Apple Music Integration Possibly Coming to Google Home Devices [Updated]

[Gilligan's last elephant]

There are several issues with Spotify compared to Apple Music.

• The Spotify app interface changes way too often and the developers will often hide features used by people (repeat).
• The 10,000 song library and download caps are an absolute joke.
• Spotify's solution for having users "upload" missing content is terrible and not a viable solution.
• Spotify's CarPlay interface doesn't make things easy for quickly accessing content.
• The lack of smart playlists in Spotify is absurd.
• Adding an album adds a track counting against the joke of a library cap Spotify implements, this shouldn't happen.
• The Spotify app is bloated and uses way too many resources on Android.
• The Spotify PC program has become a bloated mess no different than iTunes (on Windows) and uses even more resources on macOS (my MacBook Air's fan shouldn't be spinning when I'm just playing music).

The points I raised are about the ergonomics of Apple Music ap.
Listening to albums like Dark Side Of The Moon, where all the tracks merge into each other, is ruined by half second audio gaps. Most of the albums I and many others listen to have lots of merging tracks.

When listening to music on the gym when on a crosstrainer it's necessary to keep the phone in landscape position and Apple Music doesn't adjust to landscape. This is ridiculous.

When active on gym equipment it's far easier to swipe across the screen than carefully tap on the transport controls if one wants to advance to next track.

ALL music players I have used on Android have these FUNDAMENTAL requirements dealt with.

It makes one think the programme was written by someone with no thought for ergonomics.

If these basics aren't dealt with, all your points are irrelevant.

 

[P_Devil]

The points I raised are about the ergonomics of Apple Music ap.

The points I raised are about the Spotify app and the underlying service.

Listening to albums like Dark Side Of The Moon, where all the tracks merge into each other, is ruined by half second audio gaps. Most of the albums I and many others listen to have lots of merging tracks.

It's gapless on my iPhone and has been since Apple updated it a couple years ago. I don't think it's gapless on Android though.

When listening to music on the gym when on a crosstrainer it's necessary to keep the phone in landscape position and Apple Music doesn't adjust to landscape. This is ridiculous.

What's ridiculous is Spotify limiting people to 10,000 songs. How am I supposed to listen to anything, gapless or not, if my library is full? The lack of smart playlists also means I have to manually manage things and I'm not about to dive into a 35,000 song library to manually manage content, this isn't 1998.

When active on gym equipment it's far easier to swipe across the screen than carefully tap on the transport controls if one wants to advance to next track.

It's a lot easier for me just to leave my iPhone in a cup holder and use my Apple Watch for changing tracks, it isn't my fault that Wear OS has been stagnent.

ALL music players I have used on Android have these FUNDAMENTAL requirements dealt with.

And all music players I have used have the FUNDAMENTAL requirements of not limiting people to 10,000 songs/downloads, supporting some type of smart playlists, not bogging systems down, not removing easily accessible features or controls, and being able to easily upload content missing from the service.

It makes one think the programme was written by someone with no thought for ergonomics.

If these basics aren't dealt with, all your points are irrelevant.

It makes me think Spotify was made by people who don't actually have music libraries. If the underlying service doesn't support what I listed, your points about the app are irrelevent. The music service must first and foremost support large libraries and, at the very least, the ability to upload missing content. Without the ability to have an actual music library, there is no point in polishing an app. Spotify might have a better app but their service is attrocious and it's missing some of the most basic features, features that Deezer has and even Groove Music had when it was actually running, features that Google Play Music and Apple Music had when they launched (and continue to support). Without those underlying features, app enhancements are a moot point.

 

[ipedro]

I see that Apple Music has been removed from Google Home in the latest update.

That’s too bad. I love my HomePod but got a Google Home for free at a raffle (isn’t that how everyone gets them?) that’s I keep on my bedside table.

I’m looking forward to a Beats Pill like HomePod mini or a Beats Pill itself with Siri and AirPlay 2. The HomePod is fantastic but it’s still too big for a bedside table. A smaller version will be welcome.

 

[Timemaster]

Well until Apple music makes it onto the Google home devices there is no way I will switch over to used it. I have been using Google music for a long time and it works great. It was a great service when it first came out and my house is set up with several google homes and nest products. I was on android for a while.
Apple speaker cost way to much for what it I want it to do 99% of the time. That is a voice assitant for basic things like setting timer, running smart home things, checking weather or quick question, and just playing some background music. I do not care about the high quality music as it is more for a mood.

They work great for that I have at this point like 5 of them in my house if you include the minis. Apple voice assistant is not as good and the speaker is way to late to the game.

 

[Gilligan's last elephant]

The points I raised are about the Spotify app and the underlying service.



It's gapless on my iPhone and has been since Apple updated it a couple years ago. I don't think it's gapless on Android though.



