Then it would be great if those features are put into an individual app, not adding more non removable tabs into interface.
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.
Check Out iOS 10's Redesigned Apple Music Experience
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Maybe you should do actual work instead of serving coffee. Men tend to have bigger, thicker fingers. Maybe you thought tiny targets were acceptable because of your dainty little fingers?
Apple is deciding that targets should be bigger and fonts should be bigger. Maybe you should present your "evidence" to Apple that tiny targets and small fonts are better for the user experience?
I'm guessing they removed stars in favor of hearts/likes. It simplifies how they can track your favorites and curate music for you (I'd assume). It is annoying to have years of stars that suddenly mean nothing but as more betas ship out maybe it will be put back?
Actually Connect is still here just moved within the For You section. Better than having dedicated real estate for a function many didn't/don't use but still not really good social functionality implemented.
I could see it in future OS's but for now I think Apple is more focused on making sure the damn thing works.
but similar to iMessages with this update I think AM will get similar treatment.
Oh man you should, especially if you're a fan of video game soundtracks. I hear they have many cheap copies in gamestops.
If you don't play the first one play the sequel coming out early next year! Looks awesome!
I have been so frustrated with these issues since iOS7 that I've started using the Cesuim app for the last year or two - quite cheap (I think I paid £1.29), has a really nice UI and most importantly - can play songs in Chronological order (i.e. earliest songs/albums before later songs/albums). I didn't really want to have to pay for something i used to get for free, but I've now removed the Music app from my phones 'Dock' and replaced it with Cesium.
From a stand point of a designer, consumer, and an avid music listener, I can tell you that Spotify's system is much better and far more intuitive. Sure, AM is new in the game but Apple has the resources to make it significantly better than it currently is, and I think that's where all the frustration comes from because they choose to cripple their platform. At this moment, I'm using AM, Spotify, and Tidal (only for the exclusive releases of course, who actually uses Tidal lets be honest) But the fact is, Spotify is dominating the social aspect of music streaming by allowing users to actually share playlists and music with their friends and many other areas that Apple is choosing not to focus on.
To add to this, I think it's Apple not really understanding where to focus on more to separate from Spotify. Spotify's social aspect works great because it doesn't really have to focus on it (more embedded with Twitter/Facebook) whereas Apple is trying to create it's own social platform via Connect (even though Ping was a huge fail). AM "borrowed" a lot of its interface from Spotify when originally launched, IMO, so I think they are trying to position it more from the look and feel and show off what makes it more (in Apple's opinion) different from Spotify.
Sure. I can agree on those points. I too am a designer and have wants for it to be more intuitive (especially while driving, at a light needing to be quick, the UI leaves me wanting).
But again, software is made with an MVP and then you add features and make changes according to a priority list. This new update is a sign of that. Apple will add features. But right now, nothing wrong with preferring Spotify, and I'm glad there is competition.
That being said, AM is good enough and it's on my device. It syncs with my personal collection of MP3 albums. It keeps it simple. Does Spotify do that? Everything has its strengths I guess and everyone has their personal preferences. And in the interest of balance, AM bugs frustrate me (eg 3 copies of the same Bestie Boys song...why and how?).
[doublepost=1466702203][/doublepost]
You raise a good point. But to add to that, Apple isn't really focused on trying to steal Spotify users. They are focused on getting their iPhone users to subscribe to Apple Music. Integration with the phone and ecosystem is the differentiator (or main selling criteria). Social growth hacking like playlist shares, and so on, are secondary or tertiary features that Apple can focus on later. Maybe once they do it will lure previous Spotify users. But I'm sure Stage 1 of their marketing plan was not to steal Spotify users. They are not the low hanging fruit in this case; The low hanging fruit are iPhone users not subscribed (daily users) to any streaming platform at all.
Last edited:
I agree. I don't think they are trying to steal Spotify customers rather than create a service that can directly compete. Obviously streaming options are few and far between currently so I think Apple wants to remain that top resource for music needs but they aren't sure what will help them with that (UI vs. social functionality, other perks like live radio and curated playlists vs. better library integration, etc.) I just think its prioritizing all of this that's created this love-hate relationship between us all but we have to remember AM, and streaming for that matter, are still in their beginner stages.
