Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The FT notes that Apple is intentionally not launching an on-demand service like Spotify in order to avoid cannibalizing purchases from its iTunes Music Store. Instead, the iRadio service will allow customers to discover new music and likely direct listeners to the iTunes Store to buy music they enjoy.

Comments like this add to why I think they aren't doing any kind of radio, on demand or otherwise, but this is about the return of Lala.com

----------

In short, wouldn't this be aggregating music, which pretty much goes against the very policy Apple adopted to crack down on apps like AppGratis, Appshopper, etc.?

We don't know what is going on with this service or even if any truth lies in this talk, but it could be just more features or the iTunes Store not a separate service. A different twist on the related/customers also bought etc

----------

iTunes Match isn't now, and launched in the US only.

Heck, THAT could be what these talks are about. Getting the deals to allow opening up iTunes Match to more countries.

----------

You only need to invest about 5 minutes to know what iRadio is going to offer. .

More like you only need to invest 5 seconds to realize that no one really has a clue if this thing is real and what it is. These reports are all 'sources' and 'people close to the matter' which could actually mean 'pulled out of my butt cause I want to get page hits'

----------

I agree no doubt Apple thought they could waltz in there and demand their price.

But you don't KNOW that they did,or why they offered the price they did (assuming there is any truth to the issue) anymore than iSunrise knows what iRadio is

----------

iRadio is going to be about as successful as... Ping.

Ping had a decent start and could have worked they just didn't expand it. It was an offshoot of the Lala.com system and perhaps they thought they would less issue getting the proper deals from the labels to add the rest of the features but that didn't work out so they let it fallow by not extending it to the indie artists etc.
 
I hope iRadio is decent so I can dump the flaming hunk of crap that spotify is turning into. I loved spotify, but they've literally taken their great piece of software and have made it worse with every iteration, both in design and performance. There are threads hundreds of pages long on their user forums, but they just don't care. So as soon as iRadio proves it works and has a good amount of stuff, I'm out and taking my dollars with me.
 
I hope iRadio is decent so I can dump the flaming hunk of crap that spotify is turning into. I loved spotify, but they've literally taken their great piece of software and have made it worse with every iteration, both in design and performance. There are threads hundreds of pages long on their user forums, but they just don't care. So as soon as iRadio proves it works and has a good amount of stuff, I'm out and taking my dollars with me.

I tried a 30 day free premium account and found it unreliable. On 3-4 bars lte constant pauses. At home on 30mbps same thing. Canceled before sub trial was up.
 
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.

But I can't think of anything here that could be "revolutionary." It's like we're chasing a fading medium of music distribution in hopes of reviving it. Maybe after this rolls out, Apple can go into the VHS tape rental business. That was hot 10+ years ago and, with the Apple spin, maybe they can turn it into something too.

Similarly, I read that bit about the ad revenues and I wonder why people are going to want to both (potentially) pay something for this service AND listen to ads rather than just play the playlists of music they like on their iDevices for free. Yes, there's something to be said for discovering new music but we already have Pandora and Spotify for that. Is the convenience of one-click purchasing really all that? If so, we're excited to pay for something with ads so that we can easily pay for something else when we hear a song we like. Pay for the opportunity to conveniently pay more. That's innovation!

Could we use LTE to download all of this music we're paying to get to pay for so that we can burn through our data allocation even faster? That way we can pay for the convenience of getting to pay for songs and getting to pay AT&T, Verizon, etc even more because this is yet another "innovation" that seems to revolve around burning through hard-capped data as quickly as possible. Win for Apple. Win for AT&T, Verizon, etc. Win for Music Studios.

Anyone noticing a trend in iDevice innovation over the last couple of years? What does SIRI, Maps, and probably this iRadio all have in common? Hint: think about data burn vs. hard caps set by AT&T, Verizon, etc. Has Apple iDevice innovation pretty much moved to a filter involving what else could be developed to burn through capped data even more quickly?

In my part of the world there is no Pandora or Spotify and also no data caps. The US is no doubt a very important market, but not the only market.

----------

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.

Exactly! Whether this service can be successful will depend a lot on how broadly Apple can offer it from day 1.

If Apple can bring this type of service to a country for a first time, it will win a lot of hearts.

The US may be already a mature market for streaming services - but that isnt the norm outside of the US.
 
In my part of the world there is no Pandora or Spotify and also no data caps. The US is no doubt a very important market, but not the only market.

Apple already has streaming music via iTunes Match if you don't have music stored on the phone.
 
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.

Why would what apple offers now on different products change what it may or may not offer on future products? And what about the itunes store - isnt there an equal argument that their streaming service would be offered everywhere their itunes store is (particularly if its seen by apple and the industry alike to be a way of capturing new sales in that store)?

