Apple TV left us questions Oprah did not answer

I'll admit – I planted on Oprah. Not to his face. She was about thirty yards away from me, on stage, in a long and fluid meeting of Colonel Sanders that very few people were able to succeed (Oprah did). I too came across Alfre Woodard and Jason Momoa. I thought of Steve Spielberg's brevity on stage and the thickness and luxury of Ewan McGregor's hair. The celebrities were present at the Apple event on Monday, and it was very clear, a few hours later, that they would have gone to forget that Apple had nothing to say.

Of course, the company has announced a new credit card of dubious merit, an information retention service that is an added highlight in the coffin of independent journalism, and its own attempt to create a platform unified game, wherever you are, but the essential of the event of an hour and a half was centered on Apple TV (no, not the media players that you plug into your TV – the application you use on the players multimedia you plug into your TV and, soon, some smart TVs also) and Apple TV +, a new Apple service that will include a lot of original content featuring many celebrities present.

The app version of Apple TV, in addition to having a deeply confusing name, is positioning itself as a competitor and perhaps even a replacement for the major streaming services of Netflix, Amazon and even Hulu. First, there are the Apple channels, which I think are a new picture of what Apple already allows you to do: subscribe to premium channels directly through Apple. Currently, you have to open iTunes Store to do it. Maybe Channels means everything will happen via the app? It's still uncertain. When asked for clarification, Apple said it would also allow offline viewing – which HBO does not currently do, but other channels supported by Channels, such as Starz , do it already.

With, as Oprah notes, more than a billion devices in the wild, Apple could theoretically have a billion views on these channels and all its new TV + content. Since the most watched shows are struggling to get 20 million live views, it's an impressive feat!

But the problem is that we do not know much about the service. Price? No idea. Subscription or pay as you go? Who can say! Heck, we do not even know how the shows that will be part of the new Apple TV + service will be featured in the Apple TV app. Apple, when I asked for clarification, declined to comment.

We can, of course, assume. Immediately after the event, my colleagues complained about the little knowledge we gained and I, as a staff member who regularly uses the Apple TV app now, I simply just rolled eyes. I have assumed that the broadcasts would be presented in the application as they are now. For now, this suggests a show that I might like and, when I click on it, it allows me to buy it through the iTunes Store or watch it in a compatible app. Game of thrones in HBO Go, and Kill Eve via BBC America or my PS View DVR.

It seems quite natural that new issues should be treated in the same way. It's only when I click to watch a show that I suggest I subscribe to TV + if I really want to watch it – a bit like he insists on me subscribing to DC Universe I wanted to see the Brendan Fraser's buttocks Doom Patrol.

But it's only me who guesses based on the operations of the current application. It was not Apple that really explained how things could work – they might not even work that way! The application is being refreshed before the launch of TV + later this year. So, that could be entirely different. It could have its own tab or TV + could even be a new application. After all this March fanfare, we still have no idea.

Will it broadcast or use movies and TV shows purchased via iTunes, by downloading the media content on your device to the highest fidelity that your device will support? Will it display in 4K with DolbyVision HDR? Or will it be shot in a less faithful environment than the classic 4K (probably not) or higher than the 8K (probably too)?

I can assume here that the previous products were released by Apple, but it is a surefire way to make me bullshit. As for almost everything else in this story, Apple declined to comment when I asked for clarification.

As frustrating as the lack of detail on TV + is, the lack of details on damn shows is even worse. The BBC or HBO can afford to make a 2-minute trailer of all their broadcasts because these networks offer extensive and well-established programming. Apple – which has published little details on its future programming, apart from some complicated summaries provided by the stars on stage – apparently does not seem so.

Jason Momoa hugging an unidentified woman in a caravan after giving us a 3-minute drama on stage will not make me passionate about her show. I do not even remember his name.

Everything about TV + was … unfinished. As if Apple was trying to distract from the attention of a cluttered car, it was trying to sell with paint and new upholstery. Only it was Oprah and Jason Momoa (and at least two people have said that Chris Evans was there too). Apple will have to do a lot of work from here launching Apple TV + to even excite me remotely. Because for the moment, the only thing I can draw from this event, is that being in the same room as Oprah was rather neat.