I agree some apps need to be beefed up. And yes google maps is good. But nothing can compare to the simplicity of my iPhone 6S by 3D-touching the maps icon for directions home. Its insanely quick and easy to find my quickest route home from work every day. The google app by comparison has no 3D touch actions . So for my use case the maps app/iPhone 6S is an amazing combo. Everyones use case is different.13 million subscribers, how many were because of having Apple Music (I say this half jokingly) shoved down their throat? They had the advantage of the music app already being on hundreds of millions of devices.
Maps being fixed? Come on. I mean I always thought the Apple Maps haters were a bit off but then I FINALLY gave Google Maps a try recently and I would never consider going back. The difference is huge between the apps. There's a reason people always say Google Maps is better, because it actually is. Us Apple fans just have to let go a bit and actually give it a fair trial which I stubbornly refused until recently. Music we've already debated and it's a complete joke: Beats acquisition? Wow. Radio 1 or whatever that crap is? Yes, that's what we wanted Apple. You know they're in LaLaLand when they actually devote such huge amounts of time in keynotes to that crap. iCloud is another one for me. I love/hate it. Really hope they make it faster, more useful/powerful and more intuitive and more synced. There's stuff that the basic Calender/Mail/Reminders apps do that makes me want to throw my phone out the window. It's 2016 and it just boggles my mind that their own stock apps are SO dumbed down. Not even that, they're not even visually/usefully coordinated between iCloud.com, my Macbook Pro and my iPhone.
[doublepost=1465572505][/doublepost]
Yea, me tooWas just a ramble wasn't it?
(Some good debates going on here, some people just taking their sides a little too strongly. As I'm sure I do as well)
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 Says App Store Changes Don't 'Get to the Core of the Problem'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I've used AirPlay with it before a few times, but it’s a little more cumbersome and would crap out too much making it not worth the effort.
My wife says I've been far too nice lately. So now she wants us to go on couples dates with her friends. I gotta change that attitude post haste. You're the first victim.Wow, nice to see such a strongly worded disagreement
As I said in my original post, developers should work with apple to get better insight. I am all for that. I also think that developers should have the ability to respond to reviews like they do on Amazon. I am not for developers knowing my name, my email, my birthdate, or any other PII. If they want that, they can force the user to log into their app and then the user can decide if they want to provide an email to log in. Read the privacy info for facebook and google. Unless you explicitly opt out, they do share your email and other PII with other vendors (facebook by far is the worst). I prefer an opt in policy, such that no developer gets my PII unless I give permission. I understand that it makes it more difficult (but not impossible) for developers to gain insight for their app, but given the world today, I think that it is appropriate. And in any case, since this is true for all apps in the appstore, it is a level playing field. It is tough for everyone and developers can and should work to find alternatives approaches. So you know, I work in business intelligence so this is an area that I am particularly well informed on. I know how to track you through so many other ways.
Anywho, I wasn't aware the devs were asking for all the information you listed. Without that confirmation, it's kind of unfair to assume that's what they're asking for and base an objection on that assumption. You already know I've read those privacy policies. All of them (including Apple) explicitly tell you they share some information with vendors. It's irrelevant though. You didn't claim any sharing. You said sell data. Distinct difference and in no way are those terms synonymous.You say you prefer and opt in policy, but which company offers that? They all seem to offer opt out of tracking, meaning it's on by default. They do it because they know the vast majority will never opt out, or even care.
Topic: I don't think the dev community is looking for carte blanche. Sounds more like their asking for the ability to access more of their customer data with app permissions allowing the customer to give info as a choice. I could be wrong about that though. Don't have enough info for a definitive answer. I am not wrong about a lack of desire to go out with my wife's friends. That's fact.
Interesting.
I'm not questioning whether or not they're losing money, but whether or not these promotions are good for a failing company. As for the Apple free thing, they have other revenue to prop up streaming. Spotify has nothing.
Spotify is an infinitely better service than Apple Music, so I'll continue to just keep buying discounter Spotify cards, and pay that way. Not giving Apple a single cent.
Are you suggesting that Spotify has no claim to understand more about their own customers? Apple is just the "mall."
Right. And lets be honest, Spotify's motivation isnt because they desperately want to give customers "special offers" and big discounts on their service. They want their data to use in whatever way will generate more revenue for THEM. If that effects customers negatively, oh well. So, yeah, im A. OK with Apple coming between me and them. Oh and if I wasnt........I dont HAVE TO sign up for Spotify through the app. I can still sign up outside of Apple and get all these "great deals" Im supposedly missing out on and then load app on my phone. Its called work around.
Streaming isn't perfect, but you haven't really given an alternative solution. A bit of a paradox, Paradoxally?
