Google Offers Free 4-Month Play Music Trial Subscription to Celebrate July 4th

[Tech198]

Good for Google

I guess if u have an Android phone, most will go for this ..... (not all).

 

[samcraig]

Even if it was free for full year,

Somehow I doubt that's true.

- Google has the worlds number one search engine, which is a literal gold mine of data about you.
- Google gets data from millions of websites. For example, if I go to Company ABC and browse their website, and then visit another unrelated website, I'll often be served a targeted ad for Company ABC (since they knew I visited their site). Or I'll be served a targeted ad for another product similar to what Company ABC sells. They know this because Company ABC will have embedded code from Google in their website.
- Google makes $50 billion a year monetizing your data for targeted advertising. Advertising that would be practically useless without a search engine to power it or tracking code built into websites.
- Google Wallet used to track all your purchasing transactions (don't know if they still do).

Apples primary reason for collecting data is for security and to improve the customer experience. Googles primary reason for collecting data is to power targeted advertising, which is almost 90% of their revenue. Any company that relies so heavily on only a single product (advertising) will never have the same concerns about your privacy, regardless of what they try to tell you.

For example, Apple is implementing differential privacy (announced at WWDC). Google is also doing this with RAPPOR. However, Google is more of an experiment whereas Apple is rolling out full-blown deployment. There's a lot of discussion of whether differential privacy can even be used for something like targeted advertising, as the whole purpose of targeted advertising is having a detailed profile about an individual (can't serve me ads for Miller Lite or Budweiser when I'm a beer fanatic who only drinks craft beers - so simply knowing I like beer is not specific enough to target me). You can bet Google will never introduce any privacy enhancing features that could affect their core business (targeted advertising).


So, yeah, not even close.

If you don't understand how targeting advertising works - you shouldn't criticize others. And you don't.

And stop kidding yourself that Apple has only noble reasons. The truth is - they would love to have an ad platform as successful as Google. They tried. They failed. Somehow it's a "crime" that Google is successful at it.
[doublepost=1467634629][/doublepost]

This is it.

In a year, you've spent $120 on streaming and own nothing. Just think: you could have bought 120 songs for that to own forever! That's far more than most people would ever want to buy over several years. I only buy a handful of tracks a year; maybe two or three plus the odd album. When an album typically costs about $5 on Amazon, it is pointless to pay to rent music on any streaming service.

I mostly agree. However, I have a pre-schooler at home who changes what she likes to listen to often, so it's nice to simply have access to a large library without having to be more finite and purchase songs she'll only listen to for a month.

I do often consider that I don't fully utilize the streaming music service as much as I could - but it's nice to have. And since I was a charter member, paying 7.99 for that and to have no ads on youtube, for now, is worth the expense.

 

[nazaar]

if you really want to celebrate the 4th offer it to everyone #Canada

 

[EricTheHalfBee]

We agree, they both collect a lot of the same basic information, and I'm not pedantic at all. Just factual. I'll list nothing but facts that I can prove.


I'm not sure if you realize this or not but Apple does the exact same thing. Not something similar, but the exact same thing. You can opt out of both. Opting out of either one still doesn't negate all targeted ads because: If you opt out, you will continue to receive the same number of mobile ads, but they may be less relevant because they will not be based on your interests. You may still see ads related to the content on a web page or in an application or based on other non-personal information. <-- Guess where I pulled that info from? Also opting out only applies to Apple's and Googles respective ad services and does not affect targeted ads from other ad networks.


