The only people who truly want to push paid streaming are the record companies... Because you pay to listen to the same music every single month....
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.
Sony Music CEO Confirms 'Apple Music' Unveiling at WWDC
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Agreed. I don't know anyone that streams music over here. It's all on your local device.
That's one thing I like about the paid streaming. Once I'm done w/ the song (tired of it), I just take it out of my collection or my favourites playlist and add new songs.
There's times I wish I didn't waste the money for that album or song as it gets really old quick.
There's times I wish I didn't waste the money for that album or song as it gets really old quick.
I am a teacher, so I know how important it is to not only have rules and expectations in the classroom, but also how crucial it is to enforce them regularly and fairly if those rules are to have any "teeth".
I guess the question is - was it malice or sheer incompetence? I mean, you know Apple is super-secretive when it comes to things like this, and you still take a photograph like that and upload it to instagram? Fanboys notwithstanding, I can't imagine there is any part of the company's SOP that would allow stuff like this. Even if it was an oversight on the employee's part, I suppose there is something to be said about "common sense" and all.
Maybe it is a small thing, but if you want to prevent repeat offenders, Tim Cook will need to deal with this decisively. Otherwise, Apple's partners and workers are not going to see anything wrong with leaking info like this if they don't believe there will be any repercussions for doing so. The law is only as effective as the authorities policing them.
Well we were spending $30-$50 a month on a music and since we started streaming we are spending $14 and have access to much more. I suppose you will find many people are willing to..
Beats has a family plan (at least if you subscribe through AT&T) and you can have 5 or 6 separate accounts for $14.95 and they can all stream at the same time. It is a good deal for us. I hope they do something similar.
Here's the thing - maybe I don't want to be listening to the same old albums a year from now. And maybe I don't want to have a large music library taking up space on my iOS devices, and which I have to manage.
I didn't buy any music prior to spotify. I like listening to music, but I haven't really found any songs worth keeping and that are worth listening to again and again year after year. At the price of a spotify subscription, even if I just listen to one new album every month, that more than offsets the subscription fee. And once in a while when I am bored, I just fire up spotify and blast whatever new music there is, rather than being constrained to the music that I own.
And there have been times when it has been handy to be able to pull up any song on hand, even if you don't own it.
Yes, maybe after 10 years of spotify subscriptions, I will have nothing to show for all the money I have spent. But what about all the songs that I have listened to, more than if I had purchased them individually, and the pleasure derived from them? That's like saying that just because I am going to crap out all the food that I eat anyways, that means there is no point to eating at an expensive restaurant and paying more for better tasting food?
Basically, spotify offers me a less constrained listening experience than album downloads.
I just don't understand the streaming craze of the last 5 or so years. I'm a 90s kid, and I grew up going down to the record store and buying my records and CDs. Then came iTunes, and I've been digitally buying my music since then (and more recently, records again). $10/month to listen to music? I can buy plenty of music a year with that $120 that I will actually own and call "mine," not just borrow. Streaming services are like that friend that has all the music in the world and you pay them to "borrow" it. No thanks, I'd like my own copy. But that's just me.
Most of the music nowadays aren't classics like the rolling stone, ac/dc, etc. I find that 75% of my music I don't listen to after a while. However, the ones I keep, IMO, are classics. Some examples are AC/DC, zack brown band, taylor swift.
Streaming has its perks. Especially if you grew up digital, don't like rare or hard to find stuff, and are used to not actually "buying" music, just downloading track from itunes/amazon. Why not, just pay your subscription and get your hits...if its not available, oh well. You don't even have to make playlists or organize anything. Its awesome. For 120 dollars a years. For the rest of your life. I see the appeal, really I do. Its very low work involved and is probably great for most people
It also works well for people my age who never got their **** together and ripped/organized their music. Just delete that messed up iTunes library and subscribe (that would be my girlfriend).
For a lot of people, like myself, we have collected music for years. We have already spent the money. We like a lot of music that is simply not available on streaming services. My music is already organized and curated. In essence, I have my own DRM free, always-available spotify that I like to listen to anywhere, anytime...and not have to deal with reception, wifi, and data caps (ever). And I spend about 60-70 bucks a year on music.
I personally think its a lot better to just slowly build an actual music collection, over time, that you own, of music you love, rather than pay 10 bucks a month to essentially listen to the radio and make your own playlists. But I guess not a lot of people think long term. My large for the average person music collection is 730 albums with a lot of singles. To recreate it would probably cost about...~9k?. Thats only 8 years of streaming.
Apple and record companies will probably make a lot off of streaming..not sure why they think they can't make the model work.
It also works well for people my age who never got their **** together and ripped/organized their music. Just delete that messed up iTunes library and subscribe (that would be my girlfriend).
For a lot of people, like myself, we have collected music for years. We have already spent the money. We like a lot of music that is simply not available on streaming services. My music is already organized and curated. In essence, I have my own DRM free, always-available spotify that I like to listen to anywhere, anytime...and not have to deal with reception, wifi, and data caps (ever). And I spend about 60-70 bucks a year on music.
