on the platform” and listening to customer feedback, he added.

“We’re constantly tweaking and trying to figure out what’s going to be helpful for the user experience,” Rost said.

For many streamers, however, ads and a better user experience are contradictory. In fact, for many, the simplest way to improve streaming is fewer ads and a more streamlined access to content. That’s why Apple TV boxes, which doesn’t have integrated ads and is good at combining content from multiple streaming subscriptions, is popular among Ars Technica staff and readers. An aversion to ads is also why millions pay extra for ad-free streaming subscriptions.

Roku tech, patents prove its potential for delivering “interruptive” ads Read More »

Man buys racetrack, ends up launching the Netflix of grassroots motorsports

streaming, Tech, youtube / Tim Belzer / April 23, 2025

FRDM+ is profitable, has its own smart TV apps. Subscriptions start at $20/month.

In 2019, Garrett Mitchell was already an Internet success. His YouTube channel, Cleetus McFarland, had over a million followers. If you perused the channel at that time, you would’ve found a range of grassroots motorsports videos with the type of vehicular shenanigans that earn truckloads of views. Some of those older videos include “BLEW BY A COP AT 120+mph! OOPS!,” “THERE’S A T-REX ON THE TRACK!,” and “Manual Transmission With Paddle Shifters!?!.”

Those videos made Mitchell, aka Cleetus McFarland, a known personality among automotive enthusiasts. But the YouTuber wanted more financial independence beyond the Google platform and firms willing to sponsor his channel.

“… after my YouTube was growing and some of my antics [were] getting videos de-monetized, I realized I needed a playground,” Mitchell told Ars Technica in an email.

Mitchell found a road toward new monetization opportunities through the DeSoto Super Speedway. The Bradenton, Florida, track had changed ownership multiple times since opening in the 1970s. The oval-shaped racetrack is three-eighths of a mile long with 12-degree banking angles.

BRADENTON, FL — Mid-1980s: Late Model racing action at DeSoto Speedway in the mid-1980s. Both the All-Pro Series and NASCAR All-American Challenge Series ran races at the track in 1985 and 1986. Credit: ISC Images & Archives via Getty Images

By 2018, the track had closed its doors and was going unused. DeSoto happened to be next to Mitchell’s favorite drag strip, giving the YouTuber the idea of turning it into a stadium where people could watch burnouts and other “massive, rowdy” ticketed events. Mitchell added:

So I sold everything I could, borrowed some money from my business manager, and went all in for [$]2.2 million.

But like the rest of the world, Mitchell hit the brakes on his 2020 plans during COVID-19 lockdowns. Soon after his purchase, Mitchell couldn’t use the track, renamed Freedom Factory, for large gatherings, forcing him to reconsider his plans.

“We had no other option but to entertain the people somehow. And with no other racing goin’ on anywhere, we bet big on making something happen. And it worked,” Mitchell said.

That “something” was a pay-per-view (PPV) event hosted from the Freedom Factory in April 2020. The event led to others and, eventually, Mitchell running his own subscription video on demand (SVOD) service, FRDM+, which originally launched as Cleetervision in 2022.

Today, a FRDM+ subscription costs $20 per month or $120 per year. A subscription provides access to an impressive library of automotive videos. Some are archived from Mitchell’s YouTube channel. Other, exclusive videos feature content such as interviews with motorsports influencers and members of Mitchell’s staff and crew, and outrageous motorsports stunts. You can watch videos from other influencers on FRDM+, and the business can also white-label its platform into other influencers’ websites, too.

“A race against time”

Before Mitchell could host his first PPV event, he had to prepare the speedway. Explaining the ordeal to Ars, he wrote:

We cleaned that place up best we could, but let’s be real, it was rough. Lights were out, weeds poppin’ up through the asphalt, the whole deal.

Pulling off the first PPV event at the Freedom Factory speedway was a “race against time,” Jonny Mill, who built FRDM+’s tech stack and serves as company president, told Ars.

“Florida implemented a statewide shutdown on the very day of our event,” he said.

Mitchell also struggled to get the right workers and equipment needed for the PPV. Flights weren’t available due to the pandemic, forcing Mill to produce the event from California using a cell phone group chat and “last-minute local crew,” per Mitchell. The ENG camera person was much shorter than Mitchell “and had to climb on whatever she could just to keep me in frame,” he recalled.