How did you come to the conclusion about Apple's reasoning for data collection? Was it because of this:

We may collect, use, transfer, and disclose non-personal information for any purpose. The following are some examples of non-personal information that we collect and how we may use it:

• We may collect information such as occupation, language, zip code, area code, unique device identifier, referrer URL, location, and the time zone where an Apple product is used so that we can better understand customer behavior and improve our products, services, and advertising.
• • We may collect information regarding customer activities on our website, iCloud services, and iTunes Store and from our other products and services. This information is aggregated and used to help us provide more useful information to our customers and to understand which parts of our website, products, and services are of most interest. Aggregated data is considered non‑personal information for the purposes of this Privacy Policy. Aggregated data... where have I heard that term before? Oh yeah, Google.
  • Apple’s websites, online services, interactive applications, email messages, and advertisements may use“cookies” and other technologies such as pixel tags and web beacons. These technologies help us better understand user behavior, tell us which parts of our websites people have visited, and facilitate and measure the effectiveness of advertisements and web searches.
  • Apple and its partners use cookies and other technologies in mobile advertising services to control the number of times you see a given ad, deliver ads that relate to your interests, and measure the effectiveness of ad campaigns.
  • As is true of most internet services, we gather some information automatically and store it in log files. This information includes Internet Protocol (IP) addresses, browser type and language, Internet service provider (ISP), referring and exit websites and applications, operating system, date/time stamp, and clickstream data.
    
    We use this information to understand and analyze trends, to administer the site, to learn about user behavior on the site, to improve our product and services, and to gather demographic information about our user base as a whole. Apple may use this information in our marketing and advertising services.

Google has been using RAPPOR for over a year now. Full blown roll out of DP for Apple? When did that news come out?
There's also a question of whether Apple's future use of DP will be effective for them. They are studying it intently. Which is why a full blown deployment is not eminent.


Apparently, closer than you think at least. All of that info comes from Apple's privacy policy. You say they collect for security and improvements. I'll agree on the improvements, but security is a stretch for me since the policy mentions advertising, customer behavior, tracking cookies, and a host of "Google-like" things far more than any mention of security. To be fair, maybe you think the security is implied instead of being laid out legally.

No, not even close. The problem with you quoting Apples terms & conditions is that the terms & conditions of most major companies (Apple, Google, Facebook, Microsoft) are practically identical (and for good reason as they are catch-all legalese to protect them from all manor of legal issues that might arise from their business operations).

You're trying to use a logical fallacy to make it appear Apple and Google are similar. Specifically, reduction of an idea or method down to a binary state of Yes or No. A tactic often used to confuse the issue or make it appear two things are similar, while removing the scale of something.

Let me give you some examples:

- Johnny is a convicted fraudster. Tony is also a convicted fraudster. Therefore they are similar. Ignore the fact one of them bounced a cheque for $2,000 and the other ran a Ponzi scheme that stole millions from people.
- Apple issues regular security updates. Google issues regular security updates. Therefore they are both just as secure from new threats as they both issue updates.
- Malware Apps have been found in The App Store. Malware Apps have been found in Google Play Store. Therefore iOS and Android are equal in terms of Apps found to contain malware.

This is EXACTLY what you're doing to try and place Apple in the same boat as Google when it comes to collecting data. You want to talk about terms & conditions and ignore the SCALE of what each company does.

- Are you going to claim that Apples efforts to serve ads are on the same scale as Google?
- That Apple collects anywhere near as much information as Google (does Apple run a search engine or have their own versions of DoubkeClick or Google Analytics)?
- That Apple makes 90% of their revenue from their data collection?
- That Apple gets as much data from the iPhone (with 15% market share) as Google gets from Android phones (with 80% market share)?

Apple and Google are only equal in that they collect data. How much they collect and how they use or monetize it is completely different.
[doublepost=1467640921][/doublepost]

If you don't understand how targeting advertising works - you shouldn't criticize others. And you don't.

And stop kidding yourself that Apple has only noble reasons. The truth is - they would love to have an ad platform as successful as Google. They tried. They failed. Somehow it's a "crime" that Google is successful at it.

Actually I do know how targeted advertising works. The fact that you didn't bother to counter my points and came up with a lame response speaks volumes about you.
[doublepost=1467641173][/doublepost]

That's not how it works.

