The TV store

The following map shows the countries where iTunes Apps are available.

It represents 123 countries. It also shows where the iPhone is currently available.

The following map shows the countries where iTunes music can be purchased.

The countries in white are countries where apps are available but music isn’t. There are 51 countries where you can buy music and 72 where you can buy apps but not music.

The following map shows the countries where iTunes TV shows can be purchased.

As in the previous chart, the countries in white are those where apps are available but TV shows aren’t. There are six countries where you can buy TV shows and 117 countries where you can buy apps but not music.

The data is here (along with a widget which lets you generate the maps–if there are errors, please correct them and let me know).

Digital music (as iTunes defines it) started expanding outside the United States in 2004 and managed to reach these 50 other countries in seven years. TV shows took a much slower route. Not only has there been a limited selection of countries in six years of expansion but even in the US, the programs available are a tiny subset of what is being produced.

Is the TV business going to expand digital distribution at the glacial rate of music or not at all? In either case, the distribution of Apps as a digital medium is positively viral.

  • Not all App Stores are equal. In South Africa, the App Store does not have games due to the Film and Publications Board’s archaic rule that all games for sale (on disc or via download) must be reviewed at some cost (I’m not sure how much it is). Apparently there is not an iTunes Store because South African law requires music sold online to have some form of DRM. It’s terrible that outdated laws ruin a part of the Apple ecosystem.

    • Fascinating.

      • Dajhilton

        Yes, the South African legal situation is accurately summarized here with regard to DRM.  It should be remembered, that the situation regarding internet service provider immunity from liability for direct copyright infringement (ie., ISP’s making copies and distributing on behalf of their users) is limited to 28 countries:  the US (DMCA establishes it) and the EU (Electronic Commerce Directive of 2000 establishes immunity in language almost identical to the DMCA).  Outside this network of 28 countries, previous copyright rules (as established in the Bern Convention and WTO Treaty apply) apply and countries are free to require ISP’s to deploy DRM – or at least to recognize DRM deployed by music services – as a condition of engaging in an enterprise so potentially detrimental to the interests of copyright holders.

        In the US and EU, the situation is addressed by giving the ISP’s full immunity for their own acts of direct, primary infringement (as well as immunity from secondary infringements committed by their users) if they comply with two threshold conditions:  (1) adoption of a policy addressing piracy, essentially; and (2) responding to DRM technologies (referred to in the law as ‘technological measures” installed by rightsowners.  In addition, the DMCA and Electronic Commerce Directive both make the stripping our or removal of digital rights management information an offense.  The liability from immunity also ceases to exist, once the ISP obtain knowledge of infringements it is involved in facilitating or committing (hence, the proliferation of ‘notice and take-down regimes).

        So, the key difference between South African regulation and that found in the US and EU is that our ISP’s simply have to respond to DRM installed by rightsholders (or else the immunity from copyright infringement liability is lost), whereas in South Africa there is an affirmative obligation on the part of ISP’s to take pro-active steps to respond to technological measures against unauthorized distribution of music and other protected works.Note that there is still no absolute obligation on US and EU ISP’s to take action with  regard to DRM.  It is simply a pre-condition to obtaining the full immunity from infringement liability that the DMCA and Electronic Commerce Directive offer, if ISP’s so wish.  But the benefits of doing so are so great, that no ISP would, I think, fail to avail itself of the law’s benefits on the liability side. 

    • Anonymous

      I’m curious about this claim “South African law requires music sold online to have some form of DRM”. I bought the entire catalog of Falling Mirror (the greatest band South Africa has ever produced!) from a web store a few years ago. I forget the name, but it might have been this company:
      I bought my music as unprotected mp3, and this store is selling mp3s. And they are priced in rand, so it’s not like they are selling SA music to non-SA buyers and thus somehow evading the rule. 

      • Stackjd

        I also buy aKing music from Rhythm Music online.  It’s DRM free and priced in South African Rand.

    • Kishyr Ramdial

      Nokia has been selling music in South Africa through its Ovi Music Store for over a year now, and all content is not in any form of DRM (they’re all MP3).

  • DV Henkel-Wallace

    Are you sure Danemark and Greenland are different?

  • Canucker

    The massive  difference between app distribution verses TV program distribution is a huge opportunity for app-based TV. “Someone” will realize this and exploit it soon. The TV and media companies will only realize after the fact how much they blew the opportunity.