Mitchell said Freedom Factory’s first PPV event had 75,000 concurrent viewers, which caused his website and those of the event sponsors to crash.

“Our initial bandwidth provider laughed at our viewership projections, and, of course, we surpassed them in the first week of pre-sales,” Mill said. “They did apologize before asking for a much larger check.”

Other early obstacles included determining how to embed the livestream platform into Mitchell’s e-commerce site. The biggest challenge there was “juggling two separate logins, one for merch shopping and another for livestream PPV, all within the same site,” Mill explained.

“Now, our focus is on seamlessly guiding the YouTube audience over to FRDM+ for premium live events,” he added.

Live events are still the heart of FRDM+. The service had 21 livestreamed events scheduled throughout 2025, and more are expected to come.

Peeking under the hood

Today, bandwidth isn’t a problem for FRDM+, and navigating the streaming service doesn’t feel much different from something like Netflix. There are different “channels” (grouped together by related content or ongoing series) on top and new releases and upcoming content highlighted below. There are horizontal scrolling rows, and many titles have content summaries and/or trailers. The platform also has a support section with instructions for canceling subscriptions.

A screenshot of FRDM+ — Browsing FRDM+. Credit: FRDM+

Like with other SVOD services, subscribers can watch FRDM+ via a web browser or through a smart TV app. FRDM+ currently has apps for Apple TV, Fire OS, and Roku OS. Mitchell said the team’s constantly working on more connected TV apps, as well as adding features, “more interactivity,” and customers.

To keep the wheels spinning, FRDM+ leverages a diverse range of technologies, Mill explained:

At the core of our infrastructure, AWS bandwidth servers handle the heavy lifting, while Accedo powers the connected TV apps, bridging the gap between our tech stack and the audience. Brightcove serves as our primary video player partner, with additional backup systems in place to maintain reliability.

For a service like this, with live events, redundancy is critical, Mill said.

“At the Freedom Factory, we even beam air fiber from a house five miles away to ensure a reliable second Internet. We also have a hidden page on [the Cleetus McFarland website] to launch a backup stream if the primary one fails,” he said.

Today, FRDM+’s biggest challenge isn’t a technical one. Instead, it’s around managing the business’s different parts using a small team. FRDM+ has 35 full-time employees across its Shop, Race Track, Events, and Merch divisions and is “entirely self-funded,” per Mill. The company also relies on contractors for productions, but its core livestream team has six full-time employees.

Mitchell told Ars that FRDM+ is profitable, but he couldn’t get into specifics. He said the service has “strong year-over-year growth and a solid financial foundation that allows us to continue reinvesting in our team and services,” like a “robust technology stack, larger events, venue rentals, and even giving away helicopters and Lamborghinis as the prizes for our races.”

“Having been at Discovery during the launch of MotorTrend OnDemand, I’ve witnessed the power of substantial budgets firsthand,” Mill said. “Yet, [FRDM+ has] achieved greater success organically than [Discovery] did with their eight-figure marketing investment. This autonomy and efficiency are a testament to the strength of our approach.”

Any profitability for a 3-year-old streaming service is commendable. Due to wildly differing audiences, markets, costs, and scales, comparing FRDM+’s financials to the likes of Netflix and other mainstream streaming services is like comparing apples to oranges. But it’s interesting to consider that FRDM+ has achieved profitability faster than some of those services, like Peacock, which also launched in 2020, and Apple TV+, which debuted in 2019.

FRDM+ doesn’t share subscription numbers publicly, but Mitchell told Ars that the subscription service has a 93 percent retention. Mill attributed that number to a loyal, engaged community driven by direct communication with Mitchell.

Mill also suggested to Ars that FRDM+ has successfully converted over 5 percent of Mitchell’s YouTube audience. Five percent of Cleetus McFarland’s current YouTube base would be 212,500 people.

