Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

v0lume4

macrumors 68020
Jul 28, 2012
2,485
5,158
Dud u dont have an iPhone? Why? I cant believe it. All ppl i know including females uses iPhones. Even frienz from the neighborhood who r a poor have iPhone too. Why u don’t? Please explain.
2 b honest, my usage needs r better met by an android phoen so taht is why.
[doublepost=1513103002][/doublepost]
It's an unwinnable war! :p
I'm assuming that Apple Music is also unprofitable, but Apple the advantage Apple has is that Apple Music is just one piece of their entire business. So even if Apple Music is losing money, if it can still bring people to iPhone and get then further entrenched in the ecosystem, then Apple wins. Spotify, on the other hand, only has it's music.

The issue is the record labels. They know that they have everyone bent over a barrel, and they charge accordingly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: saudade

DeepIn2U

macrumors G5
May 30, 2002
12,923
6,922
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/11/why-did-apple-buy-shazam.html

As long as Apple doesn't make Shazam an iOS-exclusive and doesn't affect Android users, I'm ok with it. Run independent like Waze. If not, then Google should remove the apps they make for iOS and make them exclusive only for Android.

I'll go back using SoundHound or a voice assistant. It's only fair since Google shares Google Assistant and many useful apps to iOS users. I don't want divisive moves. Shazam is cool and was amazing back in 2008 but SH and voice assistants can now do the same thing.

Shazam being used all the time is insane. It would have been Al Bundy's favorite app over 25 years ago to figure out the song was "Anna"... ~Go with him~

That kind of thinking ONLY hurts everyone within the technology industry - as evidenced with the squabbling going on between Amazon and Google affecting Google Home and Echo and now Android.

iOS is already getting crippled services from Google.
Google Maps ... you cannot layer search results for say restaurants near you as you can on Android. I saw this first hand last weekend.

Personally I use SoundHound for my music searches on iOS and it will playback lyrics in sync with the track I'm playing and connects to iTunes Store / Apple Music streaming. As it stands, Shazam offers me nothing, yet. There must be something else here and I'll bet it's for better song detection, their code to be used in Siri and bundling all Shazam services into Apple Music app. Intellectual Property must have something Apple is after, maybe distinctive voice detection for Siri services in Apple Home with ATV4/4K and HomePod?

Hmm.
 

Michael Scrip

macrumors 604
Mar 4, 2011
7,936
12,502
NC
I'm assuming that Apple Music is also unprofitable...

The difference for Apple is that all of their 30 million customers are paying something... either $10/mo per normal user, or $5/mo for students, or some other amount per user on family plans. I don't know how much money Apple has to pay for music licenses... but at least they get some revenue from every user.

On the other hand... Spotify has 60 million customers who are paying something... but also 80 million customers who pay nothing. And Spotify has to pay music licenses for both sets of users... while they only make a tiny amount of revenue from ads from the majority of their userbase. (free users)

It's really lopsided for Spotify.

I don't know if Apple Music is profitable... but it'd be hard to be doing worse than Spotify. :p
 

v0lume4

macrumors 68020
Jul 28, 2012
2,485
5,158
The difference for Apple is that all of their 30 million customers are paying something... either $10/mo per normal user, or $5/mo for students, or some other amount per user on family plans. I don't know how much money Apple has to pay for music licenses... but at least they get some revenue from every user.

On the other hand... Spotify has 60 million customers who are paying something... but also 80 million customers who pay nothing. And Spotify has to pay music licenses for both sets of users... while they only make a tiny amount of revenue from ads from the majority of their userbase. (free users)

It's really lopsided for Spotify.

I don't know if Apple Music is profitable... but it'd be hard to be doing worse than Spotify. :p
What's crazy is Spotify used to be subscription only for mobile devices, if I recall correctly. I guess they thought that getting more people on the free tier might eventually entice them to upgrade to Premium.