  • Mmmm…

    I know, it’s limited to the US and a few other countries (for now) — but isn’t something like iCloud iTunes match ideal for those who can’t buy music at the iTunes store?

    What’s to prevent individuals in these countries form:

    1) installing iTunes on their computer to manage their music

    2) importing, ripping, otherwise ingesting their music into iTunes

    3) using iTunes match with iCloud (when available) to make their music available on iCloud

    4) streaming their music from iCloud to their iDevices.

    We currently have over 16,000 audio files available on iTunes match from 5 Macs and accessible to 7 iDevices.

    Most of the files are songs lasting 4-5 minutes.  But, some are old-time radio programs up to 1 hour…

    Lionel Barrymore: A Christmas Carol;  Orson Wells: War Of The Worlds; Abbot And Costello, Jack Benny, Jean Shepherd…

    It all works amazingly well.

    Seems like there is an opportunity there, somewhere…

    • El Aura

      The iTMS is about (a) buying from a very large selection whenever and wherever you want including listening to previews and (b) about buying individual songs. iCloud does none of these things.

      • Many of us bought music (records, tapes, CDs) or made recordings before the iTunes Store even existed. 

        As I said, we have 16,000 audio files in our iCloud iTunes collection.

        At best, 1,000 were purchased from the iTunes store.

        We probably have 4,500 audio files that are not available (and never will be) from the iTunes store — and were uploaded from our computers with iTunes match.

        For people like us, iCloud provides access to all the music we bought from the iTunes Music Store… plus all the legacy music we previewed and purchased/recorded before.

      • Dajhilton

        Yes, the iCloud provides all of the access benefits you cite; as a technological questions.  But you should not presume that those will always be provided for free.  Apple has already conceded that cloud storage and streaming from the cloud to users are licensable activities that Apple is apparently willing to subsidize for the time-being.  But should the bill negotiated by rightsowners in the future become a much more significant hit for Apple and other storage providers, the situation could be quite different.

        It all depends on the pricing.  If Apple will allow me to store the entire 16-hour Ring Cycle of Wagner for free on the iCloud, i would not mind paying 50 cents every time I stream an act of one of the four operas.  At that rate, I’ll probably never catch up with the $200-300 retail price of the set.  With a pop tune that I might want to hear hundreds of times, the price would obviously have to be much lower.

      • El Aura

        I already had access to all the music I own (ripped CDs + iTMS) way before iCloud thanks to iPods and iPhones. What exactly does iCloud contribute to this? That I can trade buying storage space against buying stream bandwidth?

      • iCloud is designed to keep your content synchronized or accessible across multiple devices.

    • Davel

      Could you not do the same with competing services like Google, Amazon, etc?

  • Lots of technology blogs are abuzz with Apple TV rumours, but many of these blogs are US-centric: Looking at these maps, does it make sense for Apple to focus on a full TV as their next big hardware product, especially if it can’t go as international as the iPhone?

    We’ve been waiting for _any_ content here for ages here in Singapore, so I’m really not optimistic about ever seeing any Apple TV here — we don’t even get to buy the current iteration! — with all the issues associated with cross-border content licensing.

    • Davel

      I was watching a vid recently of Steve talking about tv. I think it was from all things digital in 2010. The problems were the Balkanization of content and deals as well as there is no national cable company.

      This leads me to believe that whatever Apple brings out will have to be an integrated TV with the Apple hardware/software. This will bypass the PAL/NSTC and national cable issues, but they still will need to deal with content.

      If Apple does what @poke describes above then they will have dealt with the content issues too.

      We will get to a la carte services soon. Just this week time Warner and MSG are having a spat over fees. Cable fees are way too high for what is delivered. I think if the consumer could pay for what they want then for many people TV will be cheaper.

      I for one do not watch ESPN so that is almost $10/month right there.

    • In a global economy, TV is the most insular and provincial of all.

      • Wesley Hsu


  • Anonymous

    Very interesting review of the state of the iTunes Store.

    Just interesting for others to know that it’s perfectly possible for anyone in the world to puchase/rent content from the US iTunes store. All you need to do is open an account in the US store without a credit card and then charge your account by purchasing iTunes gift cards that are also available online.

    • A lot of people in South Africa (and other places I’m sure) do just that!

  • Your maps caught me off-guard.  Wow, I would love to watch content from Japan or France since I can speak a little of each.  But at most I can only get one French and Japanese news feed nightly at less than VHS quality from our local UCSD campus TV station.