You will only be tracked by Google if

1. You click on a search result when using google search
2. The site you visit has google analytics installed
3. The site runs google ads

Remove 2 and 3 and you are lost to google once you visit the site.

Hence when you come to macrumors you get ads following you as it runs double click for its revenue.

I'm fully aware of your points 1-3. Do you actually think that 2 & 3 don't account for millions of sites around the world? Have you EVER ran any kind of inspector on a site you're visiting to see all the assets it uses? I can't even recall the last time I checked a website and it DIDN'T use Google Ads or Analytics. I even use Google Analytics on my site.

Seeing people defend Google and try to put Apple in the same boat as them for data collection is hilarious. No wait, it's actually kind of pathetic.

 

[mantan]

Somehow I doubt that's true.




If you don't understand how targeting advertising works - you shouldn't criticize others. And you don't.

And stop kidding yourself that Apple has only noble reasons. The truth is - they would love to have an ad platform as successful as Google. They tried. They failed. Somehow it's a "crime" that Google is successful at it.
[doublepost=1467634629][/doublepost]

I mostly agree. However, I have a pre-schooler at home who changes what she likes to listen to often, so it's nice to simply have access to a large library without having to be more finite and purchase songs she'll only listen to for a month.

I do often consider that I don't fully utilize the streaming music service as much as I could - but it's nice to have. And since I was a charter member, paying 7.99 for that and to have no ads on youtube, for now, is worth the expense.

Agree with you about the music part with kids. My daughter is 18 now. She spent babysitting money on music and always asked for iTunes gift cards. Our iTunes library is bloated with music that she simply outgrew - from the High School Musical phase through Glee. Looking back, we would have loved to have a streaming option that gave her access to what she liked (and everyone else in the family liked) without building up a large library of songs we don't use any more.

 

[MH01]

No, not even close. The problem with you quoting Apples terms & conditions is that the terms & conditions of most major companies (Apple, Google, Facebook, Microsoft) are practically identical (and for good reason as they are catch-all legalese to protect them from all manor of legal issues that might arise from their business operations).

You're trying to use a logical fallacy to make it appear Apple and Google are similar. Specifically, reduction of an idea or method down to a binary state of Yes or No. A tactic often used to confuse the issue or make it appear two things are similar, while removing the scale of something.

Let me give you some examples:

- Johnny is a convicted fraudster. Tony is also a convicted fraudster. Therefore they are similar. Ignore the fact one of them bounced a cheque for $2,000 and the other ran a Ponzi scheme that stole millions from people.
- Apple issues regular security updates. Google issues regular security updates. Therefore they are both just as secure from new threats as they both issue updates.
- Malware Apps have been found in The App Store. Malware Apps have been found in Google Play Store. Therefore iOS and Android are equal in terms of Apps found to contain malware.

This is EXACTLY what you're doing to try and place Apple in the same boat as Google when it comes to collecting data. You want to talk about terms & conditions and ignore the SCALE of what each company does.

- Are you going to claim that Apples efforts to serve ads are on the same scale as Google?
- That Apple collects anywhere near as much information as Google (does Apple run a search engine or have their own versions of DoubkeClick or Google Analytics)?
- That Apple makes 90% of their revenue from their data collection?
- That Apple gets as much data from the iPhone (with 15% market share) as Google gets from Android phones (with 80% market share)?

Apple and Google are only equal in that they collect data. How much they collect and how they use or monetize it is completely different.
[doublepost=1467640921][/doublepost]

Actually I do know how targeted advertising works. The fact that you didn't bother to counter my points and came up with a lame response speaks volumes about you.
[doublepost=1467641173][/doublepost]

I'm fully aware of your points 1-3. Do you actually think that 2 & 3 don't account for millions of sites around the world? Have you EVER ran any kind of inspector on a site you're visiting to see all the assets it uses? I can't even recall the last time I checked a website and it DIDN'T use Google Ads or Analytics. I even use Google Analytics on my site.

