Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I don't understand this. I think they were very benevolent for doing this, and it makes for good business.



And yes, they do care, but when you're a multibillion-dollar public company, it becomes about an ethos, an ecosystem, and the shareholder (owner). Apple has a wonderful mix of conservatism/responsibility, stability, and delivery. Their product line is tight, and you probably don't go a day without using their products. I'm happy to criticize when it's due, but it's not due here.

It’s all about the shareholder which is all
About $$$. Ecosystem has nothing to do with this conversation. Ethics? Lol. There are zero ethics in business
 
by 'minimum guarantees' do you mean what Spotify MUST pay to artists and PMO's by virtue of doing day/day business - like all other streaming companies including Apple iTunes & Apple Music? Seems like a misuse of definition being used here, so if you can clarify that would be all well and good. Thx
Sorry. I mean, major labels and large distributors of indies receive a minimum amount of revenue from their clients over a set period of time (1, 2, 3 years...), paid in advance or arrears, not refundable regardless of the performance of the catalogues concerned. They also pay their artists and distributed labels an advance. They also negotiate better revenue sharing terms with platforms e.g. Apple/Spotify than if the artist/indie label was going to the platform directly. But of course they take a cut to account for that work (+marketing/distributing/exporting).
[automerge]1586337674[/automerge]
Are the Apple terms unfavorable? Not being a music industry attorney, I wouldn’t know the first thing about how to interpret the various clauses.

That industry is famous for having agreements that seem to be saying something favorable, but in reality actually ensure the other party is getting royally screwed. I would (like to) think that’s not how Apple rolls.

well, Universal Music (and their indie distributor Caroline) surely have a better negotiating power vis a vis Apple than any small indie label. They won’t just accept the standard Apple license agreement. Like how Netflix famously negotiated a lower app store fee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DeepIn2U
Ah, you are so wrong, not just about Apple, but about many corporations. I've worked in companies like Apple, and the company Kool-Aid is about loving your customer. And it's real-- if you don't feel a real strong affinity for your customers, you do a crappy job, and nothing works. If you don't learn to love your customers, you're not going to have much of a career, because the guy who does go that extra mile for the customer is going to whip your ass.
[automerge]1586324890[/automerge]
Great, run with that if it makes you happy. No denying that a motivated employee id a better employee. But Apple does NOT love you or care about you more than any other company. They care about your wallet. Nothing else.
[automerge]1586338238[/automerge]
Really not a fair suggestion. Of course some people feel a connection to a company. Though I doubt many of us feel the company cares specifically for us. It’s more about the direction of products and the value gained from owning them that makes the connection. Regardless of marketing, my phone, watch, AirPods, and Mac are tightly connected and their connectedness changes my daily life on dozens of small aspects.

It’s a closer connection than a football team which I’ve never understood. You have NO claim or connection with them but some people are obsessed.

And I’m glad they consider $. It’s capitalism. better products = more money. I’m cool with that.

but feel free to maintain the cynicism.
No cynicism. Truth or reality? Yes

Some people root for apple and hope others fail. It’s that simple. Same goes the other way to. It’s kinda sad to be honest.

Why let a company that wants nothing from you other than your money, have so much power in ones life? Enjoy the toys. The Apple ecosystem is great. That’s why I use it.
 
Last edited:
So it was Apple's "real strong affinity" for its customers which caused it to foist defective keyboards on its fan base for almost four years? I shudder to think what Apple may have done if it had a real weak affinity for its customers:eek:

Still one of the most satisfying typing experiences of my life - it didn't work out in durability unfortunately but I knew what they were trying to do. The 16" MBP keyboard just reliable meh.
 
Great, run with that if it makes you happy. No denying that a motivated employee id a better employee. But Apple does NOT love you or care about you more than any other company. They care about your wallet. Nothing else.
[automerge]1586338238[/automerge]

No cynicism. Truth or reality? Yes

Some people root for apple and hope others fail. It’s that simple. Same goes the other way to. It’s kinda sad to be honest.