I personally think its a lot better to just slowly build an actual music collection, over time, that you own, of music you love, rather than pay 10 bucks a month to essentially listen to the radio and make your own playlists. But I guess not a lot of people think long term. My large for the average person music collection is 730 albums with a lot of singles. To recreate it would probably cost about...~9k?. Thats only 8 years of streaming.
Apple and record companies will probably make a lot off of streaming..not sure why they think they can't make the model work.
I do enjoy classic rock, and I have quite a few older albums, but I mostly listen to alternative, punk, indie, country, and rap (all over the place, I know... you can thank college for that), and that is what I mostly buy. I have 3242 songs in my iTunes library as of this writing, and all 3242 of those are on my iPhone as well. I do agree with you in that there is a lot of music I have that I haven't listened to in ages, but I still like the comfort knowing that I can go and listen to that music anytime I want because it is "mine" (also makes shuffle more interesting).
And I couldn't tell if you were being sarcastic with the taylor swift there... but if you weren't, +1
This. paragraph. is. EXACTLY. how. I. feel. I've spent years growing and editing my collection, assigning genres, making playlists, etc.
I agree that it is a lot better to slowly grow a music collection over time. To me, streaming is like the quick and easy way to start listening to music, versus all the effort to buy it and organize it in your library and sync it to your devices.
Lol, no I wasn't. I have a broad taste of music and I liked her newest album. But I do have albums I did the 90 second sample and liked it but once I buy the album and listen to it completely, I regret the decision to buy it. Hence, I'm more selective/picky buying music.
I loved spotify when i used it but hated that it didn't have all the albums/artists I wanted and it was a pain in the butt to get my own music on my phone via the spotify app and I didn't want to go into 2 separate music apps to listen to my music. I tried google but didn't like their app too much and was finding that my battery life wasn't as good.
The new update will be just called Samsung Music .... no Hub.
Features will be change also... just wait... tomorrow, you will see the new Samsung Music.. soon....
Anyway... Samsung made it first.
Oh totally, I never said you said it, I said the original person (the first one I replied to) did.
And yes I respect your point of view, thankfully there are lots of legal options out there, everyone should choose their favorite one and be happy.
Cheers.
Ever hear the saying "smarter, not harder"?
I own tons of music, but for $120 a year, Spotify makes my life easier. And it's also downloaded on my iPhone, so I'm not sucking up an ungodly amount of data.
Music is my life. It speaks to me on levels I doubt most people can comprehend. And I'm 1000%, all for streaming music.
I'm not expecting new Apple TV hardware but expecting (or hoping for) a UI redesign for Apple TV.
Apple doesn't care about the 90s kids, it cares about this generation. It's a tech company, it can't be stuck doing things we all did 20 years.
It needs to be "hip and trendy" with the celebs, who are very unlikely to be interested in owning a physical or digital music collection, and much prefer the convenience of any streaming service.
Nowadays, just like before, it's word of mouth that gets people to use something. However, while 20 years ago we barely had the Internet and "word of mouth" was constrained to a few you knew in real life, it now spans the whole globe. People want convenience, free or paid, it doesn't matter.
Streaming is the future. Whether (Spotify Premium, Tidal, Rdio, Deezer, Apple Music) or not (Spotify Free, YouTube) people pay for it is a whole other discussion. But no one has the time to fire up the dusty torrent client anymore unless it's for something very specific (e.g. a remaster from an old album in lossless audio quality). Everything is streamed - music, TV shows, movies.
T-Swift's old tunes were excellent; her new album, not so much. But then again I am a country fan.
Same here. I can go from listening to Taylor Swift to Brad Paisley to Tupac to Aretha Franklin to Pink Floyd's DSOTM in a couple of hours.
I have genre playlists, and I also use Spotify's mood playlists which are pretty sweet. I love discovering music, and Spotify is excellent for this. iTunes, not really.
I don't mind most genres, and it would be such a pain to rip all the music I own physically. I don't mind paying for Premium at all, it actually stopped me pirating digital music (my policy is physical or streaming, no digital tracks since I don't see the point in owning a digital collection).
Last edited:
I've been using streaming services like pandora for years now and haven't purchased any music in years.
IMO the only issue with streaming is that it uses bandwidth. Thankfully I have an unlimited plan.
Besides that issue streaming rocks. Why do you want to purchase each song individually from a service like iTunes? You gotta deal with the hassle of uploading the songs to your phone, meh. With streaming you have access to the entire library at once. You can listen to songs you would never typically purchase. Plus either way the music is just data from the cloud, so it's not like you really own anything special and unique.
I wonder if Apple will unveil a new Apple TV UI that features App Icons like similar to the App Icons on iOS but located on the bottom of the TV screen. The rest of the screen can be used for info on the media you selected (movie, etc). You would think they need to update the photos app as well on Apple TV (if it hasn't been done already). Finally, love to be able to add your own wallpaper while your in the menu/app screen as well.
Not being sarcastic btw.
Personally I think the UI is going to get a big update. Apple is very clever in their invitations and the symbols look both like apple tvs and icons.