iMessage is free on Delta which I much prefer since all my music is downloaded to my phone for offline listening anyway.
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 Music Subscribers Can Stream Songs Without Buying Wi-Fi on American Airlines Flights in U.S. Starting Friday
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not sure this has anything to do with net neutrality. Why do you suggest that? This isn’t “fast lanes” for anointed clients so much as a deal between Apple and AA, the kind of which has existed for a long time. One could debate if exclusivity deals are good or bad for consumers, but that’s a different topic, and the relevant one here. E.g. when iPhone first came out, Apple had an exclusive partnership with AT&T, and that had noting to do with net neutrality either.
Custom playlists. Spotify's algorithm creates 5 "daily" playlists for you every day that are truly incredible. It has completely changed the way I make music selections. They also have non-daily custom playlists like Release Radar and Discovery Weekly.
If all you want to do is pick a few songs to stream, then sure, Apple Music and Spotify are basically the same. But when it comes to the algorithms and music discovery, Spotify blows Apple Music out of the water.
No, because it was set to stifle the investment and innovation that had built the Internet. Here's an in depth interview on C-Span addressing many of the questions.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?447015-3/fcc-chair-ajit-pai-discusses-end-net-neutrality
It also doesn't help if you're a Spotify subscriber, and Spotify doesn't have a similar streaming-without-buying-WiFi program with American Airlines.
Doesn't anyone think that these free Apple-centric offers are somehow sponsored by Apple? Behind the scenes, some back room deals were made for Apple to pay American Airlines to offer free Apple music access.
Seems Google or Spotify could do the same thing for other airlines, if they wanted.
Seems Google or Spotify could do the same thing for other airlines, if they wanted.
American Airlines (and the others) also typically allow customers free Wifi access to AA's website, to book flights, check on status, etc., but not other airlines. Is THAT a net neutrality issue as well?
People have conflated net neutrality to the point that it's completely meaningless. Complimentary access (which is still being paid for by someone, in this case likely both AA and Apple) is NOT the same as blocking or slowing down access to certain sites on your home broadband or wireless device.
In reading this thread it is clear that most people do not understand what net neutrality is about, and it is pretty useless to try to discuss it, so I know this will fall on deaf ears, but....
I agree, if you’re in a plane, your ISP is the plane you are on, you can’t get WIFI from someone else now, can you? Free Apple Music streaming goes against net neutrality, Apple Music uses data, this data is free, while any other data you want to use is not. Anyone that does not have Apple Music can’t stream music free, so, how is this net neutral??
The real problem is that in 2015 rules were put in place, but, the ISP conglomerates fought it and won, and then they got Ajit Pai to help keep net neutrality out.
Reality is, data is data, you should be charged only for access not access to certain websites, or one website is free, but have to pay for the rest. This is why ISPs should be considered utilities, which is what happened in 2015, but got fought out by the biggest ISPs, whom are also now content providers, (Universal/NBC is owned by Comcast, etc.), the 2015 ruling came about when these ISP/content providers started throttling the competition (Netflix), (my how easy we forget).
I agree, if you’re in a plane, your ISP is the plane you are on, you can’t get WIFI from someone else now, can you? Free Apple Music streaming goes against net neutrality, Apple Music uses data, this data is free, while any other data you want to use is not. Anyone that does not have Apple Music can’t stream music free, so, how is this net neutral??
The real problem is that in 2015 rules were put in place, but, the ISP conglomerates fought it and won, and then they got Ajit Pai to help keep net neutrality out.
Reality is, data is data, you should be charged only for access not access to certain websites, or one website is free, but have to pay for the rest. This is why ISPs should be considered utilities, which is what happened in 2015, but got fought out by the biggest ISPs, whom are also now content providers, (Universal/NBC is owned by Comcast, etc.), the 2015 ruling came about when these ISP/content providers started throttling the competition (Netflix), (my how easy we forget).
Years ago, Google sponsored free Wifi access on airlines over the holidays, as well as included free WiFi credits with the purchase of Chromebooks. Apple's move is nothing new, and personally I'm hoping they expand to other airlines.
[doublepost=1548863161][/doublepost]
"This data" is not free. It's being subsidized as a marketing effort between AA and Apple. In addition, airline WiFi has NEVER been neutral. Netflix or VoIP applications would overwhelm the comparatively small amount of bandwidth available that has to be shared with up to several hundred passengers and crew, so they are blocked.
"What people do not understand" about net neutrality is that its proponents want to apply it to EVERY network connection and every service, regardless of intent.
Really? People will book a flight based on free music? I would venture to say it’s based on ticket cost and flight times.
All that's clear is you're the one that doesn't understand what Net Neutrality WAS about. They are not the ISP. And the ISP they've purchased access from is not shaping the traffic. So the statement is doubly wrong.
Net Neutrality was about not providing fast lanes, and favoring some traffic over others by way of speeds. It very explicitly allowed an ISP, which again AA is not, to promote services to differentiate themselves from competition so long as they did not give a lesser QOS to competing services or double-dipping on charges to the consumer and the service provider. Offering something for free was never disallowed so long as the paid end was all treated equally.
Before Title 2, this was covered in Title 1. When Title 1 was overturned by the Supreme Court, that's when you had Comcast blocking VOIP services (2008) and BitTorrent, and AT&T charging for Facetime (2012), Verizon degrading Netflix's bandwidth and forcing them to pay them for access. That's what Title 2 sought to stop and what Net Neutrality as we know it truly was... and the throttling of Youtube and Netflix traffic is now, again, happening with Verizon and AT&T being the biggest offenders. It, at no point, offered you free internet.
Not really a net neutrality issue here since you are not paying to to connect to the internet. You are offered a free perk.
To use offline listening, you have to enable iCloud Music Library. Which absolutely mangles/changes the album art/tags for local music on the iPhone. So, iCML is a non-starter for many. Which makes this service quite the perk
The better question is why you think it is better to pay for anything vs getting something without charge?
Spotify does not have 170 million paying customers. Stop making stuff up.
I have used Spotify. Bleh on the discovery.
Raise ticket prices five bucks and make WiFi “free” on all flights. Airlines are probably saving a ton of money on not having to put screens on seat backs anymore since everyone carries a screen with them. ****, they used to buy movies and show them for free on airplanes.