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 Trying to Torpedo Spotify's U.S. Launch?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Have you heard any info on this? It would be so sweet
Nothing yet, been scouting the web for ages now, so many people have requested this so not entirely sure what the holdup is. Maybe Apple are restricting the app from the store...hopefully that is not the case as they allowed the release of the iPhone app
So if this is true then Apple is essentially trying to crush the little guy before he even has a chance.
Microsoft anyone? Of course any company would do what they can to preserve their monopoly in the market but I'd find it difficult for people to be able to praise Apple for doing this while slating Microsoft for doing the same thing many years ago.
Microsoft anyone? Of course any company would do what they can to preserve their monopoly in the market but I'd find it difficult for people to be able to praise Apple for doing this while slating Microsoft for doing the same thing many years ago.
Žalgiris;11193938 said:
Lighten up fan boy... If Apple isn't seeing Spotify as a threat then why are they trying to block it right now?
Edit: Regarding the topic of making money; the ones who sell are filthy rich and the ones who don't won't be with or without services like spotify.
The best part of the premium service is the higher quality of the music 320 kbit/s OGG Vorbis as opposed to 160 kbit/s in the free version, which is in itself worth the asking price.
Are you going to back up these claims or are you just spouting nonsense to take the heat off your beloved Apple? Perhaps in future you should stay away from topics that you clearly don't understand.
I've said it once, and I'll say it again. You keep trying to give music away for free, and we're going to lose a lot of future music geniuses. Nobody works for free.
So it is better to give the money mainly to the record labels instead of the artist like with iTunes/Amazon?
I use Spotify every day and I gladly listen to the commercials since it is the music I like, for free, and with less than half of the commercials on the radio. I have stopped pirating music since I got my Spotify account in 2009.
I have never bought any records before/after pirating and if pirating and Spotify wasn't available I would settle with radio.
Agreed. Whilst it may not be as good as lossless formats, it definitely better than the iTunes+ 256 kbit/s AAC and there is a clearly discernible difference between music played through Spotify Premium and the same music bought from the iTunes store.
So it is better to give the money mainly to the record labels instead of the artist like with iTunes/Amazon?
I use Spotify every day and I gladly listen to the commercials since it is the music I like, for free, and with less than half of the commercials on the radio. I have stopped pirating music since I got my Spotify account in 2009.
I have never bought any records before/after pirating and if pirating and Spotify wasn't available I would settle with radio.
Actually, artists gets more money out of CD Album sales then they get out of iTunes sales if they have had good sense of making a sensible royalty deal with the label.
I've been using Spotify for months now, have a premium subscription as well and it's totally worth it.. being able to search for all songs available + access to my playlists on my iPhone is awesome.. on Wifi and 3G.
I can understand why Apple is scared though, I haven't used iTunes since I got my Spotify premium subscription.
I can understand why Apple is scared though, I haven't used iTunes since I got my Spotify premium subscription.
Fun fact; all the big (four) record labels are joint owners of Spotify at around 5-10% of the shares, each. They got ~10% of the shares for what, 10,000$. The market value for Spotify, last time I checked, was 25million $.
It should be quite obvious to anyone with half a brain that the record labels gets payed for a service they don't provide - i.e creation of CDs, distribution etc. The record labels have SO much leverage over Spotify you better believe Spotify pays them boatloads of money.
Famous swedish artist once said; "I'd rather get raped by Spotify then ****ed in the ass by *Record label executive*"
I think YOU should get your head out of that bunch of fallacies you seem to like bathing it in.
- Anyone can be a musician ??? Well, if you mean it like Anyone can be a chartered accountant/brain surgeon/jet pilot/software developer then okay. But believe me, not anyone can pull out the hard work it takes to become a decent musician even at an amateur level, let alone at a level that would allow you to make a living from it.
