I hate to be that guy in this thread... but something like this wouldn't have happened under Steve!
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 Managers Didn't Know How Spotify Worked, Engineers Used Pandora Over iTunes Radio
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I already explained in depth in another post in this thread what exactly Iw as referring to. The bing quote is getting lame!
It's possible that he didn't know as much as it was possible that he did but he had total faith the issues wouldn't be issues when it launched. Or that they wouldn't be the huge issues that they were. After all, who really looks at a map app for POI when there's yelp etc, he may have thought. And based on that he told Tim it was all good.
I agree that it wasn't the only reason but I do think it was one of them. Or rather his apparent attitude about the whole thing was. It was likely the final straw in too of the whole 'Steve' attitude that has leaked out several times.
I don't understand this comment. What does Spotify have to do with "watching random TV programs"? It's on-demand and has an offline mode. It's exactly like having an iTunes library of mp3s, except it's in the cloud instead of my hard drive. I have the same library on any internet-connected device, whether it's at work or at home, or on my phone.
No, I don't own the music, but I don't really care to. I frankly just don't listen to the same music I listened to a decade ago, so those CDs and files are gathering dust.
I still buy some music solely to support an artist I really like. But honestly I'd rather hit a tip jar, because I don't actually want to own the (license to the) music. I don't see any upside in having to babysit a library of files and migrate it from device to device. The only thing is battery life when on a mobile device, but that is easily dealt with just by turning on "Available offline" for whatever you want to listen to.
"At least the Netflix model makes more sense due to the frequency with which we rewatch films as opposed to music."
What? How? How does a subscription service make more sense when you rewatch a movie every 1-2 years, but doesn't make sense for content you're actually likely to listen to several times a week, like individual songs/albums you currently like?
It seems you don't have any idea how Spotify works, either. Maybe send a resume to Cupertino?
You've misunderstood me. It's precisely because I don't watch a movie more than once on most occasions that a subscription makes sense. I'm essentially paying a small price for new content every time I watch something. With music subscriptions, I'm in effect paying a small price multiple times for the same track, because I'm more likely to listen to a song more than once. So, as my 'rental' price encroaches on the price of actually owning the song, I figure, why not purchase it? Plus, I don't want to eat into a data plan streaming songs over 4G/3G on my phone and sometimes those networks are unreliable if you have to travel. Spotify's 'download' option is hit and miss; I know this, because *gasp*, I do use Spotify. And thanks for your snarky comment at the end. It was truly inspiring; I'll take your suggestion into consideration.
If you spend less than $10 a month on buying music, then you have a point.
The data plan thing is pretty alien to me, since my bandwidth allowance is 15GB for 10 euros a month, and I never even get close to capping. If you have a crappy data plan, Spotify isn't nearly as appealing.
I'm not sure what you mean by "hit and miss", but I'll take your word for it. I've never had issues with it.
I just haven't heard anyone make a good argument for why they want to "own" music, except for wanting to support artists. What you're arguing seems to make no sense from a financial perspective, or a practical one.
Why is an mp3 on your own hard drive better? Even if you have mobile data cap issues now, surely that will stop being an issue in all developed countries in a few years. You don't really own the song, you're paying a permanent license fee, which also means you have to babysit the file or the media it's on. It just seems like an irrational position to desire this faux "ownership" for its own sake.
Spotfy has many many millions of users for a reason. I don't question their services or anything as I think they are currently best streaming services out their right now and then Pandora. I need to own my music though because Im a bedroom DJ, however streaming is great for casual listening and being introduced to new artist which is very valuable to me as a music lover and dj, for this reason I will always use the services but will never pay money and subscribe to them.
1) I definitely spend less than $10 a month on music. I'd say I buy an album's worth of music once every six months.
2) Your experience is clearly different with 15GB for 10 versus the 1GB per £16 I'm getting - and that's considered a pretty good deal in the UK. Compared to some of the plans in the US, it's a steal.
3) Babysitting an MP3 is not much work - less work than babysitting a CD or record collection. And, what is the likelihood a record company is going to knock on my door (and everybody else's) when they decide the license has expired? If Spotify's license with a label expires, the content is pulled. Much like Netflix in that sense. So, yes, the MP3 is a licensed item - of course - but it's also one that I can generally put on any device, even those that aren't 'smart', needing a full on operating system to access. For all intents and purposes, it's my song until I die, lose the file, the file becomes incompatible with software or labels come asking for it back.
I realise that everyone has different expectations out of their media. So, I respect why you enjoy Spotify. I hope you can understand why there might be a preference the other way around. =)
In addition to the services likely not being around forever and the music that is available changing constantly, you're paying $10/month for something that will, for all intents and purposes, be pulled from you once you stop paying (yes, I realize you can use Spotify for free with ads, but it's not quite the same).
If I spend $10/month and buy one album, not only do I really get to know that album, but I own it. Forever, even when I'm 95 years old and can't afford a subscription to some high-tech service.
If I spend $10/month and find some albums I like on Spotify, once I decide to stop paying Spotify, or once Spotify pulls that album, or once Spotify goes out of business, I don't have those albums anymore. Waste of $10/month.
I prefer buying and owning. (I'm also 30 years old -- I think this really is coming down to an age thing.)
Ah, thanks. That really made my day!
I like iTunes radio now and then. I just start a station with some artist du jour that I pick from stuff I collect, and let them run with it. I use "remember iTunes song changes" in Notifications so I can go back and find something later on if I'm too busy to look into it more when the track is playing. I usually listen to iTunes radio on Saturday or Sunday when I'm taking a longish break from work and chores.
As far as I'm concerned Apple does a decent job filling out the stations as long as my initial pick is not so far off the beaten track that even I would have trouble making a playlist of copacetic stuff from music I already own. And that's taking into account that when I make a playlist from my own stuff, I don't have restrictions like whatever the studios lay on Apple, since I've already bought the stuff. Apple has to work inside whatever they've managed to negotiate for streaming. If I don't care for what's playing, I can bail, so what's not to like, and it's pretty often I hear something I do like and haven't realized was out there. I don't "follow" artists or subscribe to alerts on their releases; can't stand the clutter. So every once in awhile I think to seed an iTunes station with some artist whose stuff I haven't updated in a long time. Works for me, I usually find something I'd actually like to buy.
So far I prefer iTunes radio to Pandora. I sub to Pandora One but tend to hear stuff I already own or else stuff I don't like very well. I won't really fault them since my listening is sporadic and half-distracted since I use it when slogging through the newspapers or emailed news briefs. To be completely fair to Pandora, I have a feeling my preference is more governed by WHEN and HOW I use the two streaming services than by how either one actually works.
Spotify is still in my future. I was put off initially by references to peer networking and have never gone back to straighten out how one can use the service and avoid that stuff.
I hate to be that guy in this thread... but something like this wouldn't have happened under Steve!
Very true, if Steve was in the picture they'd still be ignorant and shilling for iTunes... LOL