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
Separate discussion. This is AA partnering with a 3rd party to create value for their customers.
Most people, including you. Net Neutrality, as a concept, only covers the actions of the ISP for whom you are a paying customer. It never covered free services (like free hotel lobby and airport WiFi). It also never applied to constrained bandwidth situations like in-flight WiFi (hence why American, Delta and United could restrict access to video streaming services, while providing a selection of video content of their own).
Whether you can get WiFi from someone else is not a factor in determining whether an entity is an ISP or not. My business my offer free WiFi to my customers in an area where there is no other service available to purchase, it does not make me an ISP. Service I provide for free (or as needed for a specific service I sell) was never covered by Net Neutrality (as a concept or by the Title II regulation). As a specific example, Verizon and Frontier’s FiOS TV service delivered its VoD via IP. Being a TV service customer, did not entitle one to free access to the internet. One was purchasing TV service and the specific method of delivery was irrelevant.
If you are not paying for service from the ISP (ViaSat), you are not their customer. Someone who is not their customer is clearly not entitled to their service. Apple (or American) has chosen to purchase service from them for a specific service they are offering. They are the ISP’s customer and they can chose what they want to offer and only provide that.
Again, you are simply wrong. Even the Title II regulation would not have covered this case. This is not even zero rating, as that is only for the ISP’s customers.
If Spotify people love music so much, why are they still missing a match and upload feature? And no, the desktop sync and download feature is not the same. AM’s UI is not perfect, but Apple Music is infinitely better because of the ability to upload and stream songs that are not on the service.
You are mixing their customers and their products. They have about 70 million customers, and something like 100 million “users” they try to sell to advertisers.
No biggy. I can listen to my favorite downloaded Spotify playlists offline.
Apple today announced that, starting February 1, Apple Music subscribers can access Apple Music on any American Airlines flight in the United States equipped with Viasat satellite technology with no Wi-Fi purchase required.
[doublepost=1548895675][/doublepost]
That Apple upload feature does not really work for me. It can recognize only like 30% of my mp3. Frustrating...
What you guys don’t get, when talking about net neutrality, is the fact that even voice calls on cell phones are changing from radio to internet (VoIP), so, at some point cell providers are really going to be providing access to the internet, and that’s it...everything is going that way, and so, it’s an extremely important issue, but, most people can’t see past the end of their nose to understand, the long term...they are all going to be ISPs, and without net neutrality, they will be able to make access to their content free or cheap with a “cell data plan” while charging more for or throttling Netflix and others. Data is data, this should not be allowed to happen, they should be considered and treated as utilities.
So, it might look like Apple & AA are just providing a service, but, things like this actually hurts net neutrality.
So, it might look like Apple & AA are just providing a service, but, things like this actually hurts net neutrality.
I suppose this would be good move by Apple.. The crap you get on airlines is kind of disturbing... But at least it's good to know when you finally arrive at your destination, you WILL need a holiday after you check how much data you went through 
Just think yourselves lucky this is local only. not international..
Just think yourselves lucky this is local only. not international..
In other words, no much difference really. Sure Spotify has the so-called "free plan" that does come with advertisements but this is not Apple's strategy and I don't fault them for this. Plus, people really need to realize that there is no such thing as a free service. It is just an illusion. It boggles my mind how hard it is for people to grasp this.
Anyone who loves music would not want to sit and watch or listen to advertisements while enjoying music, plus not being able to listen to what they want and when they want. I could never do that.
This behavior is what normalizes treating data differently. Sure T-Mobile not counting some services against your data cap, or an airliner allowing you to stream music on flights through Apple Music is good in the short run for the consumer but it also opens the door for less consumer friendly policies.
This is putting Apple Music at an unfair advantage by not charging users for that data, a policy more consistent with net-neutrality would be "the first 500mb of data are free on flights."
Once you have normalized treating data differently you open the door to this:
I suppose this would be good move by Apple.. The crap you get on airlines is kind of disturbing... But at least it's good to know when you finally arrive at your destination, you WILL need a holiday after you check how much data you went through
Just think yourselves lucky this is local only. not international..
There’s no data charge. This is over WiFi.
This behavior is what normalizes treating data differently. Sure T-Mobile not counting some services against your data cap, or an airliner allowing you to stream music on flights through Apple Music is good in the short run for the consumer but it also opens the door for less consumer friendly policies.
This is putting Apple Music at an unfair advantage by not charging users for that data, a policy more consistent with net-neutrality would be "the first 500mb of data are free on flights."
Once you have normalized treating data differently you open the door to this:
We already have that. Or do you not have a Netflix, Hulu, and HBO Go account? Plus an Amazon Prime account, in addition to a Spotify and MLB Network account?
How? How about because Apple is paying to have it's service offered for free, which hurts other streaming providers who can't compete in the same way.
What you and many of those arguing this as a Net Neutrality is that the transport mechanism for a service does not mean that the service is now covered by Net Neutrality. Both Verizon and Frontier deliver their FiOS VoD service over IP. If one subscribes to their TV service, but not their internet service, one does not get to claim that the fact it is delivered over IP means that one should also get unlimited access to the public internet as well.
Not as long as people want to have reliable voice service and are willing to pay for it. They provide a service called voice and deliver over their network, just as they do for SMS. The transport mechanism is irrelevant.
You are conflating several issues. Throttling based on content type outside requirements of “reasonable network management” was prohibited under both versions of Net Neutrality (Title I and Title II). That required:
“5. Subject to reasonable network management, a provider of broadband Internet access service must treat lawful content, applications, and services in a nondiscriminatory manner.”
That does not prevent them from making access to their content free. AT&T would have every right to include a free subscription to HBO Go/HBO Now with their internet service. What would have been restricted was throttling other video streaming services but not throttling HBO Now.
First, Net Neutrality never covered in-flight WiFi. Second Neither Apple nor AA are the ISP in this case, so again, it has nothing to with Net Neutrality. Apple and AA have chosen to buy transport and deliver a service to others. You are not the the ISP’s customer if you are not paying them. Apple and AA have every right to do whatever they want to do with the transport they are purchasing. Net Neutrality only ever covered interactions between an ISP and its customers. If ViaSat limited other music services from streaming over the inflight WiFi that passengers purchased, but did not limit their own service that was available via the internet.
This service is exactly the same as Apple choosing to run fiber to every home in the United States and only offering iTunes and Apple Music content over it. Just like your cable company is not required to give you free internet service because they have chosen to deliver their set top box provisioning messages using IP.
I don’t know if Apple Music had personalized playlists before but I have it now and it makes them for me too as well. Perhaps not as many as 5 daily playlists; I get a Favorites, Chill, New, and Friends mix and they’ve been on point so far. When I did use Spotify, it was very good at figuring out songs I already knew and liked but my experience with discovery was not as good as it is now with Apple Music. As a matter of a fact, if it weren’t for Apple Music, I probably would never have discovered london grime. I guess it’s really different from person to person
I really don't understand why people get so upset that others have a preference of one over the other. lol. I've had both and for me, Apple Music won. Sure Spotify has great playlists but as you mentioned, Apple's are also great. The more you use a service, the more accurate it becomes. Both have features that the other is missing so at the end of the day, just use what's best for you (general you, not specifically you).