Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Really?

You REALLY want to waste 5 X (avg.) the data amount for an almost imperceptible difference in audio quality?

Honestly, I like the best fidelity, too; but we're talking about the modern-day replacement for a radio station or walkman that you listen to on your phone or computer while at work with $30 earbuds, or in the car, on whatever abomination it has for an audio system; not a serious replacement for your home music collection that you listen to on your $35,000 home playback equipment.

I buy my music on DVD-A whenever I can; but I still thoroughly enjoy the 128k AAC quality of Apple Music as I sit here typing this...

I don't really stream music while I am "out". I think it is not healthy to have music play into your ears for multiple hours, every day -- even if the volume is low. Therefore, I don't care about the bandwidth issue. Plus, on Spotify, you can download songs, and the internet connection is only needed for something like "copyright verification".

When I do listen to music at work, I use a decent (but not great setup): Little Dot MKIII tupe-amp and Beyerdynamic DT 770 Pro over-ear headphones (I would never ever use earbuds, the last time I stuck something into my ears was when I was 5 years old... LOL).

My car, on the other, has indeed horrible speakers and LOSSLESS is truly wasted there... LOL.
 
I've got a bridge to sell you if you think apple does it out of the bottom of their heart and "respect" to artists.
[doublepost=1497624306][/doublepost]

You must make some great reviews.
It was just easier for me to find albums artists and songs also app way faster and clean. Spotify made my phone hot af
 
Majority of people don't have a 4K TV so they don't need 4K content at the moment. I'm sure future generations of the Apple TV will include it before it becomes more mainstream.
What a shockingly short-sighted comment. It's okay for Apple to ignore a technology if it is not the "majority" but on the other hand it is great if they remove a tech that is in use by the majority (headphone jack).



Mike
 
  • Like
Reactions: tonyr6 and tentales
What a shockingly short-sighted comment. It's okay for Apple to ignore a technology if it is not the "majority" but on the other hand it is great if they remove a tech that is in use by the majority (headphone jack).



Mike
I have a 4K SUHD Samsung and I can tell you there's almost zero 4K content (unless you want to watch 2-3 minute demo videos on YouTube).
 
  • Like
Reactions: kironin
I have a 4K SUHD Samsung and I can tell you there's almost zero 4K content (unless you want to watch 2-3 minute demo videos on YouTube).
I watch 4K regularly.... Netflix and Amazon. The difference is subtle but for me noticeable. I can tell because in the bedroom I only have a FIrestick, with no 4K. If I happen to launch Netflix on that instead of from the TV itself (Samsung SUHD) I notice it... especially if HDR.


Mike
 
I watch 4K regularly.... Netflix and Amazon. The difference is subtle but for me noticeable. I can tell because in the bedroom I only have a FIrestick, with no 4K. If I happen to launch Netflix on that instead of from the TV itself (Samsung SUHD) I notice it... especially if HDR.


Mike
Thanks Mike. Dropped Netflix 2 years ago and not an Amazon member.
 
You guys do realize that the free Spotify tier has commercials? That generates revenue for Spotify that you are not factoring into your analysis.

Of course the commercials bring in revenue from the "free tier" users.

But Spotify still lost $600 million last year.

So... how's that workin' out for them?
 
  • Like
Reactions: kironin
What a shockingly short-sighted comment. It's okay for Apple to ignore a technology if it is not the "majority" but on the other hand it is great if they remove a tech that is in use by the majority (headphone jack).

Mike
More that you don't miss what you don't need.

My Apple TV is hooked up to a 40” TV in my bedroom and I don't see myself upgrading to a 4K tv anytime soon, so I am not really disadvantaged by the lack of 4K support here.
 
Spotify is superior music service compared to Apple Music. AM lag/latency is awful. Apple should buy off Spotify and rebrand.
 
What a shockingly short-sighted comment. It's okay for Apple to ignore a technology if it is not the "majority" but on the other hand it is great if they remove a tech that is in use by the majority (headphone jack).

