Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Now Has 860 Million Paid Subscriptions Across Services

spartan1967 said:
Even if it's free for X amount of time, you have to opt in for the subscription for it to count with what this article is referring to.
Click to expand...
I was referring to the services business revenue (19.6 billion), not the number of subscriptions.
 
I bundled 2TB iCloud (which will take me a long time to fill but with years of photos/videos) and Apple Music - Apple Arcade and Apple news came with the bundle.

Worth it even though I play Arcade and peruse News sparingly. My kids enjoy the games on Arcade at least!
 
Note that this MacRumors article was initially incorrect in stating that this was 860 million subscribers. That has now been corrected to 860 million subscriptions.

Early comments to this article pointed this out and I sent a note to the forum editors and they made the correction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The-Real-Deal82
MilaM said:
I was referring to the services business revenue (19.6 billion), not the number of subscriptions.
Click to expand...
So you are saying when an iPhone is sold to a business, Apple counts part of that iPhone sale revenue to the service portion of Apple's intake? How is that possible?
 
syklee26 said:
Where is annual subscription for Apple One Premium? Come on Apple
Click to expand...

Apple One already gives a discount compared to if you were to subscribe to each of the services separately. I doubt Apple will offer an annual plan that will introduce an additional discount on top of this.

As it is, churn is fairly unlikely given users’ reliance on iCloud storage.
 
Even without a paid subscription it is quite intrusive how Apple drags its customers into its ecosystem. If I buy hardware of any kind, that does not mean that I want any sort of ongoing connection with the hardware manufacturer. It makes no difference if the hardware is a vacuum cleaner or a smartphone. Apple forces you to provide your phone number, if you just want to install some basic apps on your iPad. The result is that you need not get a second phone number just for Apple, which is a major inconvenience. That part is much worse than the paid subscriptions. The subscriptions are voluntary, but if you do not give Apple your phone number, you can't even use third party apps that are not already installed. Two two factor authorization may add some security, but why do I need it for installing free apps from the app store? I do not even lock my phone. Not with a password, not with a fingerprint, not with Face-ID, because my phone is always on me and if I do not want any additional security, that should be my choice. Why do I have to give Apple a phone number to get security that I do not want? Please Apple, treat us like adults!
 
spartan1967 said:
So you are saying when an iPhone is sold to a business, Apple counts part of that iPhone sale revenue to the service portion of Apple's intake? How is that possible?
Click to expand...
That's my understanding. The service portion, recognized over two years, accounts for future upgrades but also some services that are provided by Apple "for free". Like Maps, iMessage etc..

You can read more about the topic here:

"On September 23, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ratified EITF 09-3, which will change the way that we account for iPhone and Apple TV today," Oppenheimer announced. "Under EITF 09-3 only the estimated sales value of future upgrade rights to iPhone and Apple TV software are required to be deferred at the time of sale with the balance of the iPhone and Apple TV sales price being recognized immediately as revenue.

Inside Apple's iPhone subscription accounting changes - General Discussion Discussions on AppleInsider Forums

Apple's April 2007 Q2 earnings call announced that the company planned to book revenue for its new iPhone and Apple TV using the "subscription method of accounting," a decision that startled analysts and left many users confused.
forums.appleinsider.com
 
Never paid a dime for any Apple subscriptions because I don’t need them. Blow all my money on Apple devices, because I do need them.
 
arkitect said:
I'm with you!
Earlier this year my Photos library went over 200GB and nothing for it but bite the bullet and go with 2TB… of which 1.75TB is now lying fallow…

Surely a 500GB in between would be doable?

Apple moves in mysterious ways…
Click to expand...
Oh, there is nothing at all mysterious about it... They know many would like up to 500 GB but even they could not get away with charging what they now charge for 2 TB for that. So their solution is just to make you get 2 TB. The price for it looks a little less outrageous because, hey, you're getting 2 TB, right? But of course they know very well that most people are actually getting/using around 200 - 500 GB for that price, because most people will not need 2 TB. Nothing mysterious at all...
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect
CausticSoda said:
Oh, there is nothing at all mysterious about it... They know many would like up to 500 GB but even they could not get away with charging what they now charge for 2 TB for that. So their solution is just to make you get 2 TB. The price for it looks a little less outrageous because, hey, you're getting 2 TB, right? But of course they know very well that most people are actually getting/using around 200 - 500 GB for that price, because most people will not need 2 TB. Nothing mysterious at all...
Click to expand...
100% what you just said. 👍

My "mysterious" quote was tongue in cheek… it is a well known phrase: "God moves in mysterious ways…" 🙂
 
The-Real-Deal82 said:
We subscribe to iCloud in our house because we all use iPhones and iPads. None of us use Apple Music, Apple TV+ or Arcade though. We had the tv because it was free for a year but we thought it lacked the decent content you get on other platforms. I can’t say I’m compelled to subscribe to the other Apple services because there are cheaper alternatives.
Click to expand...
I think They are marketing Apple TV + wrong. First the name, what a mouthful just for the sake of having Apple on it. It’s like they have no marketing department. Now every ****ing thing they release needs to have the Apple name on it instead of creating a new brand. You know, like the iPhone, iPod, Mac, Airpot and everything that Steve Jobs created. He didn’t see the need to put the Apple name on it, we all know it’s from Apple.
 
iPhoneFan5349 said:
I think They are marketing Apple TV + wrong. First the name, what a mouthful just for the sake of having Apple on it. It’s like they have no marketing department. Now every ****ing thing they release needs to have the Apple name on it instead of creating a new brand. You know, like the iPhone, iPod, Mac, Airpot and everything that Steve Jobs created. He didn’t see the need to put the Apple name on it, we all know it’s from Apple.
Click to expand...
What would you suggest they call their streaming service then?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back