Seeing people defend Google and try to put Apple in the same boat as them for data collection is hilarious. No wait, it's actually kind of pathetic.

Relax you are going to blow a gasket.

Let's focus here. You run GA on your site, please explain how you collect data on your site on ME, if I visit. how do you identify me. Entertain me.

Did you miss the part about personal data? Now think all the data associated with Appleid .

 

[RamGuy]

I was going to try it out, because why not? But I'm only getting an error when trying to sing-up telling me to try again later.. That's how you loose potential customers, great work Google.

 

[miknos]

I just subscribed and I'm gonna try those free months. I tried Apple Music for 3 months and Spotify for a month.

Mac apps:
-Google Music uses Adobe Flash! Not gonna use.
-Apple Music everyone knows how it works. It's fluid and improving.
-Spotify is outrageous. Seems like it uses Adobe Flash. CPU spikes leading to less battery.

iPhone apps
-Google Music seems great. UI is great. Fast, fluid and easy to use.
-Apple Music didn't convince me much. It's improving though.
-Spotify; not the best but better than Apple's.

All services are quite similar IMO. I'll keep using those free offers and move eventually to the one who offers the best price. In some countries, Google Music/Deezer cost 5 usd/month.

Apple Music has the best audio quality and more selection.
Spotify can be used for free at 160kbps (many won't care). I use an adblocker (Adguard or Glimmerblocker) so I don't hear nor see ads.
Google Music can be used for free if you upload your albums there.

I love when companies fight for my attention!

 

[deany]

I just subscribed and I'm gonna try those free months. I tried Apple Music for 3 months and Spotify for a month.

Mac apps:
-Google Music uses Adobe Flash! Not gonna use.
-Apple Music everyone knows how it works. It's fluid and improving.
-Spotify is outrageous. Seems like it uses Adobe Flash. CPU spikes leading to less battery.

iPhone apps
-Google Music seems great. UI is great. Fast, fluid and easy to use.
-Apple Music didn't convince me much. It's improving though.
-Spotify; not the best but better than Apple's.

All services are quite similar IMO. I'll keep using those free offers and move eventually to the one who offers the best price. In some countries, Google Music/Deezer cost 5 usd/month.

Apple Music has the best audio quality and more selection.
Spotify can be used for free at 160kbps (many won't care). I use an adblocker (Adguard or Glimmerblocker) so I don't hear nor see ads.
Google Music can be used for free if you upload your albums there.

I love when companies fight for my attention!

I use this on my mac https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/gear-for-google-play-youtube/id513751032?mt=12 with GPM, quite good, cheers

https://www.gearmusicplayer.com/index.html

 

[Loco Emperor]

I tend to stay away from all things Google

I am the same. Outside youtube, I tend to stay away from google crap

 

[69Mustang]

{snipped for clarity}

Please stop using logical fallacy. I don't think you know what it means. If you do, you're using it incorrectly. Just like you misunderstood the meaning of moving the goalpost in another thread. Regardless of your misinterpretation of words, you still fail to present facts. You're quotes live in a perpetual state of anecdote and supposition. It seems your entire narrative rests on the idea that Google does more data collection. No one argued that they don't, least of all me. But that's where you're hanging your hat. Okay, I guess. A bit tenuous to me, but to each his own. To be fair, it does make rationalization easier.

Apple and Google are only equal in that they collect data.

This is true. This is the point I've been making all along.

How much they collect and how they use or monetize it is completely different.

Completely different? They monetize that data in the same manner. Google monetizes more of it. Unfortunately for you narrative, monetizing more does not equal different. It simply means more.

Just as an FYI, let me help you with your logical fallacy mistake. My premise: Apple collects data just like Google. I never made a claim of who does what more. You even stated yourself that you know Apple collects data. There's no fallacy there, logical or otherwise. If you want a better example of a logical fallacy, look no further than your own quotes.