Here are some alternatives:
- buy your music
- support artists by buying tickets to their tours/gigs
Nothing beats the convenience of an offline library. And believe me, I've tried pretty much every streaming service out there: Spotify, Rdio, Deezer, Tidal, and then Apple Music. I recently canceled my AM subscription after switching from Spotify last year. Not worth the $9.99 for all the bugs and the terrible cloud library management. Spotify doesn't work with Siri, so it's a no-go for me as well, and I hate saving music for offline.
An offline library just works - anytime, anywhere. Isn't it much better paying for content you actually like and will enjoy than an all-access pass to 99% of the music you won't care about?
Quite obviously you didn't read what I said.
I love offline music. I buy my music. I have a massive offline library. I find streaming is a better alternative than torrenting in order to DISCOVER music.
After Apple announced a handful of new changes heading to the App Store under Phil Schiller's reign -- including a new revenue split for subscriptions and ads in search results -- Spotify recently commented its opinion on the announcements. Speaking with The Verge, Jonathan Prince, Spotify's head of corporate communications and global policy, said simply, "It's a nice gesture, but doesn't get to the core of the problem."
One of Spotify's major hangups centers around the fact that the new rules still prohibit apps from offering "special offers or discounts," because price flexibility is prohibited. The Cupertino company's policy makes sure that it's a constant presence between the customer and developer, "which means developers will continue to lack visibility into why customers churn."
Prince also said that the rules make it hard to even determine which customers could be considered as a long-term subscriber - an important factor to take into account now that Apple will take only a 15 percent cut if a user stays subscribed to a service for more than a year. Apple currently takes 30 percent of a subscription fee when users sign up to a service on the App Store.
Spotify's concerns follow an uptick in subscriber activity in the year since Apple's rival subscription music service, Apple Music, launched to the public. While the latter platform is on track to gain 15 million subscribers for its one-year anniversary in late June, Spotify has grown from 20 million paid users last June, to 30 million in May of 2016. The company noted that since Apple Music launched it has "been growing quicker and adding more users than before."
Article Link: Spotify Says App Store Changes Don't 'Get to the Core of the Problem'
Glad to finally see Spotify on AppleTV
In the end Siri integration trumped Spotify's user-created playlists for me. And there is of course a free version of Spotify but not for Apple Music. My favorite playlist, their Discovery weekly based on my likes, also remains available even to free users.
I'd say Spotify deserves whatever info said customers CHOOSE to share, of their own volition... wouldn't you??
Lowery is not alone in "complaining" about mechanical licenses. There has been a tremendous amount of coverage of this issue. Problem is, it's complex — and very dry — and most of us just want to listen to music.
But if there's no mechanism for them to actually do that because it's walled - then I would say that's an issue. I honestly don't know what barriers there are.
I'm a long term, loyal Apple enthusiast. However, until they clean up their cluttered, confusing interface, fix the nagging issues with what I've purchased, what I've imported from CD and what is on Apple Music, and finally fix the streaming issues, I will remain with Spotify.
I gave Apple Music 3 months. There were a few things I really liked but more often Han not, I'd tap on a song to play it and nothing would happen. I'd have to do the sign out/in, restart phone, toggle cellular/wifi dance.
Not something I want to do while I'm at the gym trying to focus.
I never have this problem with Spotify.
I gave Apple Music 3 months. There were a few things I really liked but more often Han not, I'd tap on a song to play it and nothing would happen. I'd have to do the sign out/in, restart phone, toggle cellular/wifi dance.
Not something I want to do while I'm at the gym trying to focus.
I never have this problem with Spotify.
I went back and in my original post I said sell and that was wrong. Mea Culpa. In the last post I did use the correct term of share.My wife says I've been far too nice lately. So now she wants us to go on couples dates with her friends. I gotta change that attitude post haste. You're the first victim.
You say you prefer and opt in policy, but which company offers that? They all seem to offer opt out of tracking, meaning it's on by default. They do it because they know the vast majority will never opt out, or even care.
Topic: I don't think the dev community is looking for carte blanche. Sounds more like their asking for the ability to access more of their customer data with app permissions allowing the customer to give info as a choice. I could be wrong about that though. Don't have enough info for a definitive answer. I am not wrong about a lack of desire to go out with my wife's friends. That's fact.
To be clear, Facebook states and I quote --
"When you download or use such third-party services, they can access your public profile, which includes your user name or user id, your age range, country/language, your list of friends..."
Apple explicitly states that they will share PII as needed to enable services, such as when you buy a phone, it will share needed information with the carrier to establish the account or when you are financing, it will share needed information with the credit company. But nowhere are they sharing my age of my list of friends.
