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.
Difficult Negotiations May Prevent 'iRadio' Launch at WWDC
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Doesn't matter. Google's service is basically a copy of Spotify but everyone seems to be going apesh*t over it.
Hopefully a much larger selection... Ideally, the entire iTunes music catalog. I don't think the labels would allow that to happen cos if it did, iTunes would destroy all competition. But if that happened, I'd be first in line to sign up.
How is it different than what is already available? Maybe you are too busy figuring out snarky replies?
----------
Where is the iOS app? How can I download songs to my iPhone to listen to on the subway or places without cell service/wifi?
I could be wrong, but I think that the guy you are quoting thought that you meant you dont see the point in streaming vs buying, not that you didn't see the point in Apple getting into a well established business with competitive people already doing a decent enough job.
Seeing how we don't even know if there really is an Apple streaming service, is't kind of hard to know how it will be different or compare to others...
Spotify doesn't allow you to upload your own music to their servers. Google does. Thus anything you have that they dont (e.g unsigned artists, protected artists, etc) can still be listened to on the go with Google Music. With Spotify you cant do that.
Yes, my opinion, but I don't see current music ever being considered a "classic".
I'm going to post an entire thought even though I am repeating...
I use an iPhone, I have Spotify, and don't buy that much music anymore. I realize lots of people stream or download things(sometimes illegally), or use Youtube to listen to a song multiple times(which is weird to me, I don't want to search for a new song after each one).
Some advantages of Spotify that Google Music does not have, for example, are a native iOS app and the ability to download songs to listen to while not connected to cell service(ie, the subway, etc).
I don't see what Apple could possibly do under the "one that resembles Pandora but melds it with some on-demand features" would provide any more benefit then existing services.
I realize Apple and iTunes feels threatened, but beyond saying "made by Apple", what other benefits are they providing? I'm at a loss, and it seems they are joining an increasingly crowded field with players already established(besides Google yesterday).
I use an iPhone, I have Spotify, and don't buy that much music anymore. I realize lots of people stream or download things(sometimes illegally), or use Youtube to listen to a song multiple times(which is weird to me, I don't want to search for a new song after each one).
Some advantages of Spotify that Google Music does not have, for example, are a native iOS app and the ability to download songs to listen to while not connected to cell service(ie, the subway, etc).
I don't see what Apple could possibly do under the "one that resembles Pandora but melds it with some on-demand features" would provide any more benefit then existing services.
I realize Apple and iTunes feels threatened, but beyond saying "made by Apple", what other benefits are they providing? I'm at a loss, and it seems they are joining an increasingly crowded field with players already established(besides Google yesterday).
FWIW Google Music will likely get an app within a few months. I completely agree though. Apple have nothing really new to bring to the table here, and I doubt they will want to offer streaming for free as it would kill iTunes sales. Spotify will still work out to be a way better option.
In case you didn't read, what Apples trying to launch is not just a radio service. It has some kind of differentiating feature or a differing implementation from strictly an online radio.
Thus require a new set of rules and terms to establish. Aka, the hardest part with launching something like this.
To what extent do you think the lack of Steve Jobs' intimidating presence is a factor in Apple's leverage in negotiations these days?
For those that are blaming the music companies for the difficult negotiations, stop being naive. Look at how Apple does business otherwise...from how they take such a big cut from app developers to how they overprice their hardware (and no, I don't think they're the only company that does this).
It's pretty obvious Apple's demands are what's causing the problems. They want a sweet deal that other companies don't have and the music companies aren't having it. Maybe Apple's "advantage" isn't what it used to be and the music companies know this and they're holding out.
One thing's for sure...Apple needs to do whatever it takes to get this deal done. With all the great choices out there (Spotify, Pandora, Rhapsody, and now Google Music), they're going to need something to launch come WWDC. Especially since all the rumors for the last few months point to this happening. It won't sink Apple, obviously, but pushing another product back, this time because of their own bull-headedness, isn't a good look for them.
----------
Congratulations...you just officially became old.
It's pretty obvious Apple's demands are what's causing the problems. They want a sweet deal that other companies don't have and the music companies aren't having it. Maybe Apple's "advantage" isn't what it used to be and the music companies know this and they're holding out.
One thing's for sure...Apple needs to do whatever it takes to get this deal done. With all the great choices out there (Spotify, Pandora, Rhapsody, and now Google Music), they're going to need something to launch come WWDC. Especially since all the rumors for the last few months point to this happening. It won't sink Apple, obviously, but pushing another product back, this time because of their own bull-headedness, isn't a good look for them.
