Except it sounds bad. Sorry but 320 kbps MP3 sounds like mud compared to 256 kbps AAC and I can easily doing a blind test tell.
LOL. Completely ridiculous.
Except it sounds bad. Sorry but 320 kbps MP3 sounds like mud compared to 256 kbps AAC and I can easily doing a blind test tell.
He can also leap tall buildings in a single bound.LOL. Completely ridiculous.
In your eyes, they are walking a tightrope.First, you're accusing me of implying something, that's grasping at straws already. Second, there's a heck of a big difference between mismanaged and failing.
I think Apple is mismanaged. They are 100% focused on profit over quality and customer experience, and they're acting like circus clowns in the media. I don't think that's how they should be managed.
It certainly doesn't mean I think they're failing. They're walking a tightrope, yes, but not failing.
Apple Music executive and recording industry mogul Jimmy Iovine recently sat down for a wide-ranging interview with Music Business Worldwide, reflecting upon his desire for more people to start paying for music.
![]()
The spread of free music has proliferated since the earliest days of the internet, starting with shady peer-to-peer services like Napster and LimeWire and progressing to legal, ad-supported platforms like Spotify and YouTube. Iovine thinks it's wrong, and insists artists should get paid for their work.
However, he admitted that free music is "so technically good" that many people simply aren't willing to pay up. In fact, he said if Apple Music were to offer a free tier like Spotify, it "would have 400 million people on it" and make his job a lot easier. But that's not what he nor Apple believe in.To change that, he said "you've got to put everything into making the experience for people who are paying feel special."
Iovine believes that "people who pay for subscriptions should be advantaged," something Apple Music aims to accomplish with a lineup of original content in the works, including Carpool Karaoke: The Series, Vital Signs, Planet of the Apps, and an upcoming documentary with Harry Styles.Apple Music has also had exclusives with major artists such as Chance the Rapper, Drake, Frank Ocean, and Taylor Swift, and Iovine said those deals will continue occasionally, but he admitted that record labels "don't seem to like it."
Iovine continues to believe that Apple Music will be "on the forefront of popular culture," a sentiment he has echoed in many interviews.
Interview: "Musicians Taught Me Everything. Without Them, I'm Working On The Docks"
Article Link: Jimmy Iovine Says Apple Music Would Have '400 Million' Listeners If It Had a Free Version Like Spotify
I will never use a service with Ads, I'd rather pay. (Which makes me wonder why we get ads in a movie theatre if the ticket wasn't free...)
In your eyes, they are walking a tightrope.
In my eyes, they have set a solid foundation to build upon (Swift, APFS, Metal, Custom SoC's) - that will leave the competition further in the dust.
Apple Music executive and recording industry mogul Jimmy Iovine recently sat down for a wide-ranging interview with Music Business Worldwide, reflecting upon his desire for more people to start paying for music.
![]()
The spread of free music has proliferated since the earliest days of the internet, starting with shady peer-to-peer services like Napster and LimeWire and progressing to legal, ad-supported platforms like Spotify and YouTube. Iovine thinks it's wrong, and insists artists should get paid for their work.
However, he admitted that free music is "so technically good" that many people simply aren't willing to pay up. In fact, he said if Apple Music were to offer a free tier like Spotify, it "would have 400 million people on it" and make his job a lot easier. But that's not what he nor Apple believe in.To change that, he said "you've got to put everything into making the experience for people who are paying feel special."
Iovine believes that "people who pay for subscriptions should be advantaged," something Apple Music aims to accomplish with a lineup of original content in the works, including Carpool Karaoke: The Series, Vital Signs, Planet of the Apps, and an upcoming documentary with Harry Styles.Apple Music has also had exclusives with major artists such as Chance the Rapper, Drake, Frank Ocean, and Taylor Swift, and Iovine said those deals will continue occasionally, but he admitted that record labels "don't seem to like it."
Iovine continues to believe that Apple Music will be "on the forefront of popular culture," a sentiment he has echoed in many interviews.