Man buys racetrack, ends up launching the Netflix of grassroots motorsports Read More »

Netflix plans to bring streaming into the $1 trillion club by 2030

ads, netflix, streaming, Tech / Tim Belzer / April 16, 2025

Netflix doesn’t plan to disclose subscriber counts anymore, but one of WSJ’s anonymous sources said that the streaming leader wants to have 410 million subscribers by 2030. That would require Netflix to add 108.4 million more subscribers than it reported at the end of 2024, or about 21.7 million per year, and expand its global reach. In 2024, Netflix added 41.36 million subscribers, including a record number of new subscribers in Q4 2024.

Netflix plans to release its Q1 2025 earnings report on April 17.

$1 trillion club hopeful

Should Netflix achieve its reported goals, it would be the first to join the $1 trillion club solely through streaming-related business. The club is currently populated mostly by tech brands, including two companies that own Netflix rivals: Apple and Amazon.

Netflix is, by far, the most likely streaming candidate to potentially enter the lucrative club. It’s currently beating all other video-streaming providers, including Amazon Prime Video and Disney+, in terms of revenue and profits. Some streaming businesses, including Apple TV+ and Peacock, still aren’t profitable yet.

Netflix’s reported striving for a $1 trillion market cap exemplifies the meteoric rise of streaming since Netflix launched its streaming service in 2007. As linear TV keeps shrinking, and streaming companies continue learning how to mimic the ads, live TV, and content strategies of their predecessors, the door is open for streaming firms to evolve into some of the world’s most highly valued media entities.

The potential for Netflix to have a trillion-dollar market cap also has notable implications for rivals Apple and Amazon, which both earned membership into the $1 trillion club without their streaming services.

Whether Netflix will reach the goals reported by WSJ is not guaranteed, but it will be interesting to watch how Netflix’s strategy for reaching that lofty goal affects subscribers. Further, with streaming set to be more central to the viewing of TV shows, movies, and live events by 2030, efforts around things like ads, pricing, and content libraries could impact media consumption as we head toward 2030.

Netflix plans to bring streaming into the $1 trillion club by 2030 Read More »

Turbulent global economy could drive up prices for Netflix and rivals

netflix, streaming, tariffs, Tech, united kingdom / Kris Guyer / April 12, 2025

“… our members are going to be punished.”

A scene from BBC’s Doctor Who. Credit: BBC/Disney+

Debate around how much taxes US-based streaming services should pay internationally, among other factors, could result in people paying more for subscriptions to services like Netflix and Disney+.

On April 10, the United Kingdom’s Culture, Media and Sport (CMS) Committee reignited calls for a streaming tax on subscription revenue acquired through UK residents. The recommendation came alongside the committee’s 120-page report [PDF] that makes numerous recommendations for how to support and grow Britain’s film and high-end television (HETV) industry.

For the US, the recommendation garnering the most attention is one calling for a 5 percent levy on UK subscriber revenue from streaming video on demand services, such as Netflix. That’s because if streaming services face higher taxes in the UK, costs could be passed onto consumers, resulting in more streaming price hikes. The CMS committee wants money from the levy to support HETV production in the UK and wrote in its report:

The industry should establish this fund on a voluntary basis; however, if it does not do so within 12 months, or if there is not full compliance, the Government should introduce a statutory levy.

Calls for a streaming tax in the UK come after 2024’s 25 percent decrease in spending for UK-produced high-end TV productions and 27 percent decline in productions overall, per the report. Companies like the BBC have said that they lack funds to keep making premium dramas.

In a statement, the CMS committee called for streamers, “such as Netflix, Amazon, Apple TV+, and Disney+, which benefit from the creativity of British producers, to put their money where their mouth is by committing to pay 5 percent of their UK subscriber revenue into a cultural fund to help finance drama with a specific interest to British audiences.” The committee’s report argues that public service broadcasters and independent movie producers are “at risk,” due to how the industry currently works. More investment into such programming would also benefit streaming companies by providing “a healthier supply of [public service broadcaster]-made shows that they can license for their platforms,” the report says.

The Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport has said that it will respond to the CMS Committee’s report.

Streaming companies warn of higher prices

In response to the report, a Netflix spokesperson said in a statement shared by the BBC yesterday that the “UK is Netflix’s biggest production hub outside of North America—and we want it to stay that way.” Netflix reportedly claims to have spent billions of pounds in the UK via work with over 200 producers and 30,000 cast and crew members since 2020, per The Hollywood Reporter. In May 2024, Benjamin King, Netflix’s senior director of UK and Ireland public policy, told the CMS committee that the streaming service spends “about $1.5 billion” annually on UK-made content.