    As you point out (and I’ll probably get the concepts incorrect) but the disruption will happen when the little guy publishes little apps for TV from countries around the world, like the language podcasts we can now get, and then it will spread, sneaking in bit by bit…

    There would be the Radio Nederland app (which I listened to on shortwave radio when I was a kid 45 years ago) and then the Deutche Welle app with news and silly shows, and then NHK News app with news and even sillier Japanese shows, and then Aussie Rules Highlights app (not picked up by ESPN in the US anymore), and then the big guys will want to get into the action one by one, ultimately disrupting the incumbents with the entrants.  How are the cable companies going to block an app accessing HTML5 video over the internet?  Throttle the bandwidth and watch the backlash.  Will it ultimately catch the big boys off guard as they dismiss it?

    Also, don’t miss this blog post by Guy English regarding his imaginings of unboxing an Apple TV.  It’s brilliant, and we can add a couple more things to our “in plain sight” database.  🙂

    Bien sur!  Arigato gozaimasu. (with bow)

    • javbw

      USTREAM and others have Japanese channels. YOu can pay for NHK or other imported canals on Co or Time Warner, digital cable being the prerequisite for that. The free is high, but it is there.

      Digital cable has opened enough channels for local cable companies to carry the national channels of other countries, but they have a high fee, as they feel it’s value tot he homesick person is very high. 

      If NHK or others made an App (for the Japanese content, not the English content they 100% own) then they would run into huge liscensing issues, since most of their content is on an outdated license or is produced by staunchly “anti-piracy” companies that refuse to go digital, so they would refuse streaming rights. Then there is international license on top of that.  

      I would love to know what the actual license fee COX is paying, and the markup involved, to broadcast NHK or the set of channels as a package. Would NHK offering that as a web app with a monthly reoccurring fee (account login?) be a good moneymaker? 

      if they were in the app store, then apple would get it’s 30% of the subscripton or would apple move to have NHK sell it’s shows at $2 apiece instead?  

    • Just some Guy

      I love Kickingbear’s description of Nilay Patel’s Verge report ..”I like this report because its a little forlorn…” :)) 

    • Davel

      Can’t you get the shows on the web the way you can watch Chinese channels via the web?

    • The issue with Internet TV (or anything resembling that) is twofold:

      First of all, there is the technology issue. We need smarter televisions or smarter devices (like Apple TV). This is actually the easy part to solve. This requires resources and some smart work but it can be done.

      The second problem, which is more difficult, is getting the content rights. Right now, the video (television and movie) content is licensed individually to cable channels, satellite providers, movie theaters, etc. The amount that cable television/satellite/etc pay for the content is MUCH LARGER than what Internet providers are willing to pay. Until the Internet customers pay as much or more for the content as cable and satellite companies do, you just won’t see digital purchase or streaming take off.

      To pick an extreme example, sports channels (say ESPN in USA or CBS in USA) pay around $1 billion per year for NFL (American football) rights. There is no way the content owner (NFL in this case) will allow anyone else to stream or sell digital NFL content for less than $1B/year. Right now, Internet users are unable to or unwilling to pay anything that will approach the television channel payments.

      The problem is not the app; but the content.

      Coming back to your example, why would NHK put its video on the Internet if it will earn far less than their cable/satellite television viewers? It just isn’t going to happen.

      Some might say that some television channels are available on the Internet already, so why can’t this continue. Yes, that’s true. But I feel that that is unsustainable. Companies are trying stuff but unless they earn more money from Internet users, it just isn’t going to happen.

      One might say why can’t video end up similar to audio/music. There are many reasons but the main one is that the amount of money in video is FAR LARGER. Like I was quoting the premium American football example, someone is paying $1billion/year for just one sports league. When you add up all the different sports, news, movies, reality shows, sitcoms, etc, the amounts are very large.

      For instance, it doesn’t cost much to buy, say, the top 30 songs of 2011. But try buying the top 30 television shows of 2011 and see how much it costs.

      So, until the Internet users are willing to pay more or the number of users (who consume video content online) increases significantly, all you are going to get are content purchase and rental services, with all sorts of restrictions on regions, delay-after-release, etc.

      • Why assume that content can only come from the current channels? That’s like saying that news stories can only be written by newspapers or talk shows can only be produced by radio stations. Media disruption is always driven by changes in the creative process (and hence cost structures.) Technology enables that change.

