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.
Jimmy Iovine Talks Apple Music Exclusives Criticism, Says Service Was 'Too Ambitious'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Amazon has 1/40th the number of songs as Apple Music and you need 3 apps to do what Apple Music does and you say Apple Music is average at best?
I was recently talking with some friends about this very thing. I analogized it to the underperforming employee who keeps promising to do better—that his or her best idea/memo/project/whatever is just a week or two away. I believe my grandmother would have used the term film-flam man to describe this.
I hear ya. Speaking of "biggest innovations," under Jobs it took six years from the iPod's first release to the release of the first iPhone. And both were panned by many when they first came out.
Amazon has 1/40th the number of songs as Apple Music and you need 3 apps to do what Apple Music does and you say Apple Music is average at best?
Amazon's UI is really clunky. No gapless playback, which drives me crazy, and it never remembers what song I was on when it gets killed. Yeah, you're streaming that prime music album, then when you go back to the app you have to go find that album again and play it. WTF, it's 2016 amazon. Save your song/album locally and go back to it when the app opens.
I disagree. Apple could have invested their $3B more wisely. Eddy Cue spent a lot of money to hire someone else to do his job because he has no vision.
From a financial standpoint, beats headphone sales barely registers in Apple's "other" category. Furthermore, the few million they make from headphone sales doesn't justify the hit the brand took with the botched AM launch, not to mention the distractions and employee tensions that the merger apparently created. It's also a sub-brand for management to oversee that isn't strategic to Apple's core business.
The new AM is fantastic, but they could have achieved the same thing by buying Songza for $15MM (what Google paid) and using in-house design and UX talent.
From what Steve said, he wouldn't have got himself in that predicament in the first place.
"The subscription model of buying music is bankrupt. I think you could make available the Second Coming in a subscription model and it might not be successful." -- Rolling Stone, Dec. 3, 2003
Buying music for me will always be the way to go. I like being able to keep my music forever without cost, and play it on any one of my devices (new Macs, old Macs, any iPods, Linux computers) and use them for personal things like ringtones and using it for video projects and such.
I must be getting old or something.
Agreed... the problem is what app do you use? I used to rip everything into iTunes (and buy a single track now and then from the store). Then that master library shares out to the various iDevices. But, they seem to have killed the ability to download anything local. So, it looks like I'm going to have to find another solution for music, like I had to for photos. Pretty soon, Apple is going to have weaned me off their entire eco-system.
Not if no one is buying them.
What, you're not impressed with dancing emojis?!?!? (Unfortunately, I think Apple's glory days are over.)
[doublepost=1474951765][/doublepost]
Except that Steve probably thinks like you and I, and he underestimated the level of stupid to which society would head... I can't really see Steve excitedly promoting emojis on-stage for half a keynote either.
I just use iTunes on my main Mac. There still is the ability to add tracks locally if you don't use Apple Music at least. All my stuff is locally on my Mac, some downloaded from the iTunes Store, some ripped from CDs, and some imported from standard MP3 files (just did one album last week!).
Last edited:
I'd give Steve more credit in that he was one of the few to stem the tide of stupid and banal.
Despite some missteps along his career, he knew how to harvest,
1) the GUI interface invented by others and make it accessible and popular
2) the digital music player, invented by others and make it cool for everyone
3) the smartphone idea and make it one of the 10 best selling electronic devices ever.
As we all know, Steve never really invented anything, but he was a master at drawing the best out of others' original ideas and form it into something successful by will of his mind. There's no one around in tech at the moment willing to break with conventional thinking. Someday a new rebel will come along, but probably not within Apple. For now, Apple is riding the coattails of its past successes.
Hmm, maybe it's a UI thing, but I can't figure it out. For example, from my iPad, I can see the tracks and playlists, etc. via home sharing. I can play the tracks. But, I can't figure out how to pull them local. I used to be able to do that several versions back.
I think that's what I'm saying, though, in a way. I think Steve would have stopped Apple from following all the stupid trends and such. BUT, on the other hand, current culture seems to be just eating up all this subscription stuff, w/o even thinking about the impact of doing so down the road a bit. Steve would have only been able to curb that so much.
Hate to be that guy but when was Apple magical? All of the things you describe sound like Apple under Jobs. He killed many pro apps, introduced MacBook Air with one USB port, kept Mac Pro updates years apart, introduced idea of soldering and using glue in laptops - the list goes on and on...