Netflix’s statement this week, responding to the CMS Committee’s levy, added:

… in an increasingly competitive global market, it’s key to create a business environment that incentivises rather than penalises investment, risk taking, and success. Levies diminish competitiveness and penalise audiences who ultimately bear the increased costs.

Adam Minns, executive director for the UK’s Association for Commercial Broadcasters and On-Demand Services (COBA), highlighted how a UK streaming tax could impact streaming providers’ content budgets.

“Especially in this economic climate, a levy risks impacting existing content budgets for UK shows, jobs, and growth, along with raising costs for businesses,” he said, per the BBC.

An anonymous source that The Hollywood Reporter described as “close to the matter” said that “Netflix members have already paid the BBC license fee. A levy would be a double tax on them and us. It’s unfair. This is a tariff on success. And our members are going to be punished.”

The anonymous source added: “Ministers have already rejected the idea of a streaming levy. The creation of a Cultural Fund raises more questions than it answers. It also begs the question: Why should audiences who choose to pay for a service be then compelled to subsidize another service for which they have already paid through the license fee. Furthermore, what determines the criteria for ‘Britishness,’ which organizations would qualify for funding … ?”

In May, Mitchel Simmons, Paramount’s VP of EMEA public policy and government affairs, also questioned the benefits of a UK streaming tax when speaking to the CMS committee.

“Where we have seen levies in other jurisdictions on services, we then see inflation in the market. Local broadcasters, particularly in places such as Italy, have found that the prices have gone up because there has been a forced increase in spend and others have suffered as a consequence,” he said at the time.

Tax threat looms largely on streaming companies

Interest in the UK putting a levy on streaming services follows other countries recently pushing similar fees onto streaming providers.

Music streaming providers, like Spotify, for example, pay a 1.2 percent tax on streaming revenue made in France. Spotify blamed the tax for a 1.2 percent price hike in the country issued in May. France’s streaming taxes are supposed to go toward the Centre National de la Musique.

Last year, Canada issued a 5 percent tax on Canadian streaming revenue that’s been halted as companies including Netflix, Amazon, Apple, Disney, and Spotify battle it in court.

Lawrence Zhang, head of policy of the Centre for Canadian Innovation and Competitiveness at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation think tank, has estimated that a 5 percent streaming tax would result in the average Canadian family paying an extra CA$40 annually.

A streaming provider group called the Digital Media Association has argued that the Canadian tax “could lead to higher prices for Canadians and fewer content choices.”

“As a result, you may end up paying more for your favourite streaming services and have less control over what you can watch or listen to,” the Digital Media Association’s website says.

Streaming companies hold their breath

Uncertainty around US tariffs and their implications on the global economy have also resulted in streaming companies moving slower than expected regarding new entrants, technologies, mergers and acquisitions, and even business failures, Alan Wolk, co-founder and lead analyst at TVRev, pointed out today. “The rapid-fire nature of the executive orders coming from the White House” has a massive impact on the media industry, he said.

“Uncertainty means that deals don’t get considered, let alone completed,” Wolk mused, noting that the growing stability of the streaming industry overall also contributes to slowing market activity.

For consumers, higher prices for other goods and/or services could result in smaller budgets for spending on streaming subscriptions. Establishing and growing advertising businesses is already a priority for many US streaming providers. However, the realities of stingier customers who are less willing to buy multiple streaming subscriptions or opt for premium tiers or buy on-demand titles are poised to put more pressure on streaming firms’ advertising plans. Simultaneously, advertisers are facing pressures from tariffs, which could result in less money being allocated to streaming ads.

“With streaming platform operators increasingly turning to ad-supported tiers to bolster profitability—rather than just rolling out price increases—this strategy could be put at risk,” Matthew Bailey, senior principal analyst of advertising at Omdia, recently told Wired. He added:

Against this backdrop, I wouldn’t be surprised if we do see some price increases for some streaming services over the coming months.

Streaming service providers are likely to tighten their purse strings, too. As we’ve seen, this can result in price hikes and smaller or less daring content selection.

