Maybe they can make it like the cable tv scam where you pay a monthly fee AND have commercials!
Awful lot of entitled people huh......
Maybe they can make it like the cable tv scam where you pay a monthly fee AND have commercials!
Spotify already is well established and Apple is way too late to the game. The only thing iRadio could have an advantage in is Apple´s database that could mix genres and styles on-the-fly to discover new music. It´s more like a feature for the iTunes music store, not comparable to Spotify at all.
iRadio doesn´t want to be a Spotify competitor.
I'm with you. A better Pandora doesn't seem like much of a "next big thing". I don't get how "Apple needs this" and similar. I'm sure it will be nice and probably have a few benefits Pandora has missed. On the other hand, I'm sure it will have some "why'd they do that?" lock-down that Pandora doesn't match.
Spotify is not established in all markets, Spotify and Pandora are not available in Canada for example and I am sure a few other markets.
You only need to invest about 5 minutes to know what iRadio is going to offer. Certainly not a Spotify-like replacement.Spotify is not established in all markets, Spotify and Pandora are not available in Canada for example and I am sure a few other markets.
So I would be interested in seeing what Apple has to offer.
That seems to be the plan. Except in that model, there isn't an added bill if you watch too much television (data) in a given month. In this plan, you can pay for the service, have commercials and if you use enough data to go through your cap you can pay some more. Triple threat. Everybody (that is a corporation) wins.
I don't really see what this does that radio doesn't. Pandora pretty much already has any market for this that exists cornered, and it's small.
And if you want music on demand Vevo, Youtube and Spotify exist.
----------
Why do you think this would be available in all markets?
iTunes Match isn't now, and launched in the US only.
You only need to invest about 5 minutes to know what iRadio is going to offer. Certainly not a Spotify-like replacement.
Also, Apple doesn´t offer every service worldwide, so your other point is moot.
Charge Apple more because they might bring in additional revenue. The music industry doing it what it does best.
Just read what I wrote. The answer is in there. iRadio is not a Spotify-replacement, they want to sell more music and probably also make money with additional ads. There´s almost nothing in there for customers. They won´t ever create a service on top of the iTunes music store that will eat into their music sales. Don´t get your hopes up. That´s why it has taken them so long to negotiate, because they want to make a lot of additional money with iRadio.I don't think it will be available in all markets in the beginning but iTunes match was available in other markets fairly quickly so hoping it would progress quickly.
I guess the point I am getting at is when I see comments like. "that is what Spotify" is for or "how is this going to be better than Pandora", "Apple is wasting their time" etc, etc. Well people the world is a big place and their are potential markets not served by the more popular streaming services, so there are some people interested in Apple's offering and Apple probably is looking at the big picture as well trying to look at potential revenue sources.
Anyways enough of my rant!!
----------
How do you know what Apple is offering? Your point is moot by thinking you know what Apple is bringing to the table.
Just read what I wrote. The answer is in there. iRadio is not a Spotify-replacement, they want to sell more music and probably also make money with additional ads. There´s almost nothing in there for customers. They won´t ever create a service on top of the iTunes music store that will eat into their music sales. Don´t get your hopes up. That´s why it has taken them so long to negotiate, because they want to make a lot of additional money with iRadio.
...pay something for this service AND listen to ads...
Well said. Spotify is the true rival here.
Spotify > Pandora![]()
Apple had offered roughly 6 cents per 100 tracks streamed, but later reportedly raised this to 12.5 cents per 100 tracks -- similar to the rate paid by Pandora...... Some music industry executives argue that cash-rich Apple should pay a higher rate than Pandora, which had 70m "active listeners" in April, because of its broader ambitions for iRadio.
I guess it is a matter of preference. I prefer Pandora. The main reason is I want to discover new music without exploring myself. That is Pandora's claim to fame, and I still think it does it well.
Further, if people care about the artists, like they claim they do, Pandora compensates the artists much more than Spotify does.
I know that Apple have a ridiculous amount of cash in reserve. However I am not an advocate of making somebody pay more because it is assumed [or known] that they can pay more.
It is a little like those shops that do not have any prices on the items they sell and then decide on how much to tell you they want, based on how much they think you will pay.
A licence fee, is a licence fee?
However I suppose Apple, only offering 6 cents was cheap in retrospect also..., or maybe it's time for Apple to see what it is like at the receiving end for once?![]()
I've never used pandora or spotify so am not up on this tech, but iRadio seems kinda underwhelming if its just a radio station(s).
Maybe they can make it like the cable tv scam where you pay a monthly fee AND have commercials!
iRadio is going to be about as successful as... Ping.
if they had more subscribers, iTunes/Apple model should be cheaper right? like buying in bulk...
What led you to that conclusion? Seems like the service will either be free with ads, or paid with no ads (or both options), similar to the other ones.