Take for instance that Red Herring (it's a type of logical fallacy) you're clinging to so tightly. Google getting the majority of their revenue from ad services has no bearing on whether or not Apple and Google collect data. But you sure want everyone to look at it as evidence of... I really don't know what it's evidence of besides the fact that Google monetizes the crap out of it's data collection. Afaik, that was never in question. It's also a Cum Hoc Fallacy. Google monetizes data collection more than Apple therefore how they collect and use data is completely different. Whaaaa? They don't build bridges long enough to span that gap.

 

[deany]

I remember a lot of iphone users saying Spotify would get rejected by the AppStore 7 years ago.
You couldn't have the app open in the background and I'm fairly certain you couldn't sign up in the app in 2009. (same old!).
A lot of folk also voted 1 star as it wasn't free!!
https://news.spotify.com/uk/2009/07/27/spotify-for-iphone/

 

[Tech198]

*blows streamers*

 

[blasto2236]

Please stop using logical fallacy. I don't think you know what it means. If you do, you're using it incorrectly. Just like you misunderstood the meaning of moving the goalpost in another thread. Regardless of your misinterpretation of words, you still fail to present facts. You're quotes live in a perpetual state of anecdote and supposition. It seems your entire narrative rests on the idea that Google does more data collection. No one argued that they don't, least of all me. But that's where you're hanging your hat. Okay, I guess. A bit tenuous to me, but to each his own. To be fair, it does make rationalization easier.

This is true. This is the point I've been making all along.

Completely different? They monetize that data in the same manner. Google monetizes more of it. Unfortunately for you narrative, monetizing more does not equal different. It simply means more.

Just as an FYI, let me help you with your logical fallacy mistake. My premise: Apple collects data just like Google. I never made a claim of who does what more. You even stated yourself that you know Apple collects data. There's no fallacy there, logical or otherwise. If you want a better example of a logical fallacy, look no further than your own quotes.

Take for instance that Red Herring (it's a type of logical fallacy) you're clinging to so tightly. Google getting the majority of their revenue from ad services has no bearing on whether or not Apple and Google collect data. But you sure want everyone to look at it as evidence of... I really don't know what it's evidence of besides the fact that Google monetizes the crap out of it's data collection. Afaik, that was never in question. It's also a Cum Hoc Fallacy. Google monetizes data collection more than Apple therefore how they collect and use data is completely different. Whaaaa? They don't build bridges long enough to span that gap.

Quick, someone find that clip from Billy Madison. Seriously, though. You are really projecting right now. No one ever, ever said Apple doesn't collect data. It's WHAT is being done with that data that's at issue for most. Google sells it to the highest bidder for advertising purposes, Apple uses it to improve their products. Google makes their money from ads, Apple makes theirs from hardware. This really isn't difficult to understand.

 

[npmacuser5]

Please don't hate on me, I know this isn't the best place to write this and this is JUST my opinion. But I have been with play music for a month now (actually I'm doing youtube red basically 9$/mos gets rid of ALL ads on youtube and also gives you the music subscription) and I really love it and much much than apple music which I've been since it started.

It feels nice that the suggestions are spot on. I don't get Rihanna, Taylor Swift, Drake, Justin Beiber and Dr Dre non stop in my suggestions. I cannot reiterate how many times I have said "not interested" and "dislike" on Rihanna and Taylor Swift and every single day they show up in my "for you" lists. I get that they are popular, but I thought these were supposed to be based off our preferences and your "likes". And yes, I went through the "choose your artist" thing in the beginning and the suggestions are getting worse. Now I'm getting Kanye. Keep in mind, I don't have a SINGLE pop song in my list.

I think for majority of people that love rap and I guess Apple's real target audience apple music rocks. But I think if your taste isn't Taylor, Justin or rap, then Apple Music is pretty bad and will only suggest what Apple thinks everyone should like.