      • Good point. However, the difference is that video is way more expensive to produce than say music or written content (as in web portals and the like). I think you are right in saying that technology will alter the landscape somewhat but I don’t anticipate it’ll be quite like what happened with web (text) and music. Perhaps some areas, like news, may follow a new paradigm but I don’t see it for other video content.

        You are certainly starting to see companies like Youtube pursue alternative new sources but the quality is nowhere near professional movies or sports. How long do you think it’ll take someone to produce a decent quality tv show that compares to existing TV studios? It remains to be seen.

      • Prior to their respective disruptions, all media was expensive to produce. I’ll be writing a lot more about the cost structures of video production.

      • Wesley Hsu

        The cost of video production has been falling with technological advancements. Video shooting and editing are cheap, but physical setup is still expensive and the US has Equity and other union monopolies as obstacles. Disrupting the 6-decade TV dinosaur seems to still be one or two advancements away from its overdue extinction. 

      • Bernard Sangil

        It’s no coincidence that Final Cut Pro X is priced at 300 bucks.
        As far as quality, it’s getting there. Have a look at Vimeo. And if we put aside the fancy-flashy production aspects of traditional TV studios, it’s really easy to make much better quality content. Most stuff the big channels show is essentially garbage.

      • Commenter0815

        The NFL is an interesting example because they in fact do have an app called NFL GamePass ( ) which allows you to subscribe to and watch ALL NFL games on a per week/season/post season basis. AFAIK it´s only available outside the US though, aparently only in markets where the NFL doesn’t have an agreement with a broadcaster. (According to FAQ here

  • It would be interesting if you did the same exercise with Amazon where you would add books to the equation. I suspect that a comparaison would show that Amazon’s coverage is significantly smaller than Apple’s. This is important as it has a direct impact on the sale of the iPad vs. Kindle Fire. At present, the Kindle Fire is a US only device and based on past experience, it is likely that it will take quite a while for content to be made available in other countries for things other than books. For example, in Canada, we only have access to books via Amazon (no music, digital software or video content). I believe that the only country that has a decent Amazon catalogue is the UK where books and music are available. 

    To the extent that people hook into the Apple content via the iTunes store, this should in the medium term, make the clients much more likely to stay with Apple as it would otherwise be cost prohibitive to replace content. This is perhaps why Apple is making this push with Cloud computing and expanding the offering of its stores outside of the United States. Also, Apple has been much faster at making content available outside of the US – making non-US market much more important to them than Amazon. 

    • Davel

      Really? The Fire is USA only?

      • Bernard Sangil

        Yep. That’s why I found it laughable that some “analysts” presented it as *the real iPad challenger*.

      • Not exactly. The Kindle Fire is available in a handful of other countries but the main problem with the concept is that the business model of sustaining Amazon content sales works in markets where Amazon sells content. That consists of a tiny fraction of the world and historically retail has not scaled globally. (iTunes is the only exception and even that has a limited footprint for certain content types.)

    • Here is a list of Amazon’s international distribution:

  • poke

    It’d be interesting to look at magazine distribution, since magazines on iOS are delivered as apps. AFAIK, to appear in the “newsstand” on the iOS home screen the developer just has to use the Newsstand API. How many countries have magazines in the App Store making use of the Newsstand API? This could show an entirely different distribution model for Apple. It hasn’t had to go out and make content deals for magazines the way it did with music, movies, TV shows and books. It just supplied an API and content producers have used the App Store. Maybe this data can be easily crowd sourced. For example, I know that there are Newsstand-using magazines available in the US and UK stores. How does the reach of magazines already compare to music and TV shows?

    App-based TV could use a similar system. Apple could add a “Channels” folder and supply an API for making new episodes of TV shows appear in it. Apps from different networks would just have to be uploaded by the network to the App Store. Apple wouldn’t have to make individual content deals. Actually, Apple could adopt this for all media. Music delivery could be through apps with an API to display individual music files in the music player. If Apple added an integrated search API for searching through content within apps (something that would be useful regardless) and even had a way to search for content available through apps in the AppStore (again, something that would be useful regardless), it could offer an experience essentially no different to iTunes, except that all content producers would need to do in order to get their content in the iOS ecosystem is register as developers and put apps up in the store.