Bottom line, I have no issue with a Developer getting statistical information that helps them, and as I stated, they should work with Apple to figure that out. What I am against is sharing of PII. If the vendor needs that, they should ask for it directly, which they certainly are able to do. For example when swift keyboard came out I downloaded it, the vendor asked for root access to anything on my phone (they claim they needed to provide the keyboard service), but I was not comfortable giving them that kind of access and deleted the app. Many are comfortable and use the app without issue. Many games like CoC require you to login using Facebook or Game Center. Again the user can decide at that point. If they agree, then they are tracked by the vendor without any issue. This Spotify claim is not real because as I have shown there are clear ways to get the information. They either don't want people to know or they are too lazy to develop what others already have.
I have information on over 100 million people in my database (including some VERY personal information), and all of it was obtained by front door tactics (everyone was informed and explicitly consented/opted-in). Spotify is not restricted by the app store from getting that if they really want and if people really want to give up the information. For subscribers, Spotify should already have everything they need to track them within their servers. My guess is this is more about non-subscribers.
To your wife's request, there is the old saying - happy wife, happy life. Can't really comment beyond but good luck on the date (if you capitulate)
You quoted me correctly using the word "share," not the word "sell." Therefore, WT* are you talking about here?Keep spreading the lie.
Brave words from a company who's mad about losing artists to a better paying platform.
[doublepost=1465590368][/doublepost]
[doublepost=1465590368][/doublepost]
Because they open source your information.Keep spreading the lie.
So tell me who Google shares with? Keep that tin foil hat clean, I think it isn't working.
Now that's a word salad. It's missing bacon bits. Allow me to add some. From your quote: "What I am against is sharing of PII... This Spotify claim is not real because as I have shown there are clear ways to get the information. They either don't want people to know or they are too lazy to develop what others already have."I went back and in my original post I said sell and that was wrong. Mea Culpa. In the last post I did use the correct term of share.
To be clear, Facebook states and I quote --
"When you download or use such third-party services, they can access your public profile, which includes your user name or user id, your age range, country/language, your list of friends..."
Apple explicitly states that they will share PII as needed to enable services, such as when you buy a phone, it will share needed information with the carrier to establish the account or when you are financing, it will share needed information with the credit company. But nowhere are they sharing my age of my list of friends.
Bottom line, I have no issue with a Developer getting statistical information that helps them, and as I stated, they should work with Apple to figure that out. What I am against is sharing of PII. If the vendor needs that, they should ask for it directly, which they certainly are able to do. For example when swift keyboard came out I downloaded it, the vendor asked for root access to anything on my phone (they claim they needed to provide the keyboard service), but I was not comfortable giving them that kind of access and deleted the app. Many are comfortable and use the app without issue. Many games like CoC require you to login using Facebook or Game Center. Again the user can decide at that point. If they agree, then they are tracked by the vendor without any issue. This Spotify claim is not real because as I have shown there are clear ways to get the information. They either don't want people to know or they are too lazy to develop what others already have.
I have information on over 100 million people in my database (including some VERY personal information), and all of it was obtained by front door tactics (everyone was informed and explicitly consented/opted-in). Spotify is not restricted by the app store from getting that if they really want and if people really want to give up the information. For subscribers, Spotify should already have everything they need to track them within their servers. My guess is this is more about non-subscribers.
To your wife's request, there is the old saying - happy wife, happy life. Can't really comment beyond but good luck on the date (if you capitulate)
Help me here. Where in the article does it state Spotify's issue is lack of access to PII? I ask because your entire argument has been based on this premise. It's a premise that ignores the content and context of the article and relies on an overarching theme of privacy. Also, if the customers are subscribers of Spotify, wouldn't the company already have PII for billing purposes? Not even sure how you figure this is about non-subscribers when the direct quote from Spotify says: "...which means developers will continue to lack visibility into why customers churn -- or who even qualifies as a long-term subscriber." Churn is a paying customer leaving.
Bud, I get it. I have privacy concerns as well. I just don't apply those concerns as a blanket narrative for every situation as if they are all the same. They're not, and should be examined on their merits instead of "arrrgh, my data and privacy and chemtrails and NSA and... and... {whispers} Il-lu-mi-na-ti and stuff." I say that in jest because I respect your opinion. It just differs from mine. Soooo that just inherently makes it wrong.
The wife? Yeah I'm going to dinner cuz unhappy wife just makes life taste like brussel sprouts instead of bacon. I did get a concession though: Fogo de Chao for the win and I made a word salad too so I can skip the greens at dinner.
For me, I am content with streaming precisely because I don't want to have to manage a music library. I like the idea of having accessing to any song I want in a heartbeat. I realise all this is gone once I stop subscribing, and I am fine with that.
Because people don't turn off newsletters? If I don't get an IA notification it will likely go unseen because I turn off my email subscriptions for 90% of the apps and sites I use.