----------
Congratulations...you just officially became old.
Well, I guess we don't know yet since Apple hasn't actually announced the damn thing yet, do we?
Your mind is trapped by conventional thought. Just because we have services that offer online streaming, Apples service HAS to function the same way. Just like Apples unannounced cell phone in 2006 couldn't have been anything more than just a phone that looked like an iPod and had MP3 functionality built in, right? Or just like Apples unannounced tablet HAD to basically be a touchscreen Macbook running Mac OSX, right?
Just because you have no imagination, doesn't mean Apple doesn't. When you become accustomed to certain things, your mind gets fixated on what you already know, rather than trying to start from square one and interpret an idea differently.
If Google is consistent with their new music offering, it will be available on all platforms.
If Apple is consistent, they will hamstring it by not supporting Android, BB or WP8, therefore restricting the number of customers.
Combine that with the fact that a lot of potential customers are already with Spotify/Pandora, or may have signed up to All Access (Therefore Apple's service will need to be significantly better or cheaper than anything else already out there), then Apple aren't in the drivers seat.
This is very simple business. When Apple and the labels agree a pricing structure, a deal will be done. Until that point, no-one is in the right or the wrong, and there are alternative services out there that may or may not fulfill your needs or wishes.
If Apple is consistent, they will hamstring it by not supporting Android, BB or WP8, therefore restricting the number of customers.
Combine that with the fact that a lot of potential customers are already with Spotify/Pandora, or may have signed up to All Access (Therefore Apple's service will need to be significantly better or cheaper than anything else already out there), then Apple aren't in the drivers seat.
This is very simple business. When Apple and the labels agree a pricing structure, a deal will be done. Until that point, no-one is in the right or the wrong, and there are alternative services out there that may or may not fulfill your needs or wishes.
Well maybe I should clarify. Some people are going apesh*t over it because Google beat Apple to an announcement. Although when has Apple ever really cared about being first at something? And in this case neither Google not Apple would be first anyway...
Don't worry Eddy Cue has this
Steve would have had them bent over the table asking for more by this time, and without a tube of vaseline either.
For those that are blaming the music companies for the difficult negotiations, stop being naive. Look at how Apple does business otherwise...from how they take such a big cut from app developers to how they overprice their hardware (and no, I don't think they're the only company that does this).
It's pretty obvious Apple's demands are what's causing the problems. They want a sweet deal that other companies don't have and the music companies aren't having it. Maybe Apple's "advantage" isn't what it used to be and the music companies know this and they're holding out.
One thing's for sure...Apple needs to do whatever it takes to get this deal done. With all the great choices out there (Spotify, Pandora, Rhapsody, and now Google Music), they're going to need something to launch come WWDC. Especially since all the rumors for the last few months point to this happening. It won't sink Apple, obviously, but pushing another product back, this time because of their own bull-headedness, isn't a good look for them.
----------
Congratulations...you just officially became old.
Seems to me way more people are blaming Apple than the record companies.You mean, just as much as everyone else takes? Aside from MS, who has a lower split as a means of desperation to try and lure developers.
Go back to 2008 when they pioneered these terms. There was nothing else quite like it. Free distribution, free promotion, no credit card fees, no charge for free apps. Just a flat 30% cut of revenue for paid apps, no charge for free apps. That was an incredible deal for developers at the time, and there was nothing quite like it ever before. So I don't know what planet you live on, but back here on planet earth, the App Store terms were a game changer in the cell phone industry. And they're still just as enticing today as they were in 08.
With regards to the Google music deal announced this week, is this the record companies trying to humble Apple? The record labels had to cede a lot of control to Apple in the last decade plus. They've made a lot of money but I bet there is still a lot of resentment towards Apple.
Let the "Apple is doomed" or "Apple is catching up" comments begin now......
Well yes, on troll infested MacRumors, that's a given.
Google's service is fairly standard. Negotiating was simple.
Apple is working on a hybrid service which will complicate negotiations.
Here's a quote from the original post, which you seem to have missed:
They only get them half-assed sorted out in some screwy belief that being first guarantees success. Apple usually does it right the first time. I'll wait for Apple to do it right.
beat apple to an announcement?
people were saying exactly that a year ago when google announced improvements to their maps just before apple released their own maps software.
yes thats all google did.
if people get excited because google actually has a track record of releasing some very good online software and beneficial solutions whereas apple really dosent and is living of different sized versions of the same device while keeping the os unchanged for years and years. and this is purely by apples choice they have chosen to ignore their loyal and good customers be it desktops, softwares, pro users etc etc instead trying to woo some people with half assed solutions