Streaming customers may soon be forced to reduce their subscriptions. The good news is that most streaming viewers are already accustomed to growing prices and have figured out which streaming services align with their needs around affordability, ease of use, content, and reliability. Customers may set higher standards, though, as streaming companies grapple with the industry and global changes.

Turbulent global economy could drive up prices for Netflix and rivals Read More »

Napster to become a music-marketing metaverse firm after being sold for $207M

acquisition, napster, streaming, Tech / Tim Belzer / March 26, 2025

Infinite Reality, a media, ecommerce, and marketing company focused on 3D and AI-powered experiences, has entered an agreement to acquired Napster. That means that the brand originally launched in 1999 as a peer-to-peer (P2P) music file-sharing service is set to be reborn again. This time, new owners are reshaping the brand into one focused on marketing musicians in the metaverse.

Infinite announced today a definitive agreement to buy Napster for $207 million. The Norwalk, Connecticut-based company plans to turn Napster into a “social music platform that prioritizes active fan engagement over passive listening, allowing artists to connect with, own, and monetize the relationship with their fans.” Jon Vlassopulos, who became Napster CEO in 2022, will continue with his role at the brand.

Since 2016, Napster has been operating as a (legal) streaming service. It claims to have over 110 million high-fidelity tracks, with some supporting lossless audio. Napster subscribers can also listen offline and watch music videos. The service currently starts at $11 per month.

Since 2022, Napster has been owned by Web3 and blockchain firms Hivemind and Algorand. Infinite also develops Web3 tech, and CEO John Acunto told CNBC that Algorand’s blockchain background was appealing, as was Napster’s licenses for streaming millions of songs.

To market musicians, Infinite has numerous ideas for helping Napster users interact more with the platform than they do with the current music streaming service. The company shared goals of using Napster to offer “branded 3D virtual spaces where fans can enjoy virtual concerts, social listening parties, and other immersive and community-based experiences” and more “gamification.” Infinite also wants musicians to use Napster as a platform where fans can purchase tickets for performances, physical and virtual merchandise, and “exclusive digital content.” The 6-year-old firm also plans to offer artists abilities to use “AI-powered customer service, sales, and community management agents” and “enhanced analytics dashboards to better understand fan behavior” with Napster.

Napster to become a music-marketing metaverse firm after being sold for $207M Read More »

Apple loses $1B a year on prestigious, minimally viewed Apple TV+: report

Apple, Apple TV Plus, streaming, Tech / Rejus Almole / March 21, 2025

The Apple TV+ streaming service “is losing more than $1 billion annually,” according to The Information today.

The report also claimed that Apple TV+’s subscriber count reached “around 45 million” in 2024, citing the two anonymous sources.

Ars reached out to Apple for comment on the accuracy of The Information’s report and will update you if we hear back.

Per one of the sources, Apple TV+ has typically spent over $5 billion annually on content since 2019, when Apple TV+ debuted. Last year, though, Apple CEO Tim Cook reportedly cut the budget by about $500 million. The reported numbers are similar to a July report from Bloomberg that claimed that Apple had spent over $20 billion on Apple TV+’s library. For comparison, Netflix has 301.63 million subscribers and expects to spend $18 billion on content in 2025.

In the year preceding Apple TV+’s debut, Apple services chief Eddy Cue reportedly pushed back on executive requests to be stingier with content spending, “a person with direct knowledge of the matter” told The Information.

But Cook started paying closer attention to Apple TV+’s spending after the 2022 Oscars, where the Apple TV+ original CODA won Best Picture. The award signaled the significance of Apple TV+ as a business.

Per The Information, spending related to Apple TV+ previously included lavish perks for actors and producers. Apple paid “hundreds of thousands of dollars per flight” to transport Apple TV+ actors and producers to promotional events, The Information said, noting that such spending “is common in Hollywood” but “more unusual at Apple.” Apple’s finance department reportedly pushed Apple TV+ executives to find better flight deals sometime around 2023.

In 2024, Cook questioned big-budget Apple TV+ films, like the $200 million Argylle, which he said failed to generate impressive subscriber boosts or viewership, per an anonymous “former Apple TV+ employee.” Cook reportedly cut about $500 million from the Apple TV+ content budget in 2024.