Again, Apple at least makes money from everywhere else. Apple Music is just an ecosystem perk more than anything. Spotify doesn't have those extra revenue streams. :oops:

Hoping that Spotify finds a way to become profitable. Read: I hope these royalty rates go down. These business models are not sustainable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Scrip

Uofmtiger

macrumors 68020
Dec 11, 2010
2,351
1,062
Memphis
The difference for Apple is that all of their 30 million customers are paying something... either $10/mo per normal user, or $5/mo for students, or some other amount per user on family plans. I don't know how much money Apple has to pay for music licenses... but at least they get some revenue from every user.

On the other hand... Spotify has 60 million customers who are paying something... but also 80 million customers who pay nothing. And Spotify has to pay music licenses for both sets of users... while they only make a tiny amount of revenue from ads from the majority of their userbase. (free users)

It's really lopsided for Spotify.

I don't know if Apple Music is profitable... but it'd be hard to be doing worse than Spotify. :p
As was mentioned, the main benefit for Apple is ecosystem lock in. They want people to get used to use Apple Music via Siri on the Mac, iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch. They don't really need to make money on the service if it is helping them to continue selling hardware. Of course, Apple Services are growing quickly, so Apple could be making profits in this area because they can spread out operating costs.
 

Michael Scrip

macrumors 604
Mar 4, 2011
7,936
12,502
NC
As was mentioned, the main benefit for Apple is ecosystem lock in. They want people to get used to use Apple Music via Siri on the Mac, iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch. They don't really need to make money on the service if it is helping them to continue selling hardware. Of course, Apple Services are growing quickly, so Apple could be making profits in this area because they can spread out operating costs.

Oh I understand how it benefits Apple. :)

I'm just wondering if Apple would allow any part of their business to operate at a loss.

Let's be honest... 30 million Apple Music users out of 1 billion total Apple user isn't a lot. Although yes... I can see the appeal.

But if Apple wanted to be generous by taking a loss to promote lock-in... how about giving everyone 50GB of iCloud storage. Get 1 billion people to put ALL their photos on Apple servers.

THAT would promote lock-in waaay more than Apple Music ever will. :p
 

RuffyYoshi

macrumors regular
Feb 18, 2014
216
439
Serbia
They'll do that by eliminating it. Shazam is a feature, not a product. It will be integrated into iOS and into other apps as appropriate.
Yeah, I was just trolling. My guess is it will work like how the Pixel has that feature where the title of the song playing nearby is displayed while the phone is in standby. So it may mean the iPhone is getting a standby always-on feature.
 

coolfactor

macrumors 604
Jul 29, 2002
7,202
9,992
Vancouver, BC
This is bad, because it's proof that Apple simply can't improve Siri without acquisitions.

It's not proof of anything except that Apple wants to build a platform with unique advantages over the alternatives. Ingesting well-designed, well-received services and building them in is a good strategy. But it doesn't mean that they are doing nothing else to make Siri better. Siri has improved greatly, Shazam aside.
[doublepost=1513118589][/doublepost]
Oh I understand how it benefits Apple. :)

I'm just wondering if Apple would allow any part of their business to operate at a loss.

Let's be honest... 30 million Apple Music users out of 1 billion total Apple user isn't a lot. Although yes... I can see the appeal.

But if Apple wanted to be generous by taking a loss to promote lock-in... how about giving everyone 50GB of iCloud storage. Get 1 billion people to put ALL their photos on Apple servers.

THAT would promote lock-in waaay more than Apple Music ever will. :p

How, when Google already offers unlimited photo storage? It would not be a deciding factor FOR iOS.
 

apolloa

Suspended
Oct 21, 2008
12,318
7,802
Time, because it rules EVERYTHING!
I don’t want to be right. I just see a company that is only in business because it keeps being given cash from the outside and I don’t see a viable business. But that wasn’t even about the idea of their viability.

If buying Shazam were to kill any company, they were not long for the world. Take Spotify out of the equation. How is Shazam keeping competition going?

I read Spotify and another one of these services use it, no idea how? Personally I find Siri not toooooo bad at recognising tracks, but if course they seem to only be ones available in iTunes.

And Apple does an aweful lot to try and kill the competition regardless if they are meant to be or not!
 