Interview: "Musicians Taught Me Everything. Without Them, I'm Working On The Docks"
Article Link: Jimmy Iovine Says Apple Music Would Have '400 Million' Listeners If It Had a Free Version Like Spotify
You don't have to like him to know he's a successful businessman has pretty much excelled in every venture he's been in.
First, you're accusing me of implying something, that's grasping at straws already. Second, there's a heck of a big difference between mismanaged and failing.
I think Apple is mismanaged. They are 100% focused on profit over quality and customer experience, and they're acting like circus clowns in the media. I don't think that's how they should be managed.
It certainly doesn't mean I think they're failing. They're walking a tightrope, yes, but not failing.
hmm I wonder if it's to make some time so people can get their snacks or if they arrive a little late...I will never use a service with Ads, I'd rather pay. (Which makes me wonder why we get ads in a movie theatre if the ticket wasn't free...)
It's not really 'free' if advertisers pay for it. Spotify collects millions from advertisers each year. Get your head out of your a$$ Apple. The adds in Spotify more than justify the free tier and artists can still be paid based on a % of the revenue from adds.
I think Apple doesn't fully understand where the money comes from...
Art shouldn't be motivated by profit margins. If it is, it's not really art...
“iTunes on the Windows Store” might be a sign of a rewrite for Windows, and thus an opportunity to redo a lot of things they might not want to disclose at a Microsoft event.But it's doubtful that will happen, since iTunes was announced to be coming to the Windows Store later in the year.
I'd rather have the 100 that don't. I'll make a heck of a lot more selling ads.
I guess you don't believe broadcast radio and TV is a viable business model?
This! The problem isn't iTunes, although it has turned into a bloated mess. The problem is the shockingly poor design of iCloud Music Library. It has screwed up my library multiple times. I'm never going back. It's utterly terrible.
That is true and I agree wholeheartedly - the concept of "the starving artist" comes from the idea that poverty produces the best art. In that regard, it becomes a "chicken and the egg" issue: is the artist poor because he/she can't make money from their art/music/theater/dance/writing? Or do they somehow fail to create high quality until they become poor? At any rate, in the case of music, unless independently well-to-do, the musician had to produce something of a certain level of good or better quality to even get signed on by a recording company. Now, streaming and digital sound technologies have made it fairly easy to self-produce, leaving out the professional recording industry. Though production is far cheaper, the produced music is often at mediocre or less quality that most people aren't willing to pay much to hear. You have a lot more "music" out there than the market will or can absorb. Even if you'd be willing to pay for the .1% of the music that is of higher quality, it's hard to sift through everything to find that music. Here's where the problem comes - that .1% hasn't found a a paying model out there that can reliably get their produced product to the potentially paying audience. News print and hard copy books are having similar issues with loss of ad revenue for newspapers and for loss of customers for books in pulp form. As with musicians, good writers, columnists, and reporters are having trouble reaching a largely digital audience willing to pay for their product. Until a viable profit model can be found, good musicians and writers will eventually give up and do something else just to put food on the table. Additionally, newspapers and book publishers are having trouble staying afloat.Art can't be made if you can't eat.
well no - if the movie started on time people would be on time and they would get their snacks beforehand. As usual it's a race to the bottom, people arrive 10 minutes late to avoid the ads so they play the ads for 15 minutes so people arrive 15 minutes late to avoid the ads so they play them for 20 minutes.hmm I wonder if it's to make some time so people can get their snacks or if they arrive a little late...
Just seems like a bit of an over reaction to me. No matter what you do or where you go, you are served ads. Driving down the highway, watching tv, surfing the internet, not sure why someone would draw the line at movie theaters. But hey, to each their own I guess.And get the worst seats in the place. Or pay extra for assigned seating.
The poster put his solution right in his post. If he doesn't want to see ads, he's not going to go to the theatre at all. And that's the appropriate solution.
Because the price of Movies that the theatre has to pay (they don't get them for free, they have to rent / license them) far far FAR exceeds the revenues from ticket sales. They offset this with Commercials and previews, in addition to exorbitant prices on everything else.