- Here's a tip to being successful; make brilliant music and expose as many people to it as you can. Oh, well The crux of the issue is that in the real world, the music that makes its performers *financially* successful is essentially the crappiest music out there, something that appeals to the musically uneducated masses and therefore sells in the millions units. It sells not because it is brilliant; it sells because the labels decide to push that crap with million dollar promotional budgets.
- You're not entitled to a reasonable living wage if your music only appeals to a handful of people. Hahaha the entitled silver-bullet argument, of course. Well, I look at it differently: among students who graduate from the most prestigious conservatories, only 1 or 2 in 10 will make it as professional performers. Most of them will have to teach or have a non-music-related day job to make a living. I happen to think that this state of things is unfair, considering that a Conservatory-level music education is not less taxing than any other university-level education. When people graduate med-school or engineering or whatever, they can expect to get a job that will allow them to make a decent living by being a practitioner of what they learned. However, when it comes to musicians, people dont see a problem that a high level of education will allow only a 20% expectation, at most, to live from recording/performing. Because real valuable music only appeals to a handful of people. as you put it
So maybe we should just get rid of all the music conservatories, all the Julliard, Berklee, Paris, London, Frankfurt, Vienna of the world, because what they teach there doesnt appeal to the masses. This makes sense in a world when its all about the ££££ or $$$$. But just as a reminder, theres such a thing known as Culture. Im one to believe that it shouldnt be left out of our lives just because it doesnt pay well in business standards.
This is really sad. It's been such a slippery slope for Apple. Sad, indeed.
Anyways, like someone already pointed out, artists make very little from physical CD sales and digital downloads. The record companies and online sellers make the vast shar of money. Artists make most money off concerts and merchandise. Record companys' and Apple's monopoly make it very easy for one to justify "pirating" music off net and supporting your favorite artists via concerts and buying merchandise. F U record companies and a big F U Apple.
Anyways, like someone already pointed out, artists make very little from physical CD sales and digital downloads. The record companies and online sellers make the vast shar of money. Artists make most money off concerts and merchandise. Record companys' and Apple's monopoly make it very easy for one to justify "pirating" music off net and supporting your favorite artists via concerts and buying merchandise. F U record companies and a big F U Apple.
That's an INCREDIBLY idealistic view on music. As a performing AND recording musician I can assure you that things are not that straight-forward.
Firstly, do you realise how much of a leap there is between being able to make it as a recording artist and a performing musician? This will just make the whole 'top-to-bottom' divide even larger. I'd have to be gigging every night of the week at the moment to make it pay for food, rent, clothes, a car to bring my kit in, somewhere to stay when away from home (there's no way there are enough live music venues in Cardiff to survive off gigs in local venues). Even fairly well known artists go on huge world tours and don't make that much money off it...
Touring isn't as lucrative as many people like to think it is, it's only when you get to the very top-end of the game that you can really start making a living off it.
It's not just Apple that doesn't like Spotify - those of us who are trying to make a living from music don't like it either.
So what you are basically saying here is that you don't want to put the effort in or move to another area? I've known bands that where on continual tour, living in Ford Transits, going from club to club, getting paid, getting more attention. Getting a following. In fact that is how it used to be for ages, travelling minstrels etc. If you are any good, they'll ask you back, If you are crap, get a job instead. Don't expect to get paid for something that people don't want. Mehinks the days of multimillionaire rockstars are nearly over.
I'd be interested to know how you make a crust now being a performing AND recording musician... do tell.
We have a local band here called "Bessie and the Zinc Buckets" They have day jobs, but have a huge following and will pack out any of the locals venues, they love it (and make cash), and the audiences love them.
http://www.myspace.com/bessieandthezincbuckets
http://www.zen76308.zen.co.uk/Riffs/MYDOCUMENTS/BANDREVIEWS/BESSIEZINCBUCKETS.html
In many respects I think the US not having access to Spotify is fine - they have Pandora. Pandora is a service that I miss a lot and would very much like to see coming back in the other direction.
