Jimmy Iovine Talks Apple Music Exclusives Criticism, Says Service Was 'Too Ambitious'

[LordVic]

...and only at mac users because it looks horrible on windows. The font is jagged, non anti-aliased and difficult to read.

I bet they did that on purpose.

the fanboys will blame Windows for it though and not apple for choosing to NOT use windows font API's for font smoothing and sizing.

But Apple has historically treated the Windows version of iTunes with contempt. Not sure if it still does it, but older versions of iTunes had notorious memory leaks that Apple refused to aknowledge or fix. it went on for YEARS

 

[GaryLasereyes]

Innovation would be not selling Macbook Pros that are approaching 500 days old with a Haswell processor. Not selling Mac Pros that are over 1,000 days old. All full price no less. Also, having fully sweatproof Beats headphones instead of sweat resistant that don't survive any workout of strength. Not using the older TouchID in the iPad Pro for no logical reason. Huge Apple fan, but I am incredibly dumbfounded with how things have become recently. Hoping we see some good updates soon.

So you definition of "innovation" is doing what YOU want them to do, and ignoring everything else that's been done. Apple innovates in small ways all the time. People need to realize that world changing innovation (ie. iPhone) is a rare thing and no company is going to do it year over year. Improving on existing products can still be innovative and Apple does a pretty decent job of that. I've just started using a Watch and it's completely changed how I interact with my phone. From my perspective there's some pretty innovative stuff in there.

 

[deany]

I do own a Sonos system. I was looking to buy more speakers to create a surround sound speaker system for my second tv, but it's still pretty pricey, even when you already own parts of the system. I have been pretty happy with it though.

My next phone will have as much memory as I can afford to buy. But since I also take a lot of pictures I'm not sure whether music or pictures will win the allotment battle. That's for next year anyway.

Hi

You and me in the same boat.

SONOS built up slowly over 6 years to 4 zones

iPhone 6 lucky to have 128GB its maxed out with Google Play Music to 100GB for offline (I have a 100GB wifi cap at home and 10GB on iPhone so AirPlay to AirPort express line in to Play
5 1st gen come in handy somtimes 3 1/2 weeks into the 100GB cap

iPhone 128GB offline very handy for car and out and a bout.

Hoping for iPhone 10 standard size next June '17 at 256GB should be fine with 256GB for foreseeable future.

cheers

 

[McCool71]

...there is no way on God's green earth that $10 a month is ever going to be objectively too expensive.

Totally agree. It depends a lot on your relationship with music I guess.

As a long time music lover with a sizeable physical collection (albums/CDs - now stowed away long ago) I am used to spending money on music. Back in the 80s/90s/00s I bought at least an album or two every week for years and years, trying to buy a 'classic' for every new album I bought so that I widened my horizon.

When MP3 started getting traction in the late 90s I dreamt of a service sometime in the future where you would get access to 'everything' for a monthly fee. And here we are - the selection of any of the big services is way better than I ever hoped for, and the price is way, way lower than I thought it would be.

It is truly a glorious time to be alive if you listen to music a lot.

 

[NachoGrande]

It's not too expensive, it's just not for you. Most people do listen to more than 144 songs in a year, it's for those people. And actually, from an artists perspective it's not nearly expensive enough but it seems to be around the limit of what people are willing to pay.

I listen to more than 144 songs a year, but no new songs. I've already bought 1000's of dollars worth of music. I don't need to rent new music.

 

[deany]

IIRC (off the top of my head) Apple music is roughly at 15m paying subscribers, and Spotify around 30m paid subscribers (not including free tier)

Hi
Spotify are now up to 40M http://www.forbes.com/sites/shelbyc...million-subscribers-apple-music/#1490363ddba4

Spotify have almost traded off apple since AM launched with phenomenal growth. Maybe AM subcriber base realised how poor AM was but like(d) the idea of streaming and 'jumped ship' to Spotify.

Why dont alphabet release GPM subcriber base? with over 1B android users worldwide would love to know their subcriber base.?

Cheers

Guess AM are up to 20 to 25M now based on Spotifys 40M and apple will slowly gain and overtake Spotify based on iOS user base alone.

 

[NachoGrande]

Apple Music is average at best. I use Amazon music with my prime membership and it's awesome. That coupled with Spotify and Pandora (free) and I have my music fix.

That is the combo I use. so far it's been fantastic.

 

[JustinRP37]

So you definition of "innovation" is doing what YOU want them to do, and ignoring everything else that's been done. Apple innovates in small ways all the time. People need to realize that world changing innovation (ie. iPhone) is a rare thing and no company is going to do it year over year. Improving on existing products can still be innovative and Apple does a pretty decent job of that. I've just started using a Watch and it's completely changed how I interact with my phone. From my perspective there's some pretty innovative stuff in there.