    • Oak


    • Chandra2

      poke, good add-on to what Horace posted. In fact, there is a surge in Magazine subscriptions once Newstand app was introduced. Newstand is not that different from a folder and that is all it took. Newstand is a discovery and exposure method. ( I sometimes wonder how lazy people at large are and at the same time, given the right visibility, how ready they are to spend money..quite fascinating ). Video podcasts are already there which are buried in the itunes apps which majority of folks do not seem to use. Also, There are tons of great courses under Apple U which do not get the right exposure. They need to be brought up to the surface. Given all this, the logical conclusion is, TV is the equivalent of the Newstand app and magazines are like channels or shows. ( like you wrote ) I think the model has a very good chance of working. Apple can make a lot of money with a 30% cut ( or with even less ) as the discovery platform. The TV shows themselves can be streamed from somewhere else.  Apple will have to work out a business model for Ad supported free tv shows.

      In fact, companies like Comcast, their cable franchises are ready for disruption. But, in the case of Comcast, their cable ISP and content (NBC ) businesses can thrive with Apple providing the discovery mechanisms. Apple is like ‘Third party channel controller’. The live and archived streams of Comcast need not touch Apple servers but you can still get the channels through Apple.

      • Marcos El Malo

        Laziness and willingness to purchase are one of the puzzles that these new technologies are attempting to solve (or to use the language of Aymco, a job for hire). Another way to put the “people are lazy” assertion is “people want to expend less effort”. What this means for marketers and vendors is that they need to make the purchasing process as frictionless as possible, driving the buying decision towards “yes”. Ideally, the customer will find and purchase a product without having to think about it. The decision becomes almost automatic. That’s the ideal, anyway.

      • Marcos El Malo

        Laziness and willingness to purchase are one of the puzzles that these new technologies are attempting to solve (or to use the language of Aymco, a job for hire). Another way to put the “people are lazy” assertion is “people want to expend less effort”. What this means for marketers and vendors is that they need to make the purchasing process as frictionless as possible, driving the buying decision towards “yes”. Ideally, the customer will find and purchase a product without having to think about it. The decision becomes almost automatic. That’s the ideal, anyway.

    • Davel

      This is a very good idea.

    • Hoon

      The cable companies and networks are very aware that the scenario you outline could come to pass. It will be interesting to see how aggressively they either seek to block/control it or become part of it.

      I believe on both’s shows The Talk Show and Build and Analyze they discuss app-driven tv as an outgrowth of any sort of Apple television strategy. One thing that’s terribly exciting about this possibility is that there certainly is no reason to limit the content to just video. It also underscores the true potential of iTunes and the app store.

    • OpenMinde

      Go even further with crowd source model,  AppStore, Video, iTunes, Newsstand, iBook, and iCloud, Siri, each provides API along with search functions farming out to developer and content owner.  Apple becomes a discover and delivery platform.  

  • Step 1) Sell 1080p cameras
    Step 2) Enable cameras to edit video
    Step 3) Provide a distribution and monetization platform

    • Davel

      Doesn’t YouTube do this?

      Many content holders have agreements with Google. I wonder if videos are available on YouTube channels but not in iTunes.

  • Kelupis

    You forgot to add Brunei Darussalam (BN).

  • Anonymous

    The itunes movie store is in more countries than the tv store. (I use it all the time in New Zealand)

    • If you follow the link to the data set you can also see the Movie distribution map.

  • Anonymous

    The iTunes Movie store is in more countries than the TV store – I use it all the tiusername New Zealand.

  • Anonymous

    The reason apps are better for international distribution is that every country doesn’t have its own separate regulations with regards to apps. France will essentially protect itself from American music, but not from American apps. And since an app can be anything and can adapt to various languages and cultures, its the only thing you can make one of for the whole world.

    I work on music albums, and we are getting into apps primarily for the creative options, but a strong second is the distribution. We can sell one item worldwide through one retailer (Apple) and serve millions of customers

    • Dajhilton

      I would dispute this point.  I also work in the music business internationally, and there are no laws regulating the distribution of music that do not apply wholly and equally to music distributed (or reproduced, adapted, or performed) through or by apps.  Yes, Apple and others may wish that the laws somehow didn’t apply to apps, but they do (until the laws are adapted to say they don’t).

      Nor does France discriminate against American music.  It cannot do so, even if it wished to, under WTO trade rules (which incorporate the Bern Copyright Convention) without risking trade sanctions.  True, France does have laws, such as broadcast quotas, to promote the playing of French repertoire on the radio, but those apply equally to all non-French music, including from other EU countries such as the UK; not just to American music.  And, in any case, limited exceptions of this kind must still comply with the WTO requirement that any copyright exception not be so broad as to adversely affect the reasonable economic interests of the copyright owner.  (Bern, art. 9).  The argument that music could somehow be distributed through apps without authorization of the rightsowners and fall through some kind of legal loophole is just fanciful.

