Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
They can keep Amazon Music. It has the worst sound quality. Only 256kbps MP3 unlike Apple Music 256kbps AAC which is a better codec. Also there is no parental controls at all on Amazon Music either.
 
They're probably hoping that some number of people will want to go 'all in' with Amazon services: kindle tablet, Amazon Prime video and music, books, etc. Like most things they do it'll be half-baked, and me-too. It's like watching a team that only throws hail-marys, and has no running game at all.

But there are a few Amazon fanboys/girls out there.
I like bezos. He is a better Cuban the Eddie cue and Jeff is only Cuban through adoption. But one thing is clear, he wants to compete with Apple, but recognizes that much of his income comes through Apple so it's a weird relationship. I use prime because of the free two day delivery. This means I could get all those movies and maybe even this music service thrown in for free. The problem is that he doesn't allow it on the Apple TV and his iOS implementations are semi okay. So other than the free shipping which I get more than my money's worth on, I have never experienced any of their other services. I am not a millennial and I like to watch things on a tv and not on the phone. I watch on the iPad only when traveling, so without an ATV implementation, it is a non starter.

As for music, again as a non-millennial, I own things, so streaming is always a non starter for me.
 
Be careful of projecting your own viewpoint onto the rest of the world. Many Boomers and GenX stream music, and watch video on their phones and tablets, myself included. It's not just Millennials.
Fair point. I was being a bit cavalier with my words. Still, it is fair to say that boomers like me are way less likely to stream than millennials. But you are correct that I should not have implied it was an all or nothing deal. My point now stands corrected. :)
 
It takes very little imagination to understand that there are situations that describe this, but assuming this was a genuine question:
  1. You work at a company that doesn't allow employees to install software. Firing up the company approved web browser is a great solution.
  2. You're a student utilizing a lab computer. Again, this is a case of not being able to install, and even if you can, there's no guarantee that you'll have the same computer the next time you're at the lab.
Basically, anywhere that you are a guest is a great use case for a web player. Using a little imagination of my own and anticipating solutions that aren't solutions:
  1. Just use your phone! The problem is that wifi isn't actually ubiquitous and using a limited resource this way isn't wise. Also, phones are sometimes prohibited, particularly in some work environments (security sensitive labs for instance).
  2. Installing iTunes everywhere. The last time I tried installing iTunes on one of my computers, I ran into the problem of needing to authorize it. Time has since gone by, and maybe you don't need to authorize to use it anymore, but I do believe that was the case. The problem is the decade (and a half by now?) old limitation of 5 computers. It's not hard to reach that limit, particularly if allowed to install on work owned computers.
At any rate, including a web player is standard operating procedure for the rest of the industry (Spotify, Google, etc). I know Apple struggles with web services, but a web player is a good feature. I've been dealing with this limitation, but pretty soon I will give up and go to the competition, especially now that they all have similar family plan pricing.
So wait you can't install softwares on your work or school computer but you can fire up a browser and start streaming music? I can tell you where I work no way would I ever be able to get to a streaming music site while on the company network. Heck where I work they block sites like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. They for sure would block a streaming music site.
 
Why would I want this?

If you use android get Google Play Music. If you use iOS get Apple Music. There's no room for others.
[doublepost=1465810462][/doublepost]
Good, more competition is always better for the consumers.
There's nothing a new music service can do to add competition. They're all the same with a different UI.
[doublepost=1465810606][/doublepost]
Amazon goes into streaming? Not unexpected, but given Amazon sells a ton of music simply unavailable in Apple Music and iTunes Store, I think there might be customers using it.

Again, streaming means "once label pulls out access, user lose everything. No exception"
Purchasing means "I can still listen to my loved songs, regardless of being pulled by label or not.

I'll wait until a label actually pulls out before I start caring about this hypothetical. It hasn't happened yet. In fact the opposite has happened, longtime holdouts like the Beatles have succumbed to streaming. Streaming is the future, it's best to just embrace it.
 
I'll wait until a label actually pulls out before I start caring about this hypothetical. It hasn't happened yet. In fact the opposite has happened, longtime holdouts like the Beatles have succumbed to streaming. Streaming is the future, it's best to just embrace it.
Then you must have no idea why this would happen:
http://stoneyroads.com/2015/05/another-major-label-pulls-artists-from-soundcloud

And this one is a bit old but yeah.
http://www.wired.com/2011/11/200-la...ic-from-spotify-are-its-fortunes-unravelling/

Once such happen, user will simply lose everything. No exception.
 
So wait you can't install softwares on your work or school computer but you can fire up a browser and start streaming music? I can tell you where I work no way would I ever be able to get to a streaming music site while on the company network. Heck where I work they block sites like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. They for sure would block a streaming music site.
Correct. This is not unusual.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.