What's ridiculous is Spotify limiting people to 10,000 songs. How am I supposed to listen to anything, gapless or not, if my library is full? The lack of smart playlists also means I have to manually manage things and I'm not about to dive into a 35,000 song library to manually manage content, this isn't 1998.



It's a lot easier for me just to leave my iPhone in a cup holder and use my Apple Watch for changing tracks, it isn't my fault that Wear OS has been stagnent.



And all music players I have used have the FUNDAMENTAL requirements of not limiting people to 10,000 songs/downloads, supporting some type of smart playlists, not bogging systems down, not removing easily accessible features or controls, and being able to easily upload content missing from the service.



It makes me think Spotify was made by people who don't actually have music libraries. If the underlying service doesn't support what I listed, your points about the app are irrelevent. The music service must first and foremost support large libraries and, at the very least, the ability to upload missing content. Without the ability to have an actual music library, there is no point in polishing an app. Spotify might have a better app but their service is attrocious and it's missing some of the most basic features, features that Deezer has and even Groove Music had when it was actually running, features that Google Play Music and Apple Music had when they launched (and continue to support). Without those underlying features, app enhancements are a moot point.

I had enquired from iOS users on this forum who had said gapless wasn't available.
So we have the situation whereby Apple charge Android users the same as iOS users and deliberately withhold an important feature - gapless playback.

10,000 track limit doesn’t stop you from listening to anything. However deliberately not providing gapless playback does stop me from enjoying albums properly.

I shouldn't have to spend hundreds extra £££ to buy accessories to fully use an ap on my phone. Ridiculous suggestion. Especially not having to look at stuff 90 degrees rotated.

The big issue I had in the 3 to 4 months I tried to use Apple Music, after the ergonomic problems, was its incompetence at curating music in genres I enjoy. I also didn't discover any new music to follow.

Spotify is vastly superior at this as it searches out playlists of thousands of other users who listen to tracks I listen to, and let's me hear other stuff they listen to. I've found several bands I hadn't heard of. Also lots of late 60s and 70s stuff I had completely forgotten about, using Spotify.

 

[Shanghaichica]

I had enquired from iOS users on this forum who had said gapless wasn't available.
So we have the situation whereby Apple charge Android users the same as iOS users and deliberately withhold an important feature - gapless playback.

10,000 track limit doesn’t stop you from listening to anything. However deliberately not providing gapless playback does stop me from enjoying albums properly.

I shouldn't have to spend hundreds extra £££ to buy accessories to fully use an ap on my phone. Ridiculous suggestion. Especially not having to look at stuff 90 degrees rotated.

The big issue I had in the 3 to 4 months I tried to use Apple Music, after the ergonomic problems, was its incompetence at curating music in genres I enjoy. I also didn't discover any new music to follow.

Spotify is vastly superior at this as it searches out playlists of thousands of other users who listen to tracks I listen to, and let's me hear other stuff they listen to. I've found several bands I hadn't heard of. Also lots of late 60s and 70s stuff I had completely forgotten about, using Spotify.

It’s not gapless on my iPhone. Maybe there’s a setting I need to change.

 

[BXRich]

Much of the incomparability issues are one sided.
One company not permitting their gear to work with other OSs

didn't place blame on either, just saying I'm happy to see it.

 

[Gilligan's last elephant]

It’s not gapless on my iPhone. Maybe there’s a setting I need to change.

There is a setting in Spotify to enable it. Maybe same with Apple Music

 

[Defthand]

If I were Google I’d say, “Sure, but we want a 50 percent cut.”

 

[iSayuSay]

Well, they want to do both: expand services and add value to their hardware. Opening up a HomePod sdk and allowing Spotify to use voice control would fix one of the largest gripes people have with the value proposition of HomePod, and I think it could greatly improve its position in the smart speaker market. Ppl can justify a HomePod purchase a lot easier if their Spotify family plan that everyone likes and is happy with integrates

Actually I also want Spotify to be available for Homepod and Siri and ATV. It’s a good move that will make everyone happy and stay with whatever service they prefer.

It’s just an unlikely move from Apple considering Tim Cook said many times how he wants Apple to get big in service business.

All the strategies is about expanding Apple service and rattle the competition, even if it may sacrifice a few hardware sales. Next april keynote is rumored to be Apple video streaming launch, so the next target is Netflix etc..

 

[AustinIllini]

If I were Google I’d say, “Sure, but we want a 50 percent cut.”

They don't care, honestly. That's not their jam. They just want all the data they collect from the devices and Google services. They don't need Apple Music profits.

 

[tharitm]

Apple is expanding its services alright.

 

[DarwinOSX]

A little too late, myself and damn near everyone I know moved to Spotify, from Apple music or Google Play.