Also, there are enough smart people at apple to realise that an easy way for this to be a success is to be first to market. They cant turn back the clock and get in before the leaders in the US, but they can beat them in other big markets. I live in a country where Pandora and Spotify are not available, so what they can offer doesnt matter to me. Apple know this.

----------

Apple already has streaming music via iTunes Match if you don't have music stored on the phone.

They sure do - and its great. But im still limited to music I have bought or ripped from my old CD collection.

I remember using pandora in the very early days before the geo restrictions started, and I enjoyed discovering new music using it. It became much harder to discover music after it stopped being available in my country.
 
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!!:p

----------



How do you know what Apple is offering? Your point is moot by thinking you know what Apple is bringing to the table.

We are thinking the same thing. Pandora (which this service is apparently comparable) seems to be only available in the US, Australia and New Zealand - thats about 325 million people - about 5% of the world's population.
 
How about everyone shuts their trapper because you don't know what there going to do. Man, I feel like in the forums pre-iPhone. "My ESPN feature phone already lets me check my scores on demand... why do I need and iPod phone that can browse wifi?"

You people have absolutely NO idea what it's going to be, neither do I. So rather than making up your mind right now based of of rumors that only state they're working on music deals, you only make yourself look like a fool. "Gosh darn it, what does Tesla offer? We already have enough inventors?" "Golly, who needs Einstein, we already have some smart people." "Virgin records? I already have a record store." "space shuttle? we already have Saturn V".

You get the point. Don't underestimate them, but mostly, don't decide before you even see or hear facts.
 
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).

The beauty of pandora is (was) its ability to show you new music. You type in a song you really like and it suggests new music you may like and streams the entire song.

I think an apple version would be kind of like genius added to itunes match but where your itunes match library is the whole itunes library.

I dont know what spotify does, but even if apples version only does this, it would not be underwhelming to me.
 
Anything short of offering radio and the option to listen to whatever you want ala Xbox music is a failure. It's weird to see Apple continually fall behind everyone else so often lately. They're starting to look old, clueless and slow.
 
I believe it's the first time "i miss Steve".
With the Pandora-like agreement Apple is doing exactly what a Microsfot would do: go where the money is, not where it will be.

Consumers want to have Spotify-like service, and in the end the consumer always win. If Apple doesn't do it, someone else will.

We had complete albums, then iTunes revolutionized the industry with the capability of purchasing single tracks, now Spotify and the likes revolutionize it again with their service, wich is plain better (for 90% of consumers) than purchasing music in iTunes.

I'm not using iTunes since one year, and so is any of my friends who had a chance to try Spotify. They couldn't believe it costed 10$ per month, just as i couldn't believe a song could cost 1$.

Apple should go where the consumers want to be lead, and do it better than competitors. It pays in the long run. The right thing to do is to satisfy and surprise consumers, not one-year forecast of share value.
Why on earth should i ever purchase a song that i listened from "iRadio" for 10% of what i pay to Spotify monthly to listen to it wherever i want whenever i want on whicherever device i want, all perfectly synced, is beyond my mind. And boy, yes i'm an Apple fan.
Trying to go against the tide, against what is better for consumer, might be good for iTunes sales for the next 2 years, but plainly wrong in the long run.

Purchase spotify, integrate it with your ecosystem, make it better rename it and re-invent the music industry again.

I think the market is big enough for both models. There are many people (maybe old people like me) who dont feel the same way about having access to a song while you pay a fee, as having that song once and for all to keep. Im sure there were similar feelings with having a song electronically vs on physical medium, and therefore maybe my point backs up your argument of apple not being the innovator or leader this time. I dont know. But I do know that a streaming / subscription model will never replace a purchase model (physical or electronic), because even if on paper the subscription service makes more sense, the human psychological element also plays a big part. Many people like to buy something and have it as theirs, vs pay to use something.
 
As a college student, I agree with you completely.

Something weird I've found: I listen to a lot of music on Spotify on a free plan, and about once a week I find a song I like so much that I buy it on the iOS music store just so I can listen to it on my iPhone. So Spotify basically is doing all the work of convincing me to buy the song, but then Apple is the one collecting the money when I decide to buy it.

My habit is different from yours. I get Spotify Premium and get all the songs I need, since its cross platform and works on all my devices :)
 
My habit is different from yours. I get Spotify Premium and get all the songs I need, since its cross platform and works on all my devices :)

???

iTunes downloads are also cross platform and work on all devices? I buy individual tracks rather than Spotify Premium because I find I like about 1 track per week enough to want it forever, pay ~$1 for it, with 52 weeks in a year I spend about $52. Spotify Premium costs $5/month which means $60 per year. So iTunes is cheaper.