Why let a company that wants nothing from you other than your money, have so much power in ones life? Enjoy the toys. The Apple ecosystem is great. That’s why I use it.

I base my buying decisions on the actions and business model of the company.

I'm pro-capitalism so I don't agree with companies that give away products for free but recoup those costs through advertising; I believe it to be highly anti-competitive as it basically makes it impossible for anyone else to compete unless they too have very deep pockets to be able to afford to give away their product for free.

I believe you shouldn't be permitted to 'cross-subsidise' different parts of a business like that as it massively distorts competition.

I therefore don't support companies or products that engage in that business model. I discourage others from supporting those business models too.
 
There is a huge difference between brand preference (we all have our preferred brands) and cheerleading or rooting for a multi-billion dollar company and against another, as though one’s own self-worth and identity is tied to that company. I’ll stand by my comment that the “haha” comment is nothing short of bizarre. Would the poster rather have Spotify and all other music services fail? If so, that would be an incredibly short sighted and stupid position as the cost of the music service would increase exponentially.

I see more brand cheerleading on this site than I do almost anywhere else. There are many, many posters on here (we all know them) whose own self worth seems to be tied to Apple. Just strange.

Typical internet battle cry here, but I'll post a humble rebuttal of opinion.

Curious ... what brand 'Shirt, Pants/shorts, underwear, socks, shoes/sneakers, jacket/coat, smartphone, mattress, bed, dresser, speakers, TV, gaming system, A/C (if not centralized) and other appliances that you ... OWN, Wear, purchased, etc? Heck what blunt or liquid poison do you consume?

I'm willing to bet you did not make all of them and I'll bet you have a preference for them all as well. Brands lately may not 'care about any one person' yet they DO pay big attention to anyone cause just 1 passionate person can boost brand name recognition or destroy or set-off a cascade of reduced revenues or destroy a brand.

Google got very popular amongs I.T. reps long ago by using that catch phrase 'google it' - since nobody new about their web-crawling power until used or referenced by stating/placing/sharing confidence in their brand. Apple has done it for years (ever wonder WHY Starbucks has so many mac users across Canada/USA? Look at a WWDC where Jobs shown off the original MBA or MacBook Unibody at an outdoors coffee shop).

Brands ... despite anyone's distast for them ... have us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DeepIn2U
I base my buying decisions on the actions and business model of the company.

I'm pro-capitalism so I don't agree with companies that give away products for free but recoup those costs through advertising; I believe it to be highly anti-competitive as it basically makes it impossible for anyone else to compete unless they too have very deep pockets to be able to afford to give away their product for free.

I believe you shouldn't be permitted to 'cross-subsidise' different parts of a business like that as it massively distorts competition.

I therefore don't support companies or products that engage in that business model. I discourage others from supporting those business models too.
Nice anti google rant. 🙄
[automerge]1586349305[/automerge]
I never understood why there can't be both?
No idea other than it’s all about $$$$$
 
Nice anti google rant. 🙄
[automerge]1586349305[/automerge]

No idea other than it’s all about $$$$$

I don’t use products or services from any company that’s supported by advertising. And if I have to then the adverts are blocked or skipped. Google just happens to be the biggest and most egregious culprit. They don’t have to be the bad guy, they could pick a better business model where no advertising is involved.
 
Ah, you are so wrong, not just about Apple, but about many corporations. I've worked in companies like Apple, and the company Kool-Aid is about loving your customer. And it's real-- if you don't feel a real strong affinity for your customers, you do a crappy job, and nothing works. If you don't learn to love your customers, you're not going to have much of a career, because the guy who does go that extra mile for the customer is going to whip your ass.
[automerge]1586324890[/automerge]

So true. I work for a Fortune 500 company in the automotive data and financial information services sector. We have witnessed first hand hundreds of "mom and pop" automotive repair facilities hurting over these last 4 weeks. We are responding with free goods, erasing amounts previously due, offering tangible ways that they can weather this storm, and encouragement. We love our customers.
 
