Yup, I'm sure they have crunched the numbers and reached some critical break even metric....now it's about collecting revenue, not about selling devices anymore since Services is a major arm of the company's vision of the future.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple to Reduce Apple TV+ Free Trial to Three Months From July 1
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yup, I'm sure they have crunched the numbers and reached some critical break even metric....now it's about collecting revenue, not about selling devices anymore since Services is a major arm of the company's vision of the future.
We'll see
There's really only one way to tell if people will pay -- "make them"
I suspect there are a lot of folks like myself who've had a look because it was free, but who will likely never pay.
To your points - they only need "so many"
I just remain convinced that if they don't partner it with some great back catalog from someone who actually has one, its really not compelling as an ongoing sub.
IMHO still not as fully featured as, say, Netflix so for the price of Apple devices that one year trial was rather fair and nothing extraordinary given the limited content.
Along these lines - Maybe it's just me, but nothing I've seen on there (even stuff I've liked, like FAMankind), even remotely makes me intrigued to watch it again...much of it I couldn't even make it through the initial run.
The whole back catalogue thing is such a tough nut to crack.
If you don't have one -- you simply don't have one....(for a long time)
It wouldn't allow her to accept her free 1 year trial since mine was in place and active and sharing via family sharing.
As soon as I cancelled my trial which immediatly removed it (again so weird Apple does that with this service's free trial but not the others). It then let her accept her free trial and active it as there was NO active ATV+ plan in place.
Yeah and some of the best stuff in their catalogue is $$$ pay extra per view stuff.
For me there were only few shows/ movies that me and my family were interested in, the rest looked like fillers sitting there to fill space or to fill virtue woke quotas. Even some of their shows tried a bit too hard to be all inclusive with it.
Reminded me of the WWDC video...where we seemed intent on getting literally a person of every shape, size, demographic in there.
I don't have anything against any of that, but it did seem rather forced
A great presentation should be drawing me into what is being said, not who's saying it and how
Sure, but there's a difference between taking a look and coming back regularly for more.
There's definitely a group in the middle who have been enjoying the content and coming back for more because it's free, but ultimately won't pay for it, but I'm sure Apple hopes that's a pretty small group, and most of the folks who like it enough to keep watching will also like it enough to start paying.
Yeah, I'm not saying it's going to generate a ton of paying subscribers, just that Apple probably has a pretty good read on what kind of conversion rate it's going to get once the free ride is over.
I don't entirely disagree, although personally I also sort of like the fact that it's a service focused on quality and not quantity. However, even if I don't find something compelling to watch every single month, I'm happy to keep paying just because it's less hassle than stopping and then starting up again every time a show or movie I like does come around. Mind you, for me $5 is a small enough amount that I don't really give it much thought, and even with Disney+ and a couple of Apple TV Channels, I'm still paying a fraction of what I used to give the cable company every month for 200+ useless channels.
I also think Apple One might be Apple's next secret sauce here. When you consider that Apple TV+ becomes even less than free for anybody who wants Apple Music, Apple Arcade, and some iCloud Storage, a lot of people may end up hanging onto it for that reason alone.
This is my thought as well. I kind of figured that they weren't going to extend our trial again. My wife and I just finished The Mosquito Coast, which was quite good. But there simply isn't enough content to keep me as a recurring subscriber.
$5/month is pretty reasonable, so I'll probably keep it for the next month or so. I'd like to check out Lisey's Story, but most likely moving forward, we'll just subscribe for a month, binge the shows we watch, then cancel (obviously waiting until all the new episodes have been released).
Yeah, obviously it makes sense that you couldn't have both active at the same time, but the word previously above suggests that it shouldn't be possible to use another free trial on the same family plan. Glad it worked for you, though.
I think we just see it differently.
Content quality is obviously very subjective and it sound like you think a bit more of it on ATV+ than I do.
I haven't been blown away or really find the ATV+ content to be some panacea of amazing writing or acting.
It all does "look amazing", no question -- that's very on brand for Apple to over index on that aspect.
(the line above is how I feel about Apple Arcade also -- very focused on good looks)
Ultimately, for me to stay subscribed to a video content service, it simply needs a lot more content I consistently want to watch. But that's me -- not everyone.
Anyhow - good chat - Cheers
Last edited:
I miss the good ole days when seasons were 20 - 24 episodes.