(I find endless good songs with Spotify free - I just don't find many songs that are so good I'd like to always have them with me.)
 
I think Spotify (or other services alike) are the future. Still, I do see why Apple won't cannabalize the iTunes store.

Thing is, Spotify is cannibalising the iTunes store already.

I use it all the time. On balance it hasn't probably stopped me buying the tracks I really like but it has probably killed off the more casual iTunes purchases.
 
I dont support any streaming services because I wont accept any DRM measures and am not willing to spend more on data services at additional cost on top of the service price to keep other's richer, just to hear music. If I'm paying for music I will only accept tangible copies of music. All this so-called "convenience" is way too costly.
 
I dont support any streaming services because I wont accept any DRM measures and am not willing to spend more on data services at additional cost on top of the service price to keep other's richer, just to hear music. If I'm paying for music I will only accept tangible copies of music. All this so-called "convenience" is way too costly.

spotify is cheaper than CD's and itunes
 
It's like we're chasing a fading medium of music distribution in hopes of reviving it. Maybe after this rolls out, Apple can go into the VHS tape rental business. That was hot 10+ years ago and, with the Apple spin, maybe they can turn it into something too.

My friend, you said it all. I'm really not sure what Apple even hopes to offer that a half dozen streaming programs don't already do.

And I'm not sure at all what "won't cannibalize iTunes" even means for iRadio. Are they going to limit functionality so you will be inclined to go to iTunes and buy? If they limit functionality, the only thing you'll be inclined to do is fire up Spotify.
 
My friend, you said it all. I'm really not sure what Apple even hopes to offer that a half dozen streaming programs don't already do.

And I'm not sure at all what "won't cannibalize iTunes" even means for iRadio. Are they going to limit functionality so you will be inclined to go to iTunes and buy? If they limit functionality, the only thing you'll be inclined to do is fire up Spotify.

It seems the point is that a service like this will be immediately in the hands of millions of people. Including people who don't use Spotify or Pandora. And also in the hands of people like me who use both, but would easily run this instead of Pandora or Spotify Radio assuming it is a good service.

It may not be revolutionary or a Spotify/Pandora killing, but I'd be good money its a profitable business move.
 
$10 a month and I can listen to my music on all my devices with no more work than installing the app including my work computer, what is this going to offer that Spotify doesn't? Apple just needs to spend some of that cash and acquire Spotify.
 
I've no objections to iRadio but I would much rather see Apple put their efforts into providing the option to buy HQ lossless tracks in either 16bit or 24bit. If they offered HQ lossless tracks I would switch back to iTunes and stop buying CDs altogether.
Same here.

There are a couple of reasons, though, why Apple may never go any higher than their current iTunes Plus offering. Maybe if Steve were still alive, since he was very passionate about music.

Currently I still have to purchase CDs, because I absolutely want the best masters (for a consumer) available for my favourite music.

I believe it's the first time "i miss Steve".
With the Pandora-like agreement Apple is doing exactly what a Microsfot would do: go where the money is, not where it will be.

Consumers want to have Spotify-like service, and in the end the consumer always win. If Apple doesn't do it, someone else will.

We had complete albums, then iTunes revolutionized the industry with the capability of purchasing single tracks, now Spotify and the likes revolutionize it again with their service, wich is plain better (for 90% of consumers) than purchasing music in iTunes.

I'm not using iTunes since one year, and so is any of my friends who had a chance to try Spotify. They couldn't believe it costed 10$ per month, just as i couldn't believe a song could cost 1$.

Apple should go where the consumers want to be lead, and do it better than competitors. It pays in the long run. The right thing to do is to satisfy and surprise consumers, not one-year forecast of share value.
Why on earth should i ever purchase a song that i listened from "iRadio" for 10% of what i pay to Spotify monthly to listen to it wherever i want whenever i want on whicherever device i want, all perfectly synced, is beyond my mind. And boy, yes i'm an Apple fan.
Trying to go against the tide, against what is better for consumer, might be good for iTunes sales for the next 2 years, but plainly wrong in the long run.

Purchase spotify, integrate it with your ecosystem, make it better rename it and re-invent the music industry again.
Very good post, I agree wholeheartedly.
 
Also, there are enough smart people at apple to realise that an easy way for this to be a success is to be first to market. They cant turn back the clock and get in before the leaders in the US, but they can beat them in other big markets. I live in a country where Pandora and Spotify are not available, so what they can offer doesnt matter to me.
And you think that Apple is different than Spotify and Pandora? Apple´s track record isn´t necessarily the best when it comes to release some if it´s services worldwide. There´s always at least a significant delay involved (cause of re-negogiations in other countries, because you have new rights holders). If you´re in an insignificant market for Apple to make money, they are not going to offer it to you.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.