I don’t use products or services from any company that’s supported by advertising. And if I have to then the adverts are blocked or skipped. Google just happens to be the biggest and most egregious culprit. They don’t have to be the bad guy, they could pick a better business model where no advertising is involved.
They are an advertising company. That is the business model.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And they could just as easily pick a better business model. They could quite easily sell their products and services for money and get rid of the advertising altogether.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And they could just as easily pick a better business model. They could quite easily sell their products and services for money and get rid of the advertising altogether.
Why would they. Their business model is worth billions of dollars. What is better about apples business model. Yes it is more valuable at this time but better. Not really.

Again nice anti google rant. They do the same thing as Apple does. Apple collects data and sells it too. People here believe the bs about how they don’t. They sell anonymous data same as google
 
Why would they. Their business model is worth billions of dollars. What is better about apples business model. Yes it is more valuable at this time but better. Not really.

Google wouldn’t because it’s in their interests to make tons of money and crush all competitors.

I would because I would like to see more competition.

Apples business model is better because the product sells on merit and not that it’s free.
 
This 1000X. To Apple you are a $. Nothing else. No different from any other company. The fact that people think Apple cares about shows how good the PR Dept at Apple is.
I’ll agree with you’re agreeing. But it’s false that Apple’s revenue model is the same as all others. If you’re a $ to Apple, you’re the actual product to the likes of Google and FB, and as such, for sale. I’ll go with Apple.
 
Google wouldn’t because it’s in their interests to make tons of money and crush all competitors.

I would because I would like to see more competition.

Apples business model is better because the product sells on merit and not that it’s free.
Google stockholders would disagree. I’m sure they are good with google.
 
Im sure they would, but I’m looking at this from a consumer perspective, not a stock holder or CEO.
Hence why I say Apple has the best pr dept in business. They convince people that they care about them instead of their wallet
 
Hence why I say Apple has the best pr dept in business. They convince people that they care about them instead of their wallet

I know Apple don’t care about me in the slightest. But I definitely want to send the message that I am cool with their business model and business practices by buying and using their products over the competition.
 
I know Apple don’t care about me in the slightest. But I definitely want to send the message that I am cool with their business model and business practices by buying and using their products over the competition.
As I do. Enjoy them.
 
There is a huge difference between brand preference (we all have our preferred brands) and cheerleading or rooting for a multi-billion dollar company and against another, as though one’s own self-worth and identity is tied to that company. I’ll stand by my comment that the “haha” comment is nothing short of bizarre. Would the poster rather have Spotify and all other music services fail? If so, that would be an incredibly short sighted and stupid position as the cost of the music service would increase exponentially.

I see more brand cheerleading on this site than I do almost anywhere else. There are many, many posters on here (we all know them) whose own self worth seems to be tied to Apple. Just strange.

the brand cheerleading, THC for clarifying your position and statement, is nothing at era now here or when it comes to Apple. Prior to 1998 THIS is exactly Apples marketing since ‘74 , call it guerrilla marketing by Jobs himself. It was a way of doing business to get brand loyalty and presence. And for a while it worked. This eventually began to fail, starting with the Lemmings commercial.
 
"Each advance will be based on the label's past earnings, and will be recoupable against the label's future earnings"

I wonder if a recoupable will actually happen though.. If artists are found getting paid more whole users in future are not streaming their music,, why would they give the excess back to Apple? They would just say "I need it more"

We all know music companies are greedy, so that will be their position, i reckon
 
That’s awesome! I stand corrected. Hopefully people who donate to the overall effort will do it from this page, since these are the only donations Spotify will match:


Maybe amazon music, YouTube, Tidal and others will join in, if they haven’t already.

Spotify could also help out artists by increasing their royalty rates closer to Apple’s. (And YouTube’s rates were abysmal last I checked.) That would be a major win for artists. Hard to see that happening though, since Spotify has such high cumulative losses 🙁 Hopefully they’ll dig out of the hole at some point.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.