Oh you and everyone you know huh? Wow Apple must be freaking out right now.
[doublepost=1551239438][/doublepost]

They don't care, honestly. That's not their jam. They just want all the data they collect from the devices and Google services. They don't need Apple Music profits.

Neither does Apple. They sell more devices because of Apple Music. There is next to no prpfit in a streaming service because of licensing costs.
[doublepost=1551239501][/doublepost]

I had enquired from iOS users on this forum who had said gapless wasn't available.
So we have the situation whereby Apple charge Android users the same as iOS users and deliberately withhold an important feature - gapless playback.

10,000 track limit doesn’t stop you from listening to anything. However deliberately not providing gapless playback does stop me from enjoying albums properly.

I shouldn't have to spend hundreds extra £££ to buy accessories to fully use an ap on my phone. Ridiculous suggestion. Especially not having to look at stuff 90 degrees rotated.

The big issue I had in the 3 to 4 months I tried to use Apple Music, after the ergonomic problems, was its incompetence at curating music in genres I enjoy. I also didn't discover any new music to follow.

Spotify is vastly superior at this as it searches out playlists of thousands of other users who listen to tracks I listen to, and let's me hear other stuff they listen to. I've found several bands I hadn't heard of. Also lots of late 60s and 70s stuff I had completely forgotten about, using Spotify.

Oh please. That’s laughable.

 

[Internet Enzyme]

Actually I also want Spotify to be available for Homepod and Siri and ATV. It’s a good move that will make everyone happy and stay with whatever service they prefer.

It’s just an unlikely move from Apple considering Tim Cook said many times how he wants Apple to get big in service business.

All the strategies is about expanding Apple service and rattle the competition, even if it may sacrifice a few hardware sales. Next april keynote is rumored to be Apple video streaming launch, so the next target is Netflix etc..

I think with the case of homepod, not having spotify support is preventing adoption more than homepod purchases are pushing apple music subscriptions, if that makes sense

 

[Dammit Cubs]

I have been using another app for the tracker. I'm good.

 

[LIVEFRMNYC]

Oh you and everyone you know huh? Wow Apple must be freaking out right now.

Spotify is the top dog for a reason. This is just one of x amount of times, having such a closed ecosystem bit Apple in the ass. Take offence all you want. Facts are FACTS!!!

 

[Vale71]

Just an illusion?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ug-for-apple-music-appearing-on-home-speakers

 

[gijoeinla]

IMO it is an action that acknowledges Apple's grip on customers isn't as tight as it once was. This is to reach out to those who AREN'T in Appleland. But ultimately, I think it won't be effective because what is the incentive for non-Apple people to buy into a service (Apple Music) that is not as widely cross-platform as their competitors?

Apple's services are not best-of-breed. They didn't have to be because they were just a part of the ecosystem of hardware-software-services. As standalone services, they're "meh" but as part of the larger package it all held together.

If Apple is able to improve the quality of their services and allow those services to NOT be tied to their hardware, then their hardware sales are going to suffer because people won't need to buy their hardware to use their services.

I agree and don’t agree. Do you think that every Apple customer doesn’t have a amazon dot or a google speaker in their homes and or offices today but yet may iphones, watches, computer hardware?

I’m assuming your thinking all or nothing. I think it’s apt for Apple to realize the world outside of the Apple ecosystem has arms and legs they can try to sell a future service to that might, might bring them to own more hardware. I think you need think about the billions of people that own a variety of products and will never ever own more than one thing from one manufacturer mainly because of buying impulses based strictly on PRICE. Apple is always cut out of that market. What’s wrong with having real estate on competitor platforms since nearly every single one theirs has in some cases substantial real estate on its own platform.

Apple is doing what it has to do.

Most importantly Apple will likely never make a TV but I’m certainly thrilled that two of my Vizios will be getting AirPlay and HomeKit access soon. And what’s bad about Samsung TVs getting access to iTunes or whatever?

I still don’t get the downside. There’s more people outside the Apple ecosystem than in it. A smarter strategy is to have your brand in as many places as you can - in limited form - just like it is when you see a billboard campaign up in the throngs of all your competitors.

Was it a stupid move when Netflix bought out over 20 of the worlds most prestigious billboards along Sunset Blvd in Los Angeles not long ago to promote their content?

Apples moves onto other major globally accepted platforms is a brilliant move that will drive people to their platforms regardless.

 

[Shanghaichica]

I would have liked Apple Music on the google home as I have 2 home minis.

 

[TVreporter]

Apologizes for the major bump but was this ever updated? I can’t find any mention.

Received a Google Nest Mini and I can connect via Bluetooth for AM but it won’t do voice commands besides next song. If I ask for a playlist it goes back to Google or Youtube music