So here's to time (raises drink) haha
I agree. People on this site think that if Apple enters a market that they should automatically put everyone in the field out of business. Spotify has the freemium tier that brings in new clients over time. Apple chose not to even compete in that space, so there will continue to be a space for Spotify (assuming they can somehow continue treading water without making any profits).
Someone above said that they based their app on Spotify. I don't agree with that at all. This design was a carry over from Beats and no one had anything like it, including Spotify. Also, Spotify was not the first in the space. That would have been Rhapsody and thus Spotify and everyone that followed copied from them. Personally, I want to recommend that Apple copy Roonaudio for their next update. It has everything I want in an app....other than its high price tag and lack of Siri.
I think Apple will eventually have to do something about the social networking aspects of the app. I am not saying I care about what my buddies are listening to, but it is a common complaint that I have seen when people leave Spotify for AM. Personally, I prefer having playlists built around my tastes, but they can continue to do that, as well.
I do, but I also realize that CDs are 1411 Kbps and that is is exponentially better than anything Apple and Spotify are offering. I also realize that when I buy an actual album that I can hold, I own it. Apple music and Spotify only allow leasing.
As for higher resolution downloads... if I'm going to pay my hard earned money on music, I would like something physical to hold. I don't see any point in blowing real money on invisible files.
Personally, I don't care how many active users AM has compared to Spotify, or whether their goals are to steal customs or not. I'm talking about usability and the overall experience for AM is much more stale than Spotify. Apple didn't innovate in a single way when they came out with this streaming service. Like I said, I used Beats music prior to the big purchase and when Apple re-released it as Apple Music they didn't improve on a single thing. All they did was remove the awesome dark theme and make it white/pink. And with that, they actually made the "for you" section so awful I never even use it anymore (all the gold is actually hidden in the Connect section, you just have to know who to follow). Aside from Beats1 and the content itself, AM doesn't even come close to being a great product. Their only advantage is manipulating the market by constantly releasing excluding albums/songs a.k.a. the Tidal business model.
Edit: One last thing: Apple is (one of) the world's biggest company with plenty of resources and great minds. They have the ability to infiltrate any market and dominate it by providing excellent experience for the user. That is traditionally what they claim to always strive for. AM was not one of those products. I hope it improves over time but the way it stands right now this is actually less than a hobby for Apple. It seems more like something they kinda care about. In my opinion, Eddy Cue needs to be replaced. Every product he touches comes out far below Apple standards.
Apple added Siri to Beats which is HUGE improvement for a lot of people. For me, that makes it much more usable than any other service on iOS. The fact that I could use Siri to control music from watch and hold down the face of the watch to put music where I wanted it via Airplay was another big advantage (not sure if they have that in 10, but it was a great feature in iOS 9). I also could not get to most of my fairly large (~25,000) library with Spotify. I have that inside the app via matching now.
So what you're saying is.. if they just released the Siri API in the first place they wouldn't need to destroy Beats Music.
To be honest, the Beats Music service actually destroyed MOG.
As a side note, Beats reportedly had 250,000 users when Apple bought them. Now Apple Music has 15 million and growing at a rapid pace. I wouldn't exactly call that "being destroyed".
Last edited:
I've heard of the game but it's really not my kind of thing. I prefer classic soundtracks usually, but there's a few recent gems like the new Kirby and Mario Kart, Ultra Street Fighter's great in the gym too.
I think the overall consensus is that some of us are power users and others aren't (like it's always been) and unfortunately standard users are just that... standard. They are the masses and therefore will be catered to first. I don't think Apple is not listening to us it's just priority.
But I say all that to then agree that Beats' initial launch was waaaaaaay better than AM. It's true, feels like they just opted out of the awesome black UI and slapped white/pink layers but didn't really change or add anything aside from Beats Radio and Connect (both which had/have huge backlash). We'll honestly see how much they are listening throughout this beta process since it appears they are focusing on the Music app a little more this OS-go-round. (fingers crossed)
But I say all that to then agree that Beats' initial launch was waaaaaaay better than AM. It's true, feels like they just opted out of the awesome black UI and slapped white/pink layers but didn't really change or add anything aside from Beats Radio and Connect (both which had/have huge backlash). We'll honestly see how much they are listening throughout this beta process since it appears they are focusing on the Music app a little more this OS-go-round. (fingers crossed)
at 256 kbps. Hope you don't like quality sound.
