Yes. So since Apple spent many years and invested billions into the platform, Apple deserves to set the rules as to how they see fit.
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.
Spotify Blames Apple for Loss of iPhone Volume Button Control of Connected Devices
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes. So since Apple spent many years and invested billions into the platform, Apple deserves to set the rules as to how they see fit.
Not all the rules. As a general rule, wireless carriers used to put their logos on all the phones they sold and activated, both on the phone’s outer casing and in the phone’s software. Apple refused to let them do that on the iphone, which ended up being a game changer for the entire mobile phone industry.
Apple essentially did "refuse" which lead to a unique agreement. Apple and Cingular/AT&T negotiated terms that benefited both sides including multi-year exclusive carrier agreement, revenue sharing, subsidies, 2 year consumer contract requirement, limited carrier bloatware, etc.
My point, however, remains that suggesting Spotify (and/or others) build own device/platform is not practical and would stifle competition and create higher costs for consumers. If all of the major network operators (e.g., AT&T, T-Mobile, Verizon) had been able to force Apple to build its own network in the 2000s, there probably would never have been an iPhone.
Yes, OS options are limited in mobile (dominated by iOS and Android), desktop (dominated by Windows and macOS) and tablet (dominated by iPadOS and Android).
Actually, it's well known that Apple negotiates with companies to remove common practices such as requiring a logo on the product.
Steve Jobs did this with Intel which usually required manufacturers with Intel processes to have the Intel sticker. Steve Jobs specifically made sure he put it in the contract that they don't have to put the sticker on the product. This is well documented
refuse what?
if Spotify can't build their own platform and wants to negotiate with Apple, they should. Amazon did, and they got a deal. just like how Apple negotiated with AT&T and got that deal because they couldn't build a cellular network. Same with Intel (which they were able to negotiate removing Intel stickers from the product too) because they couldn't build/design their own chips at the time.
Maybe we should start blaming developers for refusing to support additional platforms.
You mean like Apple which doesn't offer native Safari, FaceTime, iMessage, GarageBand, iMovie, Pages, Numbers, Keynote, etc. "apps" for Windows, Android or others?
Apple refused to allow AT&T to have branding and input on the iPhone UI/design, give them the option to pre-install AT&T or other third party apps, etc.
Perhaps Spotify has tried to negotiate but Apple is refusing.
Well, there was a time when Microsoft (under Ballmer) withheld office from the iPad as well. And I remember when Google pulled google maps from the iPhone, which led to Apple developing their own mapping solution in-house.
But the windows phone famously suffered from a lack of apps, and maybe each developer, through their actions and inactions, have some role to play in said platform not taking off and serving as a third viable competitor to iOS and android.
All this has simply taught me (and Apple) that you can't really rely on anybody but yourself at the end of the day.
Knowing Spotify, their version of "negotiating" probably involves banging the table and then running to the regulators and crying "Mummy!" like a spoilt brat every time they don't get their way.
I wasn't disagreeing that developers not supporting additional platforms isn't a potential issue. I was simply pointing out that Apple is one of the developers to "blame."
I don't blame spotify here.
This is another item on the long list of endless problems with bluetooth devices. I've had problems with just about every app and a small selection of bluetooth speakers. Sometimes it works great and the device volume is linked to the phone, you can adjust either and it's reflected on each other. Sometimes they fight and a change works for a second and then bounced back (spiking). Sometimes the hardware buttons on the phone don't change the speaker volume at all. It's kind of a mess. I don't know what's wrong but I'm guessing the bluetooth spec is open to interpretation leading to this.
Spotify probably said they are sick of dealing with this issue, and I'd agree. This is between every manufacturer of these bluetooth speaker **** show.
I don't have this problem with airpods.
This is another item on the long list of endless problems with bluetooth devices. I've had problems with just about every app and a small selection of bluetooth speakers. Sometimes it works great and the device volume is linked to the phone, you can adjust either and it's reflected on each other. Sometimes they fight and a change works for a second and then bounced back (spiking). Sometimes the hardware buttons on the phone don't change the speaker volume at all. It's kind of a mess. I don't know what's wrong but I'm guessing the bluetooth spec is open to interpretation leading to this.
Spotify probably said they are sick of dealing with this issue, and I'd agree. This is between every manufacturer of these bluetooth speaker **** show.
I don't have this problem with airpods.
But Spotify is the problem. Instead of using the OS's API to stream music to other devices, they are using a custom solution to hand off the stream to the other devices. But despite the fact that they've handed off the stream, they still want control of the smartphone's hardware controls.
They refused via contract. They didn't ignore the rules. Both parties agreed to no branding. In exchange, AT&T probably got more time in their exclusivity contract.
And? Tim Cook tried to negotiate a TV deal with many networks before TV+ and it didn't work.
TV+ seems to be failing, but at least Apple tried to build their own after negotiations failed. Apple isn't crying to the government for new rules to be written about TV content or TV providers.
They "ignored" (or "refused") the rules by requiring new ones. In this situation, it may be that Spotify tried to negotiate new rules but Apple is refusing and therefore Spotify is forced to explain why things aren't working as they feel they should.
And... Apple doesn't seem to want to negotiate as you suggested Spotify do in the previous post I had responded to.
no, the rule is what is stated in the contract. they negotiated the rules into the contract.
Amazon negotiated fine.
assuming Spotify negotiated at all which there is no proof.
again no proof.
Again, it seems Apple has not been willing to "negotiate" as Spotify is stating (complaining) that Apple is refusing to allow or agree to various things.
you don't know if Spotify attempted to negotiate, or if negotiation did happen, either side was asking for too much.
As poorly as Spotify seems to be run these days (hundreds of millions of dollars wasted on attempts at podcast exclusivity, for starters), one would thing they could find better ways to spend their time and energy than whine about Apple. Typical. Facing headwinds? Find something to whine about.