Google Music suggested that BS in the beginning too, which I get since I didn't have a library or any "thumbs up", but after 1 time saying I can't stand Rihanna and adding more songs/liking in my library, I don't see that sh.. anymore.

I get the privacy issue and the reason google suggestions are so powerful (they are an aggregate of everyone else liking the songs that I like, etc). But honestly, at least I don't feel like Apple being in bed with Swift is being forced on me.

Again, MY OPINION. Wondering if anyone else feels the same.. or if there is anyone out there that isn't in love with rap and whatever genre that Swift switched to recently to make more money.

Exactly my situation with the curated music services. Almost impossible removing certain genres.

 

[69Mustang]

Quick, someone find that clip from Billy Madison. Seriously, though. You are really projecting right now. No one ever, ever said Apple doesn't collect data. It's WHAT is being done with that data that's at issue for most. Google sells it to the highest bidder for advertising purposes, Apple uses it to improve their products. Google makes their money from ads, Apple makes theirs from hardware. This really isn't difficult to understand.

You could be 100% right about me projecting. You're not, but the possibility exists. Just like the possibility exists that Google sells it's data to the highest bidder for advertising purposes. That's not true either, but hey, anything's possible amirite? Someone reading your quote might wrongly assume you mean Apple only uses data collection to improve your products. Since you contrasted it directly with Google's use of data for advertising is that the impression you were trying to leave?

Google primarily makes their money from ads, Apple primarily makes theirs from hardware.

Just helping you out by removing that absolute from your quote. The accuracy of your statement just went up by 99.999%. <-- That's intentional hyperbole in case you were wondering. The only thing difficult to understand in your quote is the willingness to forego facts to make a point.

 

[blacktape242]

I might give it a try, I do like apples services even tho they can be frustrating at time with streaming issues.

 

[forerunnerg34]

Subscribed!

 

[LordVic]

... SNIP ...

Just want to say I wholeheartedly agree and it's why after the original Apple Music trial I left. No matter what I did, I was getting these pop stars in my streaming. I don't listen to pop music. I never have. I don't tend to follow it or care. I listen to Heavy Metal, Brit Metal, power metal, Etc. And yet, Time and Time again in Apple Music, I'd get the same recommendations as you.

Google Music on the other hand has done a much MUCH better job at finding music and staying within the genre's I tell it I want.

Plus Apple's biggest failure is the requirement of iTunes to be installed to listen to Apple Music on anything but an iOS device. I don't want to install iTunes. It's a terrible, bad, buggy, messy, memory leaking piece of **** that has never worked well. Nevermind the fact that most of my music listening is during the day while at work, and installing iTunes on our workstations is strictly against corporate policy. Meaning, there's NO way for me to listen to music at work via Apple Music (I don't have enough Data on my phone plan to be able to stream it)

Not having a webUI for Apple Music was a mistake that grossly limits it's scope

 

[chabig]

i cannot stand having to comb through my library and find what i want to listen to, when i mostly want to listen to something i've played recently. i cant believe other services dont have this.

I use Apple Music, which maintains a long list of everything recently played. Does Spotify not do this? Amazon?

 

[LordVic]

Can someone compare Spotify and Google play. Have been happy with Spotify for 18 months and now have many many playlists with them not sure I want to recreate. The trial is tempting. I also have Amazon prime music service but never used.

How many devices? Cache locally? How big is library? I really like to use Spotify to discover new music - usually through their various weekly playlists. How does google compare?

havent gone through the whoel thread so apologize if already answered:

you can have up to 5 phones authorized. And up to 10 total devices. But can only listen to one device at a time. (family pricing is available)

GPM will Cache locally random selection of tunes, or what you tell it to download. it will do this on WiFi if you specify. you can choose how large this cache on your phone will be. I use this feature a lot. I set my GPM to "offline mode" and let it just play randomly from the Cache. Theres probably a good assortment of 500-1000 songs that are randomly downloaded from my music library to my phone, on top of about 10 albums I've downloaded

There are a lot of ways of discovering music in GPM. there are auto-generated radio stations that can be based on anything. EG: you can tell GPM to do a "metallica radio" and it'll play a preference of Metallica + Genre specific tunes. You can select this from Any artist / song on GPM. There is also auto generated playlists that regularly rotate and change. And lastly there are discovery sessions that change daily on the main screen. EG they have specific playlists that are picked based on "mood" and "day". right now I have "its monday afternoon.. play something for". and there are playlists that Google believes fit the mood "laughing out loud" for example, or Summer break", "entering Beast Mode" etc.