Sometimes, a single number of "how many songs available" does not matter.Amazon has 1/40th the number of songs as Apple Music and you need 3 apps to do what Apple Music does and you say Apple Music is average at best?
If there are enough songs in certain genre, in one streaming platform, customer will go to that streaming platform rather than Apple Music if Apple Music has no such song in catalogue. Same for artists.
I don't know what kind of device you're using, but 3D Touch on any song or album packs a whole menu of play next/later, like/dislike, create a radio station etc options.
Difficult to be dismissive of the last 100 years of music. From where we stand, I fear for the next 100 years.
[doublepost=1474954579][/doublepost]
RIP Insanely Great and Think Different
Same here. My only complaint is the lack of "Add to Up Next" feature. You can play a song next, but then any other songs you decided to Play Next are moved to next in the queue, not added to last place in the queue. There also seems to be a weird bug where songs you do select to "Play Next" will play, the music will go back onto shuffle, and then the songs you asked for are played again, as part of shuffle.
[doublepost=1474954730][/doublepost]
When you're shuffling music there isnt a "Play Later", only when you're in an an album.
ATTENTION KP--You are good person and we don't want to lose you so -Step out of denial before something bites you! Beats does not bring in a "few million dollars" as you assert. Before Apple bought it, the revenue forecast was estimated to be close to $1.5 Billion. Yes that is the big "B" KP. Beats has only grown since then. They have a huge markup on their headphones and have consistently around 60% of the entire world wide market for premium headphones. Yes KP, that is the entire world. On that same big round rock they are also the largest seller of wireless headphones. And KP, wireless headphones now constitute over 54% of all of the revenue for the entire industry. Is the picture becoming clearer: Apple=Wireless=Most of revenue and profits. Not "millions" in revenue KP, "billions" since purchasing Beats. Not to mention the incredible value of having a brand that all the top sports stars, Lebron et al, and other stars have made the hot item among the young and culturally hip, but let's just keep this focused on the hard business numbers KP. Bow down to Apple's strategy KP, it's turned out to be ingenious.
I'm still struggling with the removal of the 5-star song rating system... My entire library, purchased over 15 years, relies entirely on that to underpin my Smart Playlists & manage syncing with my iPhone & iPad.
Yep, I think we're on the same page.
Maybe It's becoming a generational thing. Obviously, lots of people love streaming and paying a rental fee. I prefer owning stuff I plan on "using" more than once or twice. There's no wrong or right here, just preference.
I miss Steve's simplicity and elegance. Current trends are catering to every whim and fancy of the younger target audience and shareholder pressure. Too many changes over shorter time periods, producing fragmentation and disjointed products. Apple's following Samsung down the rabbit-hole of throwing up every kind of variation on a theme (different shapes, colours, whimsical features, emojis, etc.) and seeing what sticks.
Just 5 years back, we were happy with black-only iPhones and thrilled when SJ introduced the first white iPhone 4.
As for Apple Music, they were trying to copy other already successful streaming services, but without producing anything better, simpler or game changing. "Too ambitious" indeed and too political. Maybe Iovine could follow Forstall. The maps f'up is nothing compared to dismantling the existing relationships with the labels.
Beats is a money machine alright. Marketing is their biggest expenditure. Lebron et al don't come cheap.
"And even at prices of up to $450 apiece, they quickly became fashion statements. The company’s headphones have fat profit margins. Headphone designers estimate the cost of making a fancy headset is as low as $14." New York Times
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/05...=true&_type=blogs&_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=1&
Agreed. I just fear the longer-term implications, and I don't think people are stopping to consider them. I guess for me, it depends on longevity of use. Books and music are things I'd like to use over and over and keep around to potentially pass to the next generation. A video game or some app that's constantly in flux, subscriptions make a lot of sense.
[doublepost=1474957314][/doublepost]
Yea, fashion is just something I've never understood. The sad part, for me, is that I spent so many years defending Apple and Macs against the accusation of fashion vs productivity... and now Apple goes and chases after fashion while throwing productivity to the wind.
"The rights holders, whoever they are, have to do something, because there's a lot of free [music] out there, and it's a problem."
Free music is a problem? For whom? Filthy-rich Apple executives? Free music certainly is not a problem for consumers and people who still have to actually work for their money.
Free music is a problem? For whom? Filthy-rich Apple executives? Free music certainly is not a problem for consumers and people who still have to actually work for their money.