Mike

That and along with many Apple-blinded comments here is why they can behave in the way they do.
As someone who's started with Apple before the Mac, it is disenchanting to say the least.
The rebel company has become the behemoth, the big brother it so often touted against.

The music industry and media at large are struggling to win over paying eyes and ears in the face of a mosaic of competing services. Everyone can pick their favourite service, but this culture of defining winning by someone else loosing is a huge turn off. But the streaming wars continue:
http://www.billboard.com/articles/b...reaming-music-wars-spotify-apple-music-amazon

Apple has become the opposite of the counterculture it once celebrated. It's high-tech corporatism with all it's well understood lifecycles and limitations.

A piece I came across a while ago, more aptly describes the trends in Silicon Valley, then and now.
https://pando.com/2015/02/12/how-si...culture-went-corporate-and-ruined-everything/
It's lengthy but worth a read. It illustrates how counterculture turned into *******-culture.

I for one love Spotify (paying customer), for many reasons but also that it's a European company and not everything is or has to be "invented-at-Apple".
 
I switched recently from Spotify to Apple Music.

I had been using Spotify long before AM launched but after giving the three month trial a go I decided to stick with Spotify because the Apple Music app was a buggy mess with an awkward UI, I decided to give it another chance recently and after a few teething troubles I've decided to stick with Apple Music for the time being. I have been very critical of it in the past but I do think it has improved a lot.

Honestly I still prefer Spotifys app, the look and feel and UI but I like Apples curated playlists more than Spotify, strangely I never found Discover Weekly particularly compelling which I realise isn't most peoples experience, and have found some music on AM that isn't available on Spotify. The clincher for me was reading these articles that show that Apple are paying artists considerably more than Spotify.

I can deal with a slightly less well thought out interface if I know that an artist is benefitting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whsbuss
What a shockingly short-sighted comment. It's okay for Apple to ignore a technology if it is not the "majority" but on the other hand it is great if they remove a tech that is in use by the majority (headphone jack).
I agree. It is most likely the same person who says that 720p TV's looks fine unless you are right next to the TV well I can tell far away from the TV.
 
That and along with many Apple-blinded comments here is why they can behave in the way they do.
As someone who's started with Apple before the Mac, it is disenchanting to say the least.
The rebel company has become the behemoth, the big brother it so often touted against.

The music industry and media at large are struggling to win over paying eyes and ears in the face of a mosaic of competing services. Everyone can pick their favourite service, but this culture of defining winning by someone else loosing is a huge turn off. But the streaming wars continue:
http://www.billboard.com/articles/b...reaming-music-wars-spotify-apple-music-amazon

Apple has become the opposite of the counterculture it once celebrated. It's high-tech corporatism with all it's well understood lifecycles and limitations.

A piece I came across a while ago, more aptly describes the trends in Silicon Valley, then and now.
https://pando.com/2015/02/12/how-si...culture-went-corporate-and-ruined-everything/
It's lengthy but worth a read. It illustrates how counterculture turned into *******-culture.

I for one love Spotify (paying customer), for many reasons but also that it's a European company and not everything is or has to be "invented-at-Apple".

Right... And spotify basically depending on stealing artists blind for its survival is soooo cool and counter culture... Getting free songs from artists for fraction of pennies makes you a god damn rebel.
Total nonsense.
 
That and along with many Apple-blinded comments here is why they can behave in the way they do.
As someone who's started with Apple before the Mac, it is disenchanting to say the least.
The rebel company has become the behemoth, the big brother it so often touted against.

The music industry and media at large are struggling to win over paying eyes and ears in the face of a mosaic of competing services. Everyone can pick their favourite service, but this culture of defining winning by someone else loosing is a huge turn off. But the streaming wars continue:
http://www.billboard.com/articles/b...reaming-music-wars-spotify-apple-music-amazon

Apple has become the opposite of the counterculture it once celebrated. It's high-tech corporatism with all it's well understood lifecycles and limitations.