Not what I want them to do at all. Did you happen to see any of my follow up posts or did you just see the first one and think I am anti-Apple? I am definitely not anti-Apple as I am all Apple. Apple has been innovating, however, there is stagnation across their product lines. YOY revenues and sales are down across the brand. We are no longer just talking about a slow down in the iPad line. The slowdown is across Mac, iPhone, and iPad now. This is troubling to me and it should be troubling to anyone that likes Apple. Just yesterday KGI said iPhone 7 is not expected to sell as well as 6s, this would mark another YOY decrease.

Further, the Mac sales are way down as people are waiting for an update, especially with Dell, Asus, and HP posting YOY gains. People are not going to pay top dollar for a computer the has not been updated in nearly 500 days (MBP) or over 1,000 days (Mac Pro). They are still awesome computers no doubt, but they need a spec update if nothing else.

 

[blacktape242]

Honestly, I like streaming anything i want on demand. I like the updated iTunes app on OS and IOS.
This has changed how I listen to music, I don't buy or pirate anything anymore. I have it all at my fingertips now.
Yea, its a paid service and I'm fine with that.

 

[NachoGrande]

Too expensive for you perhaps.

But there is no way on God's green earth that $10 a month is ever going to be objectively too expensive.

It's not too expensive for me as in I don't have money to pay for it. Too expensive as in may people already have most of the music they're going to listen to. And in reality it's $15 plus tax. so figure $200 a year. In 5 years that $1,000. 1000 for rented music... nope I'll pass. if I stuck that money in my kids 529 plan I can turn it into 1800 with ease. But hey everyone has priorities

 

[Karma*Police]

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.

As a private company, no one really knew what beats' sales were except some beats employees and profits are not the same as sales. Apple will have to make a heck of profit on headphones to make up $3B they spent to purchase beats. It was also rumored that beats was experiencing a major slowdown in headphone sales which is why many believe Iovone shopped it to Apple.

If you look at Apple's financials, beats has had negligible impact to their business. Even with the launch of Apple Watch, their "other" category did not experience the kind of growth you'd expect based on Tim's comments about Apple Watch sales, suggesting beats did indeed experience a drop off in sales.

Beats was hip a few years ago and peaked when Apple bought them. Iovine and Dre got out at the right time and Apple execs and shareholders got the short end of the deal. When you factor the hit to Apple's brand, inability to catch Spotify's subscriber numbers and the distractions it created, the ROI has been anything but great, let alone ingenious.

Sorry Eddy, you failed.

 

[Jakexb]

Or in other words, Apple Music sucks, the iOS Music app sucks, and iTunes sucks. Jimmy and Eddy suck at their job.

Not really?

Gotta love MacRumors. Nobody hates Apple more.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

If it's true that it is $99 a year, someone could list 'overpriced' too, but is that to be expected?

 

[deany]

Too expensive for you perhaps.

But there is no way on God's green earth that $10 a month is ever going to be objectively too expensive.

If its the same as UK you should never pay $10.00 a month
20% off iTunes vouchers are available here every 3 or 4 months
15% off iTunes vouchers every couple of months
10% off iTunes vouchers available now.

So if you are happy to "stock up" and look for the 20% off you good for $8.00 per month or a thrifty £6.16 UK
or at 30,000,000 tracks 0.000027 cents a track

 

[citysnaps]

If its the same as UK you should never pay $10.00 a month
20% off iTunes vouchers are available here every 3 or 4 months
15% off iTunes vouchers every couple of months
10% off iTunes vouchers available now.

So if you are happy to "stock up" and look for the 20% off you good for $8.00 per month or a thrifty £6.16 UK
or at 30,000,000 tracks 0.000027 cents a track

In the US you can routinely pay the equivalent of $8.33/month by signing up for a year at $100, about 17% off. Works for me. That's a good deal and the new AM interface works great. No complaints.

 

[GaryLasereyes]

I listen to more than 144 songs a year, but no new songs. I've already bought 1000's of dollars worth of music. I don't need to rent new music.

Ok, but again, it's just not for you. There's no way $10 a month is too expensive.

 

[MS_Hedrick]

"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.

Artists, who've created that 'free music', have to actually work for their money. Free music is a problem - for everyone

No one works for free

 

[deany]

As a private company, no one really knew what beats' sales were except some beats employees and profits are not the same as sales. Apple will have to make a heck of profit on headphones to make up $3B they spent to purchase beats. It was also rumored that beats was experiencing a major slowdown in headphone sales which is why many believe Iovone shopped it to Apple.