Apple loses $1B a year on prestigious, minimally viewed Apple TV+: report Read More »

“Awful”: Roku tests autoplaying ads loading before the home screen

ads, Roku, streaming, Tech, TVs / Tim Belzer / March 18, 2025

Owners of smart TVs and streaming sticks running Roku OS are already subject to video advertisements on the home screen. Now, Roku is testing what it might look like if it took things a step further and forced people to watch a video ad play before getting to the Roku OS home screen.

Reports of Roku customers seeing video ads automatically play before they could view the OS’ home screen started appearing online this week. A Reddit user, for example, posted yesterday: “I just turned on my Roku and got an … ad for a movie, before I got to the regular Roku home screen.” Multiple apparent users reported seeing an ad for the movie Moana 2. The ads have a close option, but some users appear to have not seen it.

When reached for comment, a Roku spokesperson shared a company statement that confirms that the autoplaying ads are expected behavior but not a permanent part of Roku OS currently. Instead, Roku claimed, it was just trying the ad capability out.

Roku’s representative said that Roku’s business “has and will always require continuous testing and innovation across design, navigation, content, and our first-rate advertising products,” adding:

Our recent test is just the latest example, as we explore new ways to showcase brands and programming while still providing a delightful and simple user experience.

Roku didn’t respond to requests for comment on whether it has plans to make autoplaying ads permanent on Roku OS, which devices are affected, why Roku decided to use autoplaying ads, or customer backlash.

“Awful”: Roku tests autoplaying ads loading before the home screen Read More »

Sonos’ streaming box is reportedly canceled. Good riddance.

ads, audio, Sonos, streaming, Tech, TVs / Mike M. / March 13, 2025

Opinion: The long-rumored Sonos streaming box wasn’t a good idea anyway.

Sonos has canceled plans to release a streaming box, The Verge reported today. The audio company never publicly confirmed that it was making a streaming set-top box, but rumors of its impending release have been floating around since November 2023. With everything that both Sonos and streaming users have going on right now, though, a Sonos-branded rival to the Apple TV 4K wasn’t a good idea anyway.

Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman was the first to report on Sonos’ purported streaming ambitions. He reported that Sonos’ device would be a black box that cost $150 to $200.

At first glance, it seemed like a reasonable idea. Sonos was facing increased competition for wireless speakers from big names like Apple and Bose. Meanwhile, Sonos speaker sales growth had slowed down, making portfolio diversification seem like a prudent way to protect business.

By 2025, however, the reported plans for Sonos’ streaming box sounded less reasonable and appealing, while the market for streaming devices had become significantly more competitive.

A saturated market

In February, The Verge, citing anonymous sources, reported that Sonos was now planning a streaming player that would “cost between $200 and $400.” That’s a lot to charge in a market where most people have already found their preferred platform. Those who want something cheap and don’t mind ads settle for something like Roku. People who hate ads opt for an Apple TV box. There are people who swear by their Fire Sticks and plenty who are happy with whatever operating system (OS) their smart TV arrives with. Sonos would have struggled to convince people who have successfully used some of those streaming devices for years that they suddenly need a new one that’s costlier than alternatives, including some smart TVs. In the US especially, the TV OS market is considered heavily saturated, presenting an uphill battle for newcomers.

Without Sonos ever confirming its streaming device, it’s hard to judge what the company would’ve offered to lure people to a new streaming platform. Perhaps the Sonos box could have worked better with Sonos devices than non-Sonos streaming devices. But vendor lock-in isn’t the best way to try to win new customers. That approach would also force Sonos to test if it’s accrued the type of customer loyalty as a company like Apple. Much of the goodwill needed for such customer loyalty was blatantly obliterated, though, during Sonos’ botched app update last year.

According to The Verge, Sonos’ box didn’t even have a standout appearance. The publication said that by February 2025, the box was “deep into development,” and “about as nondescript as streaming hardware gets.”

“Viewed from the top, the device is a flattened black square and slightly thicker than a deck of trading cards,” The Verge reported at the time, citing images it reviewed.