A piece I came across a while ago, more aptly describes the trends in Silicon Valley, then and now.
https://pando.com/2015/02/12/how-si...culture-went-corporate-and-ruined-everything/
It's lengthy but worth a read. It illustrates how counterculture turned into *******-culture.

I for one love Spotify (paying customer), for many reasons but also that it's a European company and not everything is or has to be "invented-at-Apple".

Such is the natural order of things.

History has proven that there's no way to break the rules without creating new rules. Those who are rebels turn eventually into part of the system or the system itself. Those who go against the establishment eventually become part of establishment or replace it entirely. Every countercultural movement is culture by definition. Everything becomes a product, even if the creator doesn't want that. Every revolution—political, cultural, technological—in the history of the world has been like this.

Were you somehow expecting Apple to remain the scrappy underdog forever?
 
Such is the natural order of things.

History has proven that there's no way to break the rules without creating new rules. Those who are rebels turn eventually into part of the system or the system itself. Those who go against the establishment eventually become part of establishment or replace it entirely. Every countercultural movement is culture by definition. Everything becomes a product, even if the creator doesn't want that. Every revolution—political, cultural, technological—in the history of the world has been like this.

Were you somehow expecting Apple to remain the scrappy underdog forever?
No, just because I'm lamenting over the Apple of old does not mean I was expecting the natural order of things to remain static. I guess the teacher in you always expects other people to need schooling.

However, history also needs to be taught and reflected upon to avoid making the same mistakes over and over.
My post was both a reflection on Apple's history and pointing to the ugly fight over the current pie-du-jour: streaming.
 
No, just because I'm lamenting over the Apple of old does not mean I was expecting the natural order of things to remain static. I guess the teacher in you always expects other people to need schooling.

However, history also needs to be taught and reflected upon to avoid making the same mistakes over and over.
My post was both a reflection on Apple's history and pointing to the ugly fight over the current pie-du-jour: streaming.
And what mistake would that be? That Apple, once the disruptive, now faces the risk of being the disrupted because they have the most vested interests in keeping the status quo exactly as it is right now?

Is there really a war, or is it simply a narrative that the tech bloggers are trying to paint? David vs Goliath. Apple vs the rest of the world. Or winner takes all, highlander style?

I am not really seeing anything ugly about it. Seems like normal competition at work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whsbuss
Right... And spotify basically depending on stealing artists blind for its survival is soooo cool and counter culture... Getting free songs from artists for fraction of pennies makes you a god damn rebel.
Total nonsense.

Making baseless statements because of some personal gripe you have is so mature.. huh ? ;)
Maybe you're just a Taylor Swift fan and since she hates Spotify you follow. Sorry to tell you, even Swifty's music is back on Spotify now.

Spotify gives especially unsigned artists a revenue stream and discovery platform that traditional A&R reps at labels usually discard for lack of interest, time and the sheer size of submissions.

Fact is Spotify pays artists. You could argue that Spotify should pay more, but they're also building a business that still is not turning a profit and yes, they're contending against the behemoth Apple that's nearing $1 Trillion valuation.

How about you go after the traditional record companies and their execs that were making the big bucks off of artists backs, at least until Napster started to turn the tide. That was the counter culture 2 decades ago until Apple stepped in with iTunes and online sales.

Now streaming is the new turf, but millennials are nowhere near spending as much on music as previous generations did, so go blame the market for being such tight wads.

Maybe when "you grow up" you'll understand the supply / demand equation.
[doublepost=1497783846][/doublepost]
And what mistake would that be? That Apple, once the disruptive, now faces the risk of being the disrupted because they have the most vested interests in keeping the status quo exactly as it is right now?

Is there really a war, or is it simply a narrative that the tech bloggers are trying to paint? David vs Goliath. Apple vs the rest of the world. Or winner takes all, highlander style?