With respect to Spotify, to say that it is "free" isn't true because the free account only gets you 20-hours, which isn't that much and you have to listen to advertisements once every couple of tracks. Further, in some respects it complements iTunes. My big complaint about iTunes is that 30-second previews are not long enough (particularly for tracks that are quite long themselves) and Spotify allows me to give a track a proper listen to (much like I would have got on the radio) before buying.
Personally, I have no interest in a subscription model for listening to music and Spotify doesn't change that. It's just a better version of "try before you buy" for me.
With respect to Spotify, to say that it is "free" isn't true because the free account only gets you 20-hours, which isn't that much and you have to listen to advertisements once every couple of tracks. Further, in some respects it complements iTunes. My big complaint about iTunes is that 30-second previews are not long enough (particularly for tracks that are quite long themselves) and Spotify allows me to give a track a proper listen to (much like I would have got on the radio) before buying.
Personally, I have no interest in a subscription model for listening to music and Spotify doesn't change that. It's just a better version of "try before you buy" for me.
This is exactly what this story reminded me of. However, microsoft would have gone further. This is just Apple trying to spread FUD.
Hopefully labels will see through this and jump on board Spotify - the more options consumers have to buy online music the better.
Hot Garbage
I love Apple Products. But this is crap. Be innovative and learn to adapt, don't stifle the free market. CRAP.
I love Apple Products. But this is crap. Be innovative and learn to adapt, don't stifle the free market. CRAP.
I don't see what the problem is here. The 'free' bit of Spotify is just a lure. The real service is flat-fee streaming music (with some local storage facilities). And in that sense, it's just like Netflix. Which we cannot get in Europe. I can get Spotify. But I'd trade Spotify for Netflix any day. Wanna trade?
As for Apple, their reaction is exactly what I would expect. They wouldn't be a healthy company if they actually welcomed competition. Any company that says it welcomes competition is lying. I would expect Americans to get that, of all people. Competition is good for consumers, not for companies. What is their crime exactly? They're trying to persuade record companies not to make a deal with Spotify. That's just good business; it is the essence of the free market. They would get in trouble if they went beyond persuasion and actually tried to stifle competition by threatening to stop doing business with a record label if it also did business with Spotify. But record companies are awash with lawyers, so that probably wouldn't happen.
Finally the artists. If your label makes a deal with Spotify, don't come whining about it to the consumer. Take it up with your label. The threat 'pay me or I'll stop making music' is laughable. You are not entitled to be an artist. Get a day job and do it in your spare time until you can make a living, like everyone else trying to make it in the arts (writers, filmmakers, actors, dancers...)
As for Apple, their reaction is exactly what I would expect. They wouldn't be a healthy company if they actually welcomed competition. Any company that says it welcomes competition is lying. I would expect Americans to get that, of all people. Competition is good for consumers, not for companies. What is their crime exactly? They're trying to persuade record companies not to make a deal with Spotify. That's just good business; it is the essence of the free market. They would get in trouble if they went beyond persuasion and actually tried to stifle competition by threatening to stop doing business with a record label if it also did business with Spotify. But record companies are awash with lawyers, so that probably wouldn't happen.
Finally the artists. If your label makes a deal with Spotify, don't come whining about it to the consumer. Take it up with your label. The threat 'pay me or I'll stop making music' is laughable. You are not entitled to be an artist. Get a day job and do it in your spare time until you can make a living, like everyone else trying to make it in the arts (writers, filmmakers, actors, dancers...)
I've been using Spotify Premium on my iphone from when it first became available, and it is the one app I could absolutely not do without.
The ability to sync any song I want (including ones I own and have in itunes) to my iphone is why I never now use the "Ipod" app on my iphone.
Spotify simply wipes the floor with anything apple offers for mobile music consumption and I can understand why Apple is concerned.
The ability to sync any song I want (including ones I own and have in itunes) to my iphone is why I never now use the "Ipod" app on my iphone.
Spotify simply wipes the floor with anything apple offers for mobile music consumption and I can understand why Apple is concerned.