I do as well.
I was thinking about that when watching some ST:TNG the other day.
Like 26 episodes per season - just fantastic!
That length of season really allows a show to blossom and for lots of interesting smaller and side narratives and plot lines to flourish.
With how short modern seasons are, they simply lack depth and have no time to explore what could be very interesting tangents. The other impact is that the layoff between "seasons" is massive... I remember when the final season of Newsroom came around, I'd forgotten about it and never even watched it actually. (still true today)
It really kind of bums me out. It feels like a side effect of our society now where nobody can seem to really "focus" on anything. It's just the ADD effect mapped onto entertainment content now also.
Well, this is a substantial reduction in Apple's services. So, Apple has pathetic configurations of its hardware in the form of undernourished MacBooks and now a reduction in services. So long as people pay, then Apple will continue its trek.
Now that I live in the US, I hate that I can't get BBC for East Enders! Yes, I know I can get a VPN. But, simply can't be bothered.
I am pretty sure I have a free subscription to Apple TV, from my iPhone purchase last year.
But, I just purchased a Mac Mini, and clicked the free for a year link. Albeit, not really sure how to see if I really have another year free. Maybe it takes a while to update on the account...
But, I just purchased a Mac Mini, and clicked the free for a year link. Albeit, not really sure how to see if I really have another year free. Maybe it takes a while to update on the account...
ATV+ has the massively expensive (200 million or more reportedly) Masters of the Air in production right now. The prior iterations (Band of Brothers, The Pacific) were critics big time hits. Band of Brothers was a ratings smash hit (The Pacific did well in ratings but definitely not viewer numbers like Band of Brothers). I believe the production is Hanks Spielberg Geffen ..huge industry names.
The unverified expectation is February will see episode 1 (of 10). This likely will make ATV+ big talk among critics and probably its biggest moment at awards shows. Will it move paid viewership numbers? That’s to be seen but if Apple is ready to make ATV+ a “better” experience “, they better do that before Masters of the Air episode 1.
The unverified expectation is February will see episode 1 (of 10). This likely will make ATV+ big talk among critics and probably its biggest moment at awards shows. Will it move paid viewership numbers? That’s to be seen but if Apple is ready to make ATV+ a “better” experience “, they better do that before Masters of the Air episode 1.
Ah then I probably missed out. I also remembered when the pandemic was starting Apple gave the option to watch a bunch of episodes for free, not sure if that activated a short trial. Thanks for your reply!
Did people like "Greyhound"?
I found that to be such a weirdly put together experience
I didn't find it good or bad -- just really "odd".
And no part of me wants to watch it again - ever
It's no Hunt for Red October, lets just say that
I found that to be such a weirdly put together experience
I didn't find it good or bad -- just really "odd".
And no part of me wants to watch it again - ever
It's no Hunt for Red October, lets just say that
Yup, and that's totally fair. This is why I've never quite gotten how heated some of the debates about Apple TV+ (or any other service) get. Everybody has their own preferences when it comes to TV shows and movies, so why should the preferences for content on streaming services be any different. It's almost like arguing whether Lionsgate, MGM, or Universal Pictures are better studios 😏
Yeah, I think Apple TV+ has a few gems, some more pedestrian stuff that clearly has good production values but "meh" plots and storylines, and a few stinkers. I'd count "The Morning Show" and "For All Mankind" as some of the gems, and Mythic Quest and Ted Lasso as some of the best comedies. My daughter liked Ghost Writer and Snoopy in Space when they first came out, but she's kind of outgrown both of those now, as she was on the cusp of adolescence at the time. Other shows like "Dickinson" and "Trying" are interesting and cute, but not particularly compelling in and of themselves. IMHO, "See" is just terrible.
I'm not sure I'd say that Apple TV+ has any runaway hits — at least no more so than other streaming services. Apple TV+ does better simply because it has less mediocrity, but that's because, unlike Netflix, they don't seem to be throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks. Apple has poured more money into fewer shows, so it's clear they're being a lot more selective. Hence, the gems seem to stand out a bit more, and garner more attention, but even my favourite Apple TV+ shows are nowhere nearby my top ten for "Best TV ever."
That said, I think the service still has yet to see its "Game of Thrones" moment. I have high hopes for "Foundation" (perhaps too high — it's a very hard storyline to do justice to, and many have tried and failed), and I'm convinced "Masters of the Air" could also become a big hit when it finally debuts.