      • Chandra2

        Dajhiton, Understood. But there are 72 countires where you can buy apps but not music. So if I can package up an album as an app, I get to distribute it to those countries.

      • Dajhilton

        Yes, you can distribute your album packaged up as an app in all those 72 countries. . . . if you obtain the right to do so by licensing the distribution right from the album’s owner.  Otherwise, you’re likely to be infringing copyright.  

      • Marcos El Malo

        I would hazard a guess that it is easier to get world wide rights for an app version from the content owner than to get all the regional rights held by regional distribution rights holders. (I’m not in the music biz. I think I’d rather be a pornographer than stoop that low. Just kidding. Sort of.)

      • Bernard Sangil

        Bjork has done precisely this

  • Jason Painter

    I had no idea so few countries had TV shows in the iTunes Store. Now I’m grateful that we have them in Australia, even while I wish we had HD options.

  • Stackjd

    I live in Angola and despite the fact that 3G is pretty slow and pretty expensive (27 USD/50 mb), you would be amazed at how many iPhones you see here.  To think they aren’t even sold on the market here and most Angolans bring them in from Dubai or Portugal where they are paying 1000 USD for them, this for folks who make 2-2500 USD net/month and live in the most expensive city in the world for expats.

    Just seeing what I see here and seeing how popular iPads and iPhones are around my office I’m bullish on Apple’s ability to parlay them into the rest of the world in a major way. 

  • Pingback: Apps Are Media | Tech News Aggregator()

  • anonimo

    Sorry, iPhone is NOT available in Argentina and it IS available in Uruguay (both part of Latam)

    • The iPhone is available in Argentina on Claro and Movistar according to

      • They have the agreement but they can sell it in Argentina because imports are forbidden unless you export the same USD amount that you import (and since these are carriers, there is no way they can export anything)

        There is hope that if foxconn starts building iPhones in Brasil, Argentina will be able to get them, since Mercosur imports have a different law.

      • It seems the ban came into effect in July.

      • As a follow-up, blackberry quickly  found a partner and they are selling BB’s like pancakes, that is also why they talk about Argentina having an inmense growth this year, since they do not have competition from Apple and imported phones are really expensive (for numbers, Samsung’s Galxy SII is about 120% an “official” avg salary’s month, or about 200% the real avg salary)

      • According to some, this is a hoax:,%20Argentina%20isn’t%20blocking%20iPhone%20sales,%20but%20the%20joke%20is%20spreading

        (notable coverage in mainstream press)

      • They have the agreement but they can sell it in Argentina because imports are forbidden unless you export the same USD amount that you import (and since these are carriers, there is no way they can export anything)

        There is hope that if foxconn starts building iPhones in Brasil, Argentina will be able to get them, since Mercosur imports have a different law.

  • Jzlatic

    Horace, I imagine you realize the significance of what you are doing here… A further democratization of economic data. Asymco is employing its readers as data collectors and then creating a forum for discussing that data. Fantastic forward thinking. Absolutely brilliant!

  • Pingback: Apps Are Media | Weight Loss, Fitness and Diet()

  • I wonder about end user tastes for TV content compared to music and apps. When it comes to TV  my taste is more local than for music. The same goes for papers. I language an issue here? Culture or a bit of both?

    • Tastes have been local for a long time, but there is increasingly more cross-licensing of shows.

  • Anonymous

    Horace, a data visualization question – why not use a population-adjusted world map? Progress in Eorupe is more important than these visualizations show.

  • Andreas

    So what is the conclusion?
    The way to “crack” the television marked is to allow local content providers to create their own app…?

  • Simoonv

    No “Games” app category in South African iTunes, only limited games in “Entertainment”. In US, this is the top-selling category. Another level for analysis?

    • Same on Brazil :/
      Gift cards and US account solves the problem 🙂

  • Pingback: App已成为一种新媒体 « It最新资讯 « 麦田资讯,扬州IT,IT资讯,IT交流()

  • Pingback: 【开发】App已成为一种新媒体 | 分享区-我要去分享()

  • Pingback: Apps Are Media | Startup Help()

  • Pingback: A Apple TV vai Destruir a Globo? Meh. Não afeta nem a CNT. | Go2nPlay Studios by GoD Corporation()

  • Pingback: Aktuelles 8. Juni 2012()