 

[aloshka]

Just want to say I wholeheartedly agree and it's why after the original Apple Music trial I left. No matter what I did, I was getting these pop stars in my streaming. I don't listen to pop music. I never have. I don't tend to follow it or care. I listen to Heavy Metal, Brit Metal, power metal, Etc. And yet, Time and Time again in Apple Music, I'd get the same recommendations as you.

Careful saying that here. People get really angry when you say that Apple may have suggested something wrong.

Does the whole privacy thing bother you? Not the music as that's simple, but just supporting Google services in general?

 

[LordVic]

Careful saying that here. People get really angry when you say that Apple may have suggested something wrong.

Does the whole privacy thing bother you? Not the music as that's simple, but just supporting Google services in general?

The Privacy thing is an interesting take that I dn't want to get into discussion with here, mostly cause it's hot topic, especially on Mac Rumors, and it always just boils down into mindless FUD.

at the end of the day, whether its google, spotify, apple, tidal, all of them have personal information and history on us, and all of them use that history for a mix of targetted music and advertising. So far, Google hasn't betrayed me. Apple hasn't betrayed me, etc, etc. Plus, being Canadian, and living in Canada, any service that operates here must adhere to Canada's PIPEDA laws which pretty much render the security of private data issue moot

Now explain to me why you are so angry, became so offensive, lost all concept of respect and what a normal adult conversation, became extremely childish and just plain mean over suggestions that another person got?

Don't let these guys get to you. The Forum has a great ignore feature for many of these people. you should see my ignore list. Anyone who can't seem to string a critical thoguht together has made their way onto my list. I've got Fanboys fo Apple and Android blocked equally. The forums have become so much more tolerable once I blocked the ****s who seems to get offended and childish everytime you say something non-positive about Apple

 

[MadeTheSwitch]

I like that Google Play offers up YouTube red as part of the deal. I like watching YouTube without ads. But Google Play Music is lacking in a number of ways and leaves a lot to be desired.

• No cross fade support. I like all my songs to mix. On Spotify, I can do that. Google I can't.
• Horrible garish orange interface. Why they went with this color is beyond me. I like the black of Spotify better. At least give me a dark mode Google!
• No list view. Scrolling through all your artist or albums is a PITA. Spotify handles this so much better.
• Weak or non existent social tools. It's so much easier to share a song with someone on Spotify and even if they don't subscribe they can still give a listen thanks to the free tier. I can't share songs from Google with someone who has Apple Music.
• Notifications - Spotify let's me know when an artist I follow has a new release. I get both an email and a lock screen notification. Why don't I get that with Google? It's a search engine company for crying out loud. Along those same lines, Spotify will let me know when a band is on tour in my town.

Really the only reason I keep Google around is because it is cheaper for me ($7.99) and has a somewhat more expansive catalog. Some things are just stupidly missing from Spotify.

 

[LordVic]

My music is analog. Though I use Spotify to audition potential purchases. Not paying for that though.

you still buy cassettes? Phillistine!
[doublepost=1467656465][/doublepost]

I hope you're not using a logical fallacy to claim that Google and Apple both collect data on you, therefore they are the same. Because if so, then wow.

ANd yet,

you have no problem with your own logical slippery slope fallacy.

everyone of you making the privacy discussion in this thread so far has done nothing but throw fallacies around without any merit.