I am not really seeing anything ugly about it. Seems like normal competition at work.
The ugliness is mostly in people commenting and defending their perceived "best". Yes, David became Goliath and we're all waiting for the next David.

True, the hyper-hyped up media is always trying to use words like "war", but it's probably just a fight over the diminishing returns from a changing market profile. Many tech bloggers are also just fighting for clicks and revenue streams from the new media, hence the barrage of "fake news" we all hear so much about these days.

I content that there's room for many distribution models, I for one still buy the occasional CD, but services like Spotify serve as a discovery platform for me and my dedicated listening at home is usually done off of my ripped CD library.
 
Last edited:
Making baseless statements because of some personal gripe you have is so mature.. huh ? ;)
Maybe you're just a Taylor Swift fan and since she hates Spotify you follow. Sorry to tell you, even Swifty's music is back on Spotify now.

Spotify gives especially unsigned artists a revenue stream and discovery platform that traditional A&R reps at labels usually discard for lack of interest, time and the sheer size of submissions.

Fact is Spotify pays artists. You could argue that Spotify should pay more, but they're also building a business that still is not turning a profit and yes, they're contending against the behemoth Apple that's nearing $1 Trillion valuation.

How about you go after the traditional record companies and their execs that were making the big bucks off of artists backs, at least until Napster started to turn the tide. That was the counter culture 2 decades ago until Apple stepped in with iTunes and online sales.

Now streaming is the new turf, but millennials are nowhere near spending as much on music as previous generations did, so go blame the market for being such tight wads.

Maybe when "you grow up" you'll understand the supply / demand equation.
[doublepost=1497783846][/doublepost]
The ugliness is mostly in people commenting and defending their perceived "best". Yes, David became Goliath and we're all waiting for the next David.

True, the hyper-hyped up media is always trying to use words like "war", but it's probably just a fight over the diminishing returns from a changing market profile. Many tech bloggers are also just fighting for clicks and revenue streams from the new media, hence the barrage of "fake news" we all hear so much about these days.

I content that there's room for many distribution models, I for one still buy the occasional CD, but services like Spotify serve as a discovery platform for me and my dedicated listening at home is usually done off of my ripped CD library.
Tight-wad millennials...... maybe that's a good thing! And maybe they can instill that little-to-no debt with their children.
 
"It's great that Apple is in the game," Forster told Reuters. "They are definitely raising the profile of streaming. It is hard to build an industry on your own."
Can we talk about how these are the guys who have been suing Apple over alleged anti-competitive practices since Apple Music first came out? Not saying I agree or disagree.
[doublepost=1497813537][/doublepost]
Music enthusiasts LOL Algorithms and corporate mucky mucks more like it. And lets face it, the only reason Spotify has had the success they have had is due to millennials wanting everything for free. I don't understand why artists continue to let Spotify and YouTube give out their content for free. These execs are crazy about torrenting and shutting it down as soon as possible, but they just let these big companies give it away for free? I don't know what deals are in place, but Spotify better prepare itself for a future where the artist and record companies actually want to get paid for their music. Because its coming.
It's not free. They get paid royalties. Though on YouTube, songs often get posted without YouTube detecting, and that's just piracy. Other than that, the only thing you should be worried about is the fact that Spotify loses hundreds of millions of $ annually, partially to pay those artists, and they can't be externally funded forever. I like that Apple Music actually makes money.
[doublepost=1497813784][/doublepost]
Once my free 3 months were up, I canceled my subscription. I just don't listen enough to music to justify 19.99/m
It's _that_ much? No wonder people don't pay for it. Edit: No, it's $9.99/mo.
 
Last edited:
140 million "subscribers" and probably still not turning a profit, that doesn't sound like something to brag about. I'll stick with Apple Music and hope they improve the For You section. The last update made this worse not better. Come on Apple get some new blood into Apple Music...say someone not born in the 1950's.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WiseAJ
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.