On the ‘Apple One’ subscription #
Alongside the new Apple Watches and iPads, today’s ‘Time Flies’ Apple event launched the much rumoured ‘Apple One’ bundle, connecting Apple’s services offering into a single subscription.
I, as an occasional luddite, have rejected the SaaS model almost wholly. I believe that we should be able to buy and own any software – apps, media, data, et al – and not constantly be charged for the privilege of using it. Unless some actual service with ongoing costs is provided, as with Dropbox or iTunes Match, buying software should be as similar to buying a consumable physical good as possible[1].
That said, the Apple One subscription is priced well enough to be tempting. Perhaps the years of sharing my ex-girlfriend’s Netflix have weakened my resolve. Perhaps I’m just becoming less fiscally conscious. Regardless, I can see why someone who wants one service (probably Apple Music) might plump for a bundle. It’s really not much of a stretch for that extra content. Though compared to other cloud providers Apple is still stiffing us with its iCloud pricing.
Based on early reports from Mark Gurman, I wasn’t convinced that a tiered bundle would be a success. ‘I would like to choose the services I want à la carte, with a larger discount the more services I use’, I thought. That would almost certainly have resulted in more expensive pricing. I maintain that it would be good to be able to switch out Apple TV+ and Apple Arcade for Apple Fitness+ for instance. And it feels a bit like a category error that ‘Individual’ and ‘Family' are distinct tiers. But otherwise I think that if I bought in to media subscriptions, I’d buy into this.
One sticking point for me is the inconsistent naming. Convention suggests that the subscription be called Apple+, or at the very least each service use the ‘+’ nomenclature. ‘Plus’ naming is fast becoming a convention for media services (Disney+, ESPN+, Paramount+). Like ‘lite’, it’s a welcome shorthand. NBC recently proved this point with ‘Peacock’, which, while creative, is far less intuitive than NBC+[2]. I appreciate we are beholden to the names of existing products, but it holds up as an example of Apple naming conventions getting increasingly complex as the offering diversifies.
Nobody will be dissuaded by the name though. Apple have make a cable-like offering feel like Amazon Prime – where the core service is so appealing that everything else feels free. It’s an interesting portent of what life might be like with Apple as a services company.