Apple TV+ is a fascinating case study in the streaming wars. On one hand, it offers some truly excellent original programming—Ted Lasso, Severance, and Shrinking have all garnered critical acclaim and loyal fanbases. On the other hand, its catalog remains shockingly small, with only 69 movies and 139 shows available as of late 2023. For a service priced at $10 a month, the lack of variety could be a dealbreaker for many potential subscribers.
The platform’s limited reach is evident in its subscriber numbers—about 45 million globally compared to Netflix’s staggering 300 million. This is partly because Apple TV+ doesn’t offer much beyond its own productions, unlike competitors that boast extensive back catalogs. For example, Peacock has nearly 4,000 movies and over 1,100 TV shows, while Paramount+ leverages hits like Yellowstone despite trimming its catalog. Apple’s strategy of focusing solely on originals might appeal to quality-over-quantity enthusiasts but alienates viewers looking for breadth.
Streaming itself has transformed entertainment—and not always for the better. The convenience of on-demand viewing and binge-watching has reshaped how content is produced and consumed. However, it’s also contributed to the decline of traditional television and movie theaters. Once reliant on cable carriage fees that guaranteed revenue regardless of ratings, networks now face a merit-based system where only popular content survives. As a result, many streaming services are hemorrhaging money or barely breaking even—except for Netflix, which remains the lone profitable giant thanks to its first-mover advantage and savvy management.
Apple TV+’s decision not to produce physical media for its shows and films is a curious one, especially given the historic success of CODA. The film not only became the first with a predominantly deaf cast to win Best Picture but also earned Troy Kotsur an Oscar as the first Deaf male actor to win in any category, while Siân Heder took home Best Adapted Screenplay. Apple further cemented its place in history as the first streaming service to win Best Picture at the Academy Awards.
Despite these accolades, Apple has chosen to keep CODA and other titles exclusively digital, turning down offers from companies like Criterion to release physical editions. While this strategy aligns with Apple’s broader ecosystem approach, it alienates collectors and film enthusiasts who value owning tangible copies of groundbreaking works like CODA. By forgoing physical releases, Apple misses an incredible opportunity to generate additional revenue and strengthen its cultural footprint—two factors that could help Apple TV+ close the gap with competitors boasting larger catalogs and more diverse distribution models.
Related Christopher Nolan & Guillermo del Toro Urge Fans to Switch Back to Physical Media
Apple TV+ is uniquely positioned among streamers because its losses barely register against Apple’s enormous profit margins. With $94 billion in net profit last year, Apple can afford to play the long game while other entertainment companies struggle to stay afloat. Still, the service desperately needs a back catalog to compete effectively. Acquiring a studio like Disney could solve this problem overnight, giving Apple access to decades of beloved content while bolstering its subscriber base.
There’s also growing competition from free streaming platforms like Pluto TV and Tubi. These services offer massive libraries at no cost beyond ad interruptions—a tempting alternative for consumers tired of juggling multiple paid subscriptions. Apple’s minimalist approach might feel sophisticated, but it risks being overshadowed by rivals that prioritize variety and accessibility.
Ultimately, streaming has upended the entertainment industry. The days of cable bundles forcing consumers to pay for channels they never watched are over. Now, success hinges on delivering content people actively want to watch—a challenge Apple TV+ must address if it hopes to thrive in this cutthroat landscape.
****
English (US) · 