Yup, and pouring a lot of money into things for the sake of both ensuring high production values and attracting the kind of talent it needs if it ever hopes to produce some real critically acclaimed hits.
Consider that Netflix spent $15 billion to produce over 300 original shows. Apple spent around $6 billion out of the gate to bankroll around 15.
Yeah, and I can understand that. However, since I cancelled Netflix four years ago, I've personally taken a more "boutique" approach to streaming services, so Apple TV+ fits right into that. While Disney+ has a massive amount of content, I'm still subscribed to that for only a few key shows, and I have a few Apple TV Channels that also have a more niche focus, like movie networks and the Smithsonian Channel. I think the most "generalist" service I subscribe to is Paramount+, and most of what I watch there is nostalgic reruns. Mind you, I also have a massive library of content that I've purchased from iTunes over the past decade or so as well.
I totally agree, except that I'm not entirely sure I'd want to see a return to the purely episodic television format of the ST:TNG era.
Unfortunately, it seems that the 10-episode-per-season format is the modern way of creating a single-arced storyline, but imagine the incredible depth a series could have if they went back to the more traditional 24-26 episode format.
I'm a big fan of Babylon 5 and how it broke totally new ground in creating an ongoing narrative in a day that was basically unheard of (at least on North American TV), and they did that in 110 episodes over 5 seasons. It had a few missteps near the end, but overall it was a fantastic storyline. ST DS9 did the same thing, over a similar seven-year arc of 176 episodes, although it obviously had more non-arc "sidebar" episodes, those still added to the overall experience.
Sadly, while the narrative arc format has become almost the norm now, it's been watered down with such short-season runs as to lack any kind of real depth. This is why perhaps my hopes for "Foundation" are too high... This is a story that's going to need a lot more episodes per season to truly do it justice, yet I fear that Apple and the studio behind it are going to take the same road as they do for every other modern series and stick with those shorter (and shallower) runs.
Last edited:
It was pretty good, but I think it was overrated because of Tom Hanks. I was also expecting a Hunt for Red October or Das Boot experience, and that's clearly not what this was. A bit too soft and introspective, I think.
I can't really blame that one on Apple, though. The movie wasn't supposed to end up on Apple TV+ in the first place. It was a Sony film that was slated to land in theatres for Father's Day last year, but when the pandemic put a stop to that, they decided to go with a streaming service, and Apple TV+ managed to pick up the rights, partly thanks to its deep pockets, and partly thanks to Hanks himself feeling Apple was a good fit.
Really, very few of the feature films on Apple TV+ were specifically produced under the auspices of Apple. A lot of them started as film festival entries that Apple picked up at places like TIFF and Sundance, or ones like Greyhound that just needed to find a streaming service.
@jhollington Totally with you - great post.
I really wish we could get something in the middle between ST:TNG times and what we have now.
Just feels like we are giving short shrift to all the effort, money and talent being poured in these days by not having seasons long enough to really let things develop and shine.
I keep hearing how we are in a "golden age" of TV and I'm just kind of mixed on that honestly.
Some aspects are better than ever...but the short seasons and thus lack of depth is killing a lot of it for me.
I really wish we could get something in the middle between ST:TNG times and what we have now.
Just feels like we are giving short shrift to all the effort, money and talent being poured in these days by not having seasons long enough to really let things develop and shine.
I keep hearing how we are in a "golden age" of TV and I'm just kind of mixed on that honestly.
Some aspects are better than ever...but the short seasons and thus lack of depth is killing a lot of it for me.
Heh, maybe I'm just being curmudgeonly and showing my age, but I feel like the "golden age" of TV passed a decade or two ago. Or maybe we never really hit it... Some of the stuff in the 90's showed such great promise for ushering in a new era of writing and storytelling, but much like what happened in the music industry a couple of decades earlier, the desire to crank out stories as "products" that could make as much money as possible held us back from what could have been.
Even DS9 and B5 suffered from those issues, the latter more so because it didn't have the "Star Trek" franchise to bank on, and I'm convinced they could have both been better if the writers and producers had a freer hand. B5 even had a short-lived 13-episode spinoff, "Crusade" that the creator walked away from because the studio kept insisting on more "babes du jour," women in catsuits, "last action hero" fights, and cute wunderkinds.