Among the most appealing planned features was unified content from various streaming apps, like Netflix and Max, with “universal search across streaming accounts.” With the growing number of streaming services required to watch all your favorite content, this would be a good way to attract streamers but not necessarily a unique one. The ability to offer a more unified streaming experience is already being tackled by various smart TV OSes, including Samsung Tizen and Amazon Fire OS, as well as the Apple TV app and sister streaming services, like Disney+ and Hulu.

A potentially ad-riddled OS

There’s reason to suspect that the software that Sonos’ streaming box would have come out with would’ve been ad-coddling, user-tracking garbage.

In January, Janko Roettgers reported that ad giant The Trade Desk was supplying Sonos with its “core smart TV OS and facilitating deals with app publishers,” while Sonos worked on the streaming box’s hardware and user interface. The Trade Desk makes one of the world’s biggest demand-side platforms and hasn’t made streaming software or hardware before.

Sonos opting for The Trade Desk’s OS would have represented a boastful commitment to advertisers. Among the features that The Trade Desk markets its TV OS as having are a “cleaner supply chain for streaming TV advertising” and “cross-platform content discovery,” something that Sonos was reportedly targeting for its streaming hardware.

When reached for comment, a Sonos spokesperson confirmed that Sonos was working with The Trade Desk, saying: “We don’t comment on our roadmap, but as has been previously announced we have a long-standing relationship with The Trade Desk and that relationship continues.”

Sonos should take a moment to regroup

It’s also arguable that Sonos has much more important things to do than try to convince people that they need expensive, iterative improvements to their streaming software and hardware. Sonos’ bigger focus should be on convincing customers that it can still handle its bread and butter, which is audio devices.

In November 2023, when word first dropped about Sonos’ reported streaming plans, there was no doubt that Sonos understood how to make quality speakers. But last year, Sonos tarnished its reputation by rushing an app update to coincide with its first wireless headphones, the Sonos Ace. The app’s launch will go down as one of the biggest app failures in history. Sonos employees would go on to say that Sonos rushed the update with insufficient testing, resulting in Sonos device owners suddenly losing key features, like accessibility capabilities and the abilities to edit song queues and playlists and access local music libraries. Owners of older Sonos devices, aka long-time Sonos customers, were the most affected. Amid the fallout, hundreds of people were laid off, Sonos’ market value dropped by $600 million, and the company pegged initial remediation costs at $20 million to $30 million.

At this point, Sonos’ best hope at recovering losses is restoring the customer trust and brand reputation that it took years to build and months to deplete.

Sonos could also use time to recover and distill lessons from its most recent attempt at entering a new device category. Likely due to the app controversy associated with the cans, the Ace hasn’t been meeting sales expectations, per a February report from The Verge citing anonymous sources. If Sonos should learn anything from the Ace, it’s that breaking into a new field requires time, patience, and incredible attention to detail, including how long-time and incoming customers want to use their gear.

Of course, financial blowback from the app debacle could be more directly behind why Sonos isn’t releasing a streaming box. Additionally, Sonos saw numerous executive changes following the app fiasco, including the departure of the CEO who greenlit the streaming box, Patrick Spence. New executive leaders, including a new chief product officer and chief marketing officer, could have different views on the value of Sonos to enter the streaming market too.

Sonos’ spokesperson didn’t answer Ars’ questions about Sonos’ reported plans to cancel the streaming box and whether the decision is related to the company’s app woes.

Sonos may have dodged a bullet

Ultimately, it didn’t sound like Sonos’ streaming box had the greatest potential to disrupt other TV streaming platforms already settled into people’s homes. It’s possible Sonos had other products that weren’t leaked. But the company would have had to come up with a unique and helpful feature in order to command a high price and compete with the likes of Apple’s TV 4K set-top box.

Even if Sonos came up with some killer feature or app for its streaming box, people are a lot less likely to gamble on a new product from the company now than they were before 2024’s app catastrophe. Sonos should prove that it can handle the basics before attempting to upcharge technologists for new streaming hardware.

Sonos’ streaming ambitions may only be off the table “for now,” new CEO Tom Conrad reportedly told employees today, per The Verge. But it’s probably best that Sonos focus its attention elsewhere for a while.

Sonos’ streaming box is reportedly canceled. Good riddance. Read More »