[doublepost=1466718595][/doublepost]
SACD and DVD-A are amazing.
I'd love to download music with that level of quality, as long as they're still DRM free.
Last edited:
You bring up valid criticisms with less than ideal UI and lacking-features when compared to Spotify's more savvy UI and social focus. My response to you was more about addressing that Apple isn't "crippling their platform." Here's your quote:
mtnDewFTW said:
I'm directly (but respectfully) arguing that Apple just launched an MVP that is "good enough" to get the ball rolling and begin integration, and improvement. Apple isn't intentionally trying to release bad software, or lacking focus on Apple Music. They know the path towards great software is to release "good enough" and then use market feedback to help dictate the direction of things. And I understand that that process takes time, especially with Apple, and that time creates frustration, because we may be wanting for certain features right now.mtnDewFTW said:
Notes could have 1,800 features like Microsoft Word, but it doesn't. It could have 400 features like Evernote, but it doesn't. Apple starts simple and then adds. They also improve UI and such through feedback. They do seem to neglect software when interest weans but clearly Apple Music is big business and their #1 thing that gets them worldwide branding recognition next to the iPhone/iPad. There is no way Apple and Eddie Cue aren't hustling every single day to improve Apple Music.
(Just to be clear, I'm discussing intent, not measure. I wouldn't argue Apple Music is the best music streaming service)
My experience was waaaaaaaaaaaay different. Here is an excerpt from my article at the time:
"As I have mentioned numerous times on my blog, I am a huge fan of MOG. This is the music service that came out with great features like 320 kbps files and a slider that would allow you to make a radio station with one artist and add more similar artists as you moved the slider to the right.
The service also had a desktop app, an iPad app, and a "New Releases" section. When I heard Beats bought the service a while back, I had high hopes that the merger would take MOG's first class service and combine it with Beats marketing that has taken a relatively expensive headphone that critics usually dismiss and made it a household name. If they can do that with a so-called "mediocre" product (I have never owned a pair), what could they do with a great product?
Well, the beginning of this service has seen the end of the iPad app, the desktop app, the "new releases" section, and the radio slider. If that wasn't disappointing enough, the service had connection problems all night. I tried to log in via the iPad, iPhone, Chrome, Safari, Internet Explorer, and Firefox. I was able to sign in a couple of times and get it up and running, but it would simply stop working. I actually logged out of wifi and tried cell service on both the iPad and iPhone, but I had no luck."
According to the article ( linked below), Mog had 500,000 users when they were purchased by Beats:
http://www.theverge.com/2012/3/20/2887698/beats-mog-music-service-purchase
When Apple bought Beats, the people at Beats had run off half its user base:
http://www.fastcompany.com/3031209/...t-bought-for-3-billion-only-has-250000-subscr
This is a sensitive subject as everyone has their own definition of "innovation." But I too had Beats prior to the acquisition. Apple improved it (increased utility for the user) in the following ways
- Discovery: because where as before it would only play Hip-Hop for me, Apple improved it so that discovery was much more balanced and suggestive. (Not arguing this is better than Spotify, just that Apple improved the model from Beats)
- Siri: Apple integrated Siri. While not perfect, it increased utility, especially while driving. Also, being able to use Siri to Shazam a song in a commercial, youtube video, Starbucks, etc and add directly to Apple Music was an improvement
- 3-Month Free Trial
- Integration with personal library of music; iCloud Music; iTunes Store
And probably a few "innovations" I haven't thought of. They just started. You said, "Apple re-released it as Apple Music they didn't improve on a single thing." and I disagree. Doesn't mean you aren't right about it's negatives, though. And it's buggy as all hell.
Can you help me understand that a bit better? I sort of feel like I have much the same setup. Admittedly I think three old tracks of mine disappeared in the switch. But apart from that, it seems to be working well.
I actually like the essentials remastered for iTunes stuff for audio quality . It all comes down to quality of the rips . Would I rather have uncompressed music .. The answer is most definently , but I can handle a well done remaster at 256, 320 Mbps over a crappy copy of 1441
The problem here is that they don't identify the Mastered for iTunes stuff on Apple Music. They had a section at the bottom of the New page for the essentials you are describing, but this is the third week in a row that the section is no longer available.
I agree with your point about mastering. The "loudness wars" have been a problem on CDs for decades.