Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Confirms 71.5% Revenue Sharing for Apple Music, No Royalties During Trial Period
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well Apple is using "human curation" as their sales pitch so they have to offer more than one month for a trial.
Yeah until someone says that should be free with ads too...
Here's to hoping they put some of that 71.5% to designing more icons with white backgrounds.
I remember the days when Steve Jobs lost sleep over Google's iPhone icons and their colors, etc. Now I think Apple has middle school interns designing their icons. It's as if the first thing that pops into their heads, they sit down in Illustrator and hash it out in 15 min. I thought Android OS icons were bad, but they have Apple beat I think now.
The poor icons are just another step in a long line of poor choices Apple has made, such as dumbing down all their apps, dumbing down their computer designs, and generally dumbing down everything for the 90% of casual computer user.
The only thing Apple is doing now that mildly excites me is their Apple TV/Subscription service. And they are even putting music ahead of that. Steve Jobs said people want to own their music. Tim Cook thinks otherwise. I'm with Steve. Between renting my music from Apple, renting my apps from Adobe, and generally being nickel and dimed at every turn, I simply have lost all my passion for Apple products.
You know what, I'm really getting freaking sick of some of you people here who are constantly backing up artists you don't even know personally, like you really care. At the end of the day "I"/ "WE" are the customers that are paying money and my/our needs come first rather than sitting down acting like the artists come before the consumer's needs. Just stop. Really. The artists certainly don't care about you as much as you care about them."No royalties during trial period" - what a shabby business model where artists are pre-financing Apple's market entry.
I know this is probably industry standard, and due to negotiations with the labels, but for me, that means I will not buy Apple Music. I simply do not want to support such a business model.
And nobody is stopping you from paying for the subscription upfront to take care of these artists you "seem" to care about so much.....or did you just want to have yet another reason to blast Apple?
Last edited:
For artists holding out like the Beatles, why wouldn't the labels agree to Apple Music. It's not like they're a new band and pretty much everyone who wants to listen to all their music have already done so
A lot of the music I listen to on Spotify (family sub) is music that I already own (why? convenience while mobile). I also listen to music on Spotify that I would never consider buying, but at least the artist that made it is getting paid something (as opposed to when I preview music in the iTunes Store). I also maintain a Tidal subscription for the lossless streaming (so yeah, I'm spending $15+$20 / month on streaming services currently).
Apple Music might be interesting if they offered ALAC as an option (at least on the desktop), then (assuming the streaming works better and more reliably than iTunes Match and they follow through on the Android app promise) I might be able to replace both Spotify and Tidal.
Apple Music might be interesting if they offered ALAC as an option (at least on the desktop), then (assuming the streaming works better and more reliably than iTunes Match and they follow through on the Android app promise) I might be able to replace both Spotify and Tidal.
Taylor swift never said she doesn't like streaming. She is against free streaming. She probably doesn't have a problem with a free trial.
Exactly my thought as well. And as no detailed royalities where named outside the U.S. supports your observation. I think we might see things repeating. Like iTunes Match, movies and series in iCloud that were only introduced years after or even never started as iTunes Radio.
Freerider theory. They know others will pay, so why should I? Especially popular in discussions lead by students.
What .99 trial? Apple's trial will be 3 months, no cost. You're thinking Spotify there.
Taylor Swift is not a hypocrite. She is against a free tier, not a free trial. These words are not the same. I, too, am against free tiers. I think if people willingly pay to stream TV shows and movies with Netflix, they should pay to stream music too. It has as much value as TV shows/movies. But that's me. I pay for Spotify Premium because artists deserve to get paid, and if Apple Music proves to be better for my needs (likely so, since iTunes Match will be built-in), I will switch and willingly pay for the service.
UK is getting Apple music on June 30th as their apple music website has changed to that date. It seems, again, that Canada is getting shafted as it still says coming soon. Already blasted SOCAN and Apple music on twitter about it. Trying to email tim cook to give him a piece of my mind. Really close to subscribing to a year w/ xbox music and apple music can shove it up their ass.
Here's to hoping they put some of that 71.5% to designing more icons with white backgrounds.
She doesn't want "freemium", she never said she was against free trials.
I hope Apple can really pull this one off. Besides the launch of the original iTunes, on-line services have not been a bright spot for Apple. However, if you think long-term, where Spotify and other music streaming services are basically music only, merge this with Movies, TV channels, shows, games, etc... and you may end up with a single subscription someday where all your entertainment can come through Apple. In the Car, on your phone, the TV, etc...
However, Apple Music, as well as any TV offering must be successful on it's own first... if so, then it could be very cool in the long run.
However, Apple Music, as well as any TV offering must be successful on it's own first... if so, then it could be very cool in the long run.
Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. Wait for June 30th, and if Apple Music hasn't arrived in Canada by then, you are free to burn down Apple's HQ.
Honestly, I can see Apple competing with Netflix when they expand Apple Music to support TV shows/Movies in a couple of years time.
You heard it here first!
Why on earth are you trying to email Tim Cook?
Show a little patience.
You don't think, for example, that the underlying legal agreements for each country might be a huge, time consuming minefield?
Self-entitlement seems to be all the rage these days.
Hmm, where are you looking? https://www.apple.com/uk/music/membership/ is still saying coming soon when I look.
Email sent but asking why Canada is always getting the shaft on new features. I doubt Canada will get it on June 30 if the websites are being changed by now.
Another possibility is that you don't understand why Taylor Swift pulled her music from Spotify.
She said it was because she felt Spotify devalued music.. that it created an expectation that music should be too cheap or even free to get. That doesn't necessarily mean she's against streaming outright, just how Spotify's doing it.
There are some differences between Apple Music and Spotify that might account for the difference. The biggest one is that Apple doesn't have a free tier. After a trial, everyone pays. And, maybe the student discount contributes to the feeling that it devalues music (College kids tend to consume a lot of music so a flat rate is pretty favorable).
I still think new album from some artists will be delayed by a month or 2 so they can get album sales before they are in the streaming music library.
Unless it's a big name player, they absolutely cannot afford to do so. And if they aren't, you can always buy their album and get it matched with Apple Music anyway (so you can stream it), just like iTunes Match.
