0
Apple extends Emergency SOS via satellite for an additional free year (www.apple.com)
submitted 2 years ago by [B] to c/apple@hardware.watch
85 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [B] 0 points 2 years ago (21 children)

I don’t think it’s something I would subscribe to after the free trial. I think Apple knows this as well, that’s why everyone is getting it free for another year.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 21 child comments
    •
  • [–] [B] 1 point 2 years ago

    My theory is they’re testing to see how much of a load the service generates on the satellite network and the overall cost burden. If it’s not unreasonable use, they’ll probably just announce it as free for all users (or perhaps bundle with iCloud subs).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [B] 1 point 2 years ago

    I think Apple knows this as well, that’s why everyone is getting it free for another year.

    It also comes less than a week after Qualcomm ends its deal with Iridium to offer a similar emergency SOS satellite feature. This extra free year has likely been in consideration for a long time, but the timing of this announcement is likely Apple rubbing salt in Qualcomms wound.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [B] 0 points 2 years ago (14 children)

    I don't think Apple is ever going to stop giving it out for free because it would cost them a lot more in bad press if just one person died.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
    •
  • [–] [B] 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Not really, gm reputation wasn't destroyed from people crashing who didn't pay for onstar.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [B] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I feel like that’s a different situation, though.

    Let’s be very clear: Onstar in 1996 only around 16% of Americans owned a cellphone of any kind. Connectivity of any kind was a high-end luxury product, and it was self-obvious a service like Onstar required some kind of revenue stream to continue functioning.

    From there, consumer expectations that this was a paid service were set in stone. So of course no one has really questioned why the service that’s been subscription based before some of the people reading this were even born….is still not free. Apple should never have offered this service for free for so long if they expect to make money off of it.

    Not today, when emergency connectivity is largely assumed on devices capable of it. Particularly on smartphones, where it’s actually mandated by law regardless of whether you have an active plan in a ton of western countries.

    Combine this with the reality that news travels far faster and easier than in the 90s and early 00s, and that Apple is (so far as any of this mega-companies are) already known for high-quality safety features in their products…..it all makes gating the service behind a paywall seem a deeply penny-wise and pound-foolish idea.

    It’s anyone’s guess whether a viral story around someone dying after their trial on this ends pops up, and the PR and goodwill from keeping this service free more than likely makes up for the operating costs unless it’s truly an absurd amount of money being lost by the company(in which case I doubt they’d be extending it like this anyway).

    It’s a worthwhile loss-leader, imo, in a way Onstar in the late 1990s never possibly could have been.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] [B] 1 point 2 years ago

    It’s a worthwhile loss-leader, imo, in a way Onstar in the late 1990s never possibly could have been.

    I don't know why people are reaching into the distance past of the 90s.

    Every vehicle manufacture has it's own version of OnStar now and they also all offer about three years of complimentary emergency tracking/services in their vehicles.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [B] 0 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    I mean, other similar services also charge money for its usage, I'm not sure why this should be free if those aren't?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] [B] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Most reasonable people understand why it wouldn't be free. But the negative press if someone dies for such a well-known giant like Apple could be deterrence enough for Apple to keep it free.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] [B] 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Why not instead of a monthly fee just charge me $100 to use it or something.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [B] 1 point 2 years ago

    Because that would't come close to paying for it.

    It works like insurance. The vast majority of people who don't need something make the prices affordable so that it's there for people who do need it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [B] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Story: we stopped paying for Mercedes whatever service. Somehow my wife locked our (then) 2 year old in the car and the Mercedes service said “sorry mam, you don’t pay for this service.” Luckily they were at Disneyland and Disney had a swat team of emergency services and had it open in minutes

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •