Tim Cook: Apple TV launches next week; Apple Music has 6.5 million paying subscribers

“More than 6.5 million people have signed up for Apple Music since the $10-a-month streaming music service launched a little more than three months ago, CEO Tim Cook said Monday,” Shara Tibken and Connie Guglielmo report for CNET. “Cook added that another 8.5 million people are participating in the music service’s 90-day free trial.”

“‘I’m finding personally that I’m discovering a whole lot of music that I wasn’t listening to before,’ he said. ‘I think it’s fabulous, and to have over 15 million on there, and 6.5 million in the paid category, I’m really happy about it. And I think the runway here is really good.’ Cook made the remarks during a wide-ranging interview here at a Wall Street Journal technology conference,” Tibken and Guglielmo report. “”

“Cook also revealed that Apple will start taking orders for its updated Apple TV on October 26 and will begin shipping the set-top box by the end of next week,” Tibken and Guglielmo report. “While Apple TV isn’t launching with an Internet-based TV service, as many have requested, Cook said the company is trying to fix ‘a terrible, broken process’ that no one likes. ‘You have 700 channels, but you can’t find anything you want to watch,’ he said.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: We’ll be ordering new Apple TVs as soon as they’re available.

Now, as for Apple Music, 6.5 million paying subscribers seems more than a bit paltry for a well-priced, full-featured, UI-challenged service that launched in over 100 countries nearly four months ago.

As we wrote back in August: This might be a harder sell than most, including Apple (with their rumored goal of 100 million subscribers), initially thought.

Are 11 million Apple Music subscribers – during a free trial in over 100 countries – worth bragging about? – August 10, 2015


  1. The thing is, apps to an extent will just replace channels. Sure you can just not install certain apps, but then you might miss out on something new you’ve never seen. Universal Search will help you find the content you know you want to watch as well as content similar to stuff you like, but live TV still has a place because there are always things you stumble upon because you’ve been watching something else and carried on watching, there’s also a lot of shows you just have on. I often come across shows that I own, had no intention of watching specifically, but just leave them on because they’re there. I will definitely buy one if for no other reason than I can move one of my existing models into another room, but I think the ever increasing amount of content available online is just replicating the problem of broadcast TV in that there is so much rubbish that it drowns out the good stuff. It’s hard to block out whole swathes of stuff without risking missing a gem.

  2. Sure, almost a billion a year might sound like a small amount to the rich elite at macdailynews, but it’s a good start in the market. Ever consider that Spotify et all have been at this business for years and years and have probably already collected the low hanging fruit? And that they probably didn’t instantly jump ship just because it’s got an Apple label on it?
    And who the hell said 100 million? I’ll tell you who- random bloggers or tech news writers who have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA what Apple’s actual goals are. If I’m wrong, please send the source material with the name of the exec at Apple who leaked their internal goals.

    Thought so.

  3. For my part I feel buckle and dined by Apple. It’s not that I want things for free, but I do want them easy, because my life is complex enough.

    Paying monthly for iPhoto storage, and for space for iPhone backups, and for iTunes Match, and for Apple Music, and for Apple TV HBO, and for ATV other channels, and for future skinny bundles… And some of these payments cover more than one thing but others are their own thing, and by the naming conventions it’s not clear what covers what…

    It’s just a PITA, which I haven’t waded into because my life is full of plenty of other PITA’s.

    Frankly it’s enough of a psychic annoyance that I wonder if I’m ripe for another solution that makes it all simple, if such a thing is possible.

    iCloud is a great example. Bake it in, make it seamless, let people enjoy. At the very least call it Apple Plus and make two or three levels and wrap it all together. Or make it payable all on the same page with clear explanations for each section.

    Something. I’m sick of being nickel and dimed with perpetual monthly payments.

  4. Apple will certainly have a profitable streaming business if nothing else. All Wall Street is interested in is market share of number of listeners whether it’s profitable or not. They’ll say Apple only having 6.5 million paying subscribers is nothing. It’s obvious Apple has likely turned a profit faster than any other streaming service in existence. I’d think this number would be considered a decent start without an ad-supported tier, but that’s just me.

    Spotify now has 20 million paying subscribers and around 50 million non-paying listeners so Wall Street can easily claim Apple’s music service is somewhat of a failure. No matter that Spotify was launched in 2008, AppleMusic will be compared directly with Spotify’s seven-year headstart.

    I think Apple could be a little more aggressive with AppleMusic by offering a free period for consumers who buy new mobile devices because those people may have missed the initial free introduction of AppleMusic. Apple is going to have to be aggressive if they expect to reach some 100 million subscriber goal. I don’t recall any specific time period mentioned about reaching that number.

  5. I subscribe. Two things: (a) I can search for any artist in the catalog. (b) Once I’ve found that artist, I can hear artists in the same genre. (c) I can add music to my own library without paying more. For You still isn’t working well For Me. But it’s good enough and I presume as I listen and like more, it’ll get better. I never listen to the radio stations but then, I don’t remember listening to the radio when I was younger either.

  6. This isn’t a service for everyone. Make sense if you own a very small music library and like pop music.
    If you already own a large collection why pay to stream stuff you already own?
    The service will be FUD’ed as a failure because not everyone is using it, but it will be fairly successful with people who actually need it.

    1. A lot of us with large music collections have them because we are always looking for new stuff to enjoy. I have above the 25,000 track limit for iTunes Match, have my 128 Gb iPhone 90% full of music, but also subscribe to Spotify and love the Discover Weekly playlist — 30 new tracks every week I’ve never heard and 90% of those I add to my “saved” music.

      You’re right, I don’t want or need to pay to stream stuff I already own, but I love discovering new stuff and would subscribe to Apple Music if/when they get that track limit up to 100,000.

  7. Apple is lucky enough to get my $20 a year for iTunes Match, and $3 a month for iCloud storage, on top of everything I buy from them. If they keep adding more subscription based products (even the iPhone can now be purchased this way from Apple), we’ll soon have an Apple bill the size of our cable bills.

    I don’t want to pay for Apple Music because I prefer to “own” my music and never have to pay for any of it more than once if I don’t feel like it. I rarely add new music to my library so it’s just not necessary for me.

    I’m just glad Apple has not enforced the infamous bundle that cable companies are notorious for.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.