Michael Goff

Suspended
Jul 5, 2012
13,329
7,421
I read Spotify and another one of these services use it, no idea how? Personally I find Siri not toooooo bad at recognising tracks, but if course they seem to only be ones available in iTunes.

And Apple does an aweful lot to try and kill the competition regardless if they are meant to be or not!

Oh yeah, every business tries to kill competition. I’m not saying Apple isn’t. I just don’t think this should, or will, sign the death warrant for any company.
 

Bawstun

Suspended
Jun 25, 2009
2,374
2,999
Note to Apple: hype no longer sells as well as the early 2000's. Buying Shazam and taking their users/interest will not fix how poorly designed and unusable Apple Music is. Your growth will continue to stall until you address those problems. Acquiring isn't the answer.

Signed,
happy Spotify premium user of 3+ years
 

Uofmtiger

macrumors 68020
Dec 11, 2010
2,351
1,062
Memphis
Oh I understand how it benefits Apple. :)

I'm just wondering if Apple would allow any part of their business to operate at a loss.

Let's be honest... 30 million Apple Music users out of 1 billion total Apple user isn't a lot. Although yes... I can see the appeal.

But if Apple wanted to be generous by taking a loss to promote lock-in... how about giving everyone 50GB of iCloud storage. Get 1 billion people to put ALL their photos on Apple servers.

THAT would promote lock-in waaay more than Apple Music ever will. :p
Not really, there is nothing unique about cloud storage. Siri combined with Apple Music is much harder to replace if you get used to it on the Watch, Mac, Appletv, etc.... I could easily move files from iCloud to Google Drive without much of a hassle.

30 million and growing. The service is still relatively new and they haven’t even brought out the HomePod yet.
 

Michael Scrip

macrumors 604
Mar 4, 2011
7,936
12,502
NC
Siri combined with Apple Music is much harder to replace if you get used to it on the Watch, Mac, Appletv, etc...

30 million and growing. The service is still relatively new and they haven’t even brought out the HomePod yet.

I'm not knocking Apple Music... I use it myself. :)

But even if Apple Music had 100 million users.... that's still only 1 out of 8 Apple customers. Or thereabouts.

Apple Music will not be the "glue" that keeps a majority of Apple's customers locked into the Apple ecosystem.

Most of those Apple customers only have an iPhone... while the number of people with iPhone and iPad and Mac and Watch and AppleTV are far less.

And if you love Apple Music... you can still use it if you switch to an Android phone. Or on a Windows PC in iTunes.

Sure... you don't get Siri integration on those other platforms... but I wonder how big of a draw Siri is with Apple Music. Or with Apple products overall.

Is Siri really the thing that makes people buy Apple hardware? :p

Not really, there is nothing unique about cloud storage. I could easily move files from iCloud to Google Drive without much of a hassle.

You're right about cloud storage. There's nothing inherently unique about Apple's iCloud versus other cloud platforms. Google already offers it for free... so it's game, set, match.

My point was... if Apple is willing to take a loss on Apple Music... why wouldn't they take a loss and give everyone free iCloud?

iCloud Photo Library is their built-in service. And there are more people who take photos on iPhone versus the people who use, or will ever use, Apple Music.

You're correct though... you can move all your photos from iCloud to Google Drive rather easily. So the "ecosystem lock-in" with photos is actually very weak.

But at the same time... you can use Apple Music on non-Apple hardware too. No lock-in there either.

The only secret weapon Apple Music has with Apple hardware is Siri. But really... is Siri the "lock-in" queen? :D
 
Last edited:

Uofmtiger

macrumors 68020
Dec 11, 2010
2,351
1,062
Memphis
I'm not knocking Apple Music... I use it myself. :)

But even if Apple Music had 100 million users.... that's still only 1 out of 8 Apple customers. Or thereabouts.

Apple Music will not be the "glue" that keeps a majority of Apple's customers locked into the Apple ecosystem.

Most of those Apple customers only have an iPhone... while the number of people with iPhone and iPad and Mac and Watch and AppleTV are far less.

And if you love Apple Music... you can still use it if you switch to an Android phone. Or on a Windows PC in iTunes.