If you look at Apple's financials, beats has had negligible impact to their business. Even with the launch of Apple Watch, their "other" category did not experience the kind of growth you'd expect based on Tim's comments about Apple Watch sales, suggesting beats did indeed experience a drop off in sales.

Beats was hip a few years ago and peaked when Apple bought them. Iovine and Dre got out at the right time and Apple execs and shareholders got the short end of the deal. When you factor the hit to Apple's brand, inability to catch Spotify's subscriber numbers and the distractions it created, the ROI has been anything but great, let alone ingenious.

Sorry Eddy, you failed.

100% agree I estimate buying

• KOSS cost - $20M (far better and more experience plus wont "date" like dreadful oversized Beats - date within 3 years max - already proved by minimalistic AirBuds)
+
• Say Tidal and rebrand to AM cost - $30M

cost KOSS + Tidal = $50,000,000
Beats = $3500,000,000

SAVING an eye-watering $3450,000,000 you can do a lot with that amount of money.
[doublepost=1474990334][/doublepost]

Or in other words, Apple Music sucks, the iOS Music app sucks, and iTunes sucks. Jimmy and Eddy suck at their job.

LOL

 

[S.B.G]

I'm still not sold on the exclusivity deals, at least for me personally. If it works for the artists that sign them and their fans are okay with it and buy the music, then great. But its not anything that will draw me to the exclusivity service at all.

--

Or in other words, Apple Music sucks, the iOS Music app sucks, and iTunes sucks. Jimmy and Eddy suck at their job.

So what you're saying is..

 

[deany]

In the US you can routinely pay the equivalent of $8.33/month by signing up for a year at $100, about 17% off. Works for me. That's a good deal and the new AM interface works great. No complaints.

So in the US you can prepay via phoning apple or online or do you purchase a 12 months voucher 'code' 17% off so $120.00 iTunes voucher costs $99.96? if so are the vouchers readily available Walmart Target BestBuy etc?

 

[avanpelt]

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

Thanks for pointing that out, but my main point was the general idea that Steve probably wouldn't have continued the association with someone like Iovine after he essentially publicly bad mouthed the company (and specifically a service he's basically in charge of).

With as big a head as Iovine has and the experience he has in the music industry, I'm sure he commands a lot of money; and I suspect that Apple's paying him quite well. It's Business 101 not to bite the hand that's feeding you. I guess he either never learned that lesson, just doesn't give a damn, or he's just trying to get out of Apple altogether. I suspect it's one of the latter two or some combination of those.

 

[LordVic]

Hi
Spotify are now up to 40M http://www.forbes.com/sites/shelbyc...million-subscribers-apple-music/#1490363ddba4

Spotify have almost traded off apple since AM launched with phenomenal growth. Maybe AM subcriber base realised how poor AM was but like(d) the idea of streaming and 'jumped ship' to Spotify.

Why dont alphabet release GPM subcriber base? with over 1B android users worldwide would love to know their subcriber base.?

Cheers

Guess AM are up to 20 to 25M now based on Spotifys 40M and apple will slowly gain and overtake Spotify based on iOS user base alone.

dunno about GPM. google has the service, it's quite good, But Google doesn't push it. at all. it's liek "it's here if you want it, if not, meh". no commercials, no marketting advertising, its not even installed on most phones by default. They honestly probably don't really care about GPM all that much in the grand scheme of things.

I wouldn't be surprised if GPM usage is only a couple million tops (even if I'm one of them)

 

[deany]

I think The Beatles exclusive iTunes helped iTunes iPod and iPhone and even iPad sales back in 2010 - apple inc. overall actually helped get them firmly on "the map"

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2010/nov/21/beatles-itunes-apple-downlaods

 

[69650]

The UI wasn't too ambitious, it was just too confusing. They deliberately tried to force users to abandon or ignore their music collections in favour of Apple Music. Having spent thousands of pounds over the years building my collection that really pissed me off.

 

[deany]

dunno about GPM. google has the service, it's quite good, But Google doesn't push it. at all. it's liek "it's here if you want it, if not, meh". no commercials, no marketting advertising, its not even installed on most phones by default. They honestly probably don't really care about GPM all that much in the grand scheme of things.

I wouldn't be surprised if GPM usage is only a couple million tops (even if I'm one of them)

I too am GPM loyal subscriber prepaid till Dec 2019 at £4.25

I actually thought the GPM app was a part of andoid like music is a part of iOS.

GPM not on all android will make a huge difference to subscriber base thats why I'm amazed they dont insist on the apps inclussion.

I had GPM at min 10M but at 5% of 1B upto a crazy 50B ie bigger than Spotify

I meantion 5% as I seem to remember that figure banded about with regard to AM and iTunes 150,000,000 card holders so immediate 15M AM subs without even advertising.