Sure... you don't get Siri integration on those other platforms... but I wonder how big of a draw Siri is with Apple Music. Or with Apple products overall.

Is Siri really the thing that makes people buy Apple hardware? :p



You're right about cloud storage. There's nothing inherently unique about Apple's iCloud versus other cloud platforms. Google already offers it for free... so it's game, set, match.

My point was... if Apple is willing to take a loss on Apple Music... why wouldn't they take a loss and give everyone free iCloud?

iCloud Photo Library is their built-in service. And there are more people who take photos on iPhone versus the people who use, or will ever use, Apple Music.

You're correct though... you can move all your photos from iCloud to Google Drive rather easily. So the "ecosystem lock-in" with photos is actually very weak.

But at the same time... you can use Apple Music on non-Apple hardware too. No lock-in there either.

The only secret weapon Apple Music has with Apple hardware is Siri. But really... is Siri the "lock-in" queen? :D
It isn't about it being the "glue" or being the "lock-in queen", which is honestly a straw man argument. I said "They don't really need to make money on the service if it is helping them to continue selling hardware". I never said it was "THE glue".

Airplay isn't "the glue" either, but it was the one feature that held me in the iOS ecosystem while they were making tiny phones while Android manufacturers had phones in every size. People have different reasons for wanting to stay with iOS. One of them is Apple Music with Siri and the number of those people will continue to grow as the service and products that take advantage of Siri/Apple Music grows.

The products that take advantage of Siri/Apple Music is getting longer by the day. Airpods, Beatsx, HomePods (which will eventually make it to market), CarPlay, Apple Watch, etc. Apple Music combined with Siri is a part of their overall strategy to "lock in" users and sell more hardware. Spotify, on the other hand, has no such strategy. And no, Apple Music isn't the same service without Siri.

By the way, we don't know that Apple isn't making money on Apple Music. They have it in "services" on their financials and services is one of the fasting growing segments for Apple.
 

Michael Scrip

macrumors 604
Mar 4, 2011
7,936
12,502
NC
It isn't about it being the "glue" or being the "lock-in queen", which is honestly a straw man argument. I said "They don't really need to make money on the service if it is helping them to continue selling hardware". I never said it was "THE glue".

Airplay isn't "the glue" either, but it was the one feature that held me in the iOS ecosystem while they were making tiny phones while Android manufacturers had phones in every size. People have different reasons for wanting to stay with iOS. One of them is Apple Music with Siri and the number of those people will continue to grow as the service and products that take advantage of Siri/Apple Music grows.

The products that take advantage of Siri/Apple Music is getting longer by the day. Airpods, Beatsx, HomePods (which will eventually make it to market), CarPlay, Apple Watch, etc. Apple Music combined with Siri is a part of their overall strategy to "lock in" users and sell more hardware. Spotify, on the other hand, has no such strategy. And no, Apple Music isn't the same service without Siri.

By the way, we don't know that Apple isn't making money on Apple Music. They have it in "services" on their financials and services is one of the fasting growing segments for Apple.

I understand what you mean now. It's the little things that make iOS great. I love that stuff.

I was thinking of an iMessages type of lock-in. That was my bad. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Uofmtiger

MysteryMii215

macrumors regular
Jan 10, 2016
153
355
NYC area
How, when Google already offers unlimited photo storage? It would not be a deciding factor FOR iOS.

It would be because:
  1. The "unlimited" photo storage doesn't store your photos in their original quality. If you decide to do that, then it's going to eat into the 15GB of free cloud storage that Google gives to all Google Accounts.
  2. Google Photos is a separate app download.
 

SaucyWeeTart

macrumors member
Oct 13, 2016
41
14
Glasgow, Scotland
Could you elaborate more why you wished this?

Because I've always felt that an acquisition of this sort would increase the benefits of being involved in the Apple ecosystem, mainly improving Siri/Apple Music, which I currently subscribe.

Right, Apple. Next on the list, oDrive! Make it rain on these small, talented companies!
 
  • Like
Reactions: matrix07
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.