Apple looks to kill off free Spotify streaming to make more $$$ for itself

[elbows]

Meanwhile fresh opportunities to laugh at Microsofts plight and further establish my case again the rubbish grit was talking about languages without getting into a tedious discussion about modern compilers etc.

They've made tools available that attempt to make it much easier for developers to port their iOS apps to Windows 10. Ho ho ho, as I've said before I find this sort of thing hilarious in the face of my personal memories of all those terrible years where it felt like windows was almost the only OS choice because of apps.

Since I mention Microsoft I should also point out that they've opensourced big chunks of the .NET runtime, are promoting its use on other OS's, have engaged with Xamarin and have even released a cross-platform code editor.

Fun on so many levels. Even the biggest corporate enemies of the very concept of opensouce now have to go further than mere lip-service in their new-found appreciation for opensource. Even if its still through gritted teeth, they have moved on from their original attitudes. And that makes both the inappropriately wide use of the term opensource and seeking too narrow a definition for what opensource is as a movement/ideology even more likely to confuse these sorts of discussions.

 

[Kid_Eternity]

Nonsense. It's a near monopoly that exploits its power to the max. The best that can be said for it is that it's appalling behaviour was a major driver of the open source movement

It's not. Apple is a minority seller of smartphones. For it to be a monopoly they'd have to sell the majority of phones and do this.

 

[grit]

It's not. Apple is a minority seller of smartphones. For it to be a monopoly they'd have to sell the majority of phones and do this.

They have the enviable position of smallest market share but largest profits.

 

[belboid]

It's not. Apple is a minority seller of smartphones. For it to be a monopoly they'd have to sell the majority of phones and do this.

You understand nothing about economics

 

[Kid_Eternity]

You understand nothing about economics

You understand nothing about how monopoly law works.

 

[Mojofilter]

Back on topic, It seems that Spotify is miles better at streaming over less than ideal connections so I'm going back once the free trial is over.

On reflection I think that I prefer it anyway, the interface on Apple Music is cluttered and hard to navigate. The lack of a recently played section is especially irritating.

 

[kabbes]

All these paid-for streaming services are too expensive for me to perceive them as value for money. I have 100s of CDs that I have ripped to MP3. I like to be able to some music beyond that, but I'm not depending £100 a year for the privilege, thanks. I'll give you £3 a month tops. After that, I'll stick with buying the occasional stuff I'm going to want.

 

[Athos]

All these paid-for streaming services are too expensive for me to perceive them as value for money. I have 100s of CDs that I have ripped to MP3. I like to be able to some music beyond that, but I'm not depending £100 a year for the privilege, thanks. I'll give you £3 a month tops. After that, I'll stick with buying the occasional stuff I'm going to want.

Fair enough - depends how much you use it, and how much you value it, I suppose. Personally, I think the Spotify Premium price point is good value. At home, I listen to music for about 60 hours a month, of which about a sixth is streamed. So that's 10 hours a month, for a tenner. And I can't think of many forms of entertainment that cost lest than £1 per hour.

 

[Athos]

I've tried Apple Music. The algorithym is a bit hit-and-miss: it seems to bring up some spot-on suggestions for me, whereas it's miles out for the Mrs. I do prefer the Spotify interface, over all, though. And it's a bit cheaper.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

All these paid-for streaming services are too expensive for me to perceive them as value for money. I have 100s of CDs that I have ripped to MP3. I like to be able to some music beyond that, but I'm not depending £100 a year for the privilege, thanks. I'll give you £3 a month tops. After that, I'll stick with buying the occasional stuff I'm going to want.

When I'm at home I reckon I must listen to around 5 new albums a day. So £10 a month is ridiculously cheap.

 

[kabbes]

When I'm at home I reckon I must listen to around 5 new albums a day. So £10 a month is ridiculously cheap.

Fair enough - depends how much you use it, and how much you value it, I suppose. Personally, I think the Spotify Premium price point is good value. At home, I listen to music for about 60 hours a month, of which about a sixth is streamed. So that's 10 hours a month, for a tenner. And I can't think of many forms of entertainment that cost lest than £1 per hour.

And that's it, really. Good value if you use it a lot, terrible value if you use it occasionally.

There needs to be a low price point option, I think. I'd take something cheap that gave me a handful of hours a month (but only if the credits rolled over if I didn't use them, because my use would likely be sporadic)

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Well, there is still the free option. You just get adverts. Seems fair enough.

 

[kabbes]

Well, there is still the free option. You just get adverts. Seems fair enough.

Yeah, that's what I use when I use it. You can't use the free version with services such as the SONOS system, though, which is what I use in my house. So in practice, I don't use it at all.

 

[Mojofilter]

It's not just that though - I'm paying to have virtually every song ever recorded in my pocket 24/7, I'm paying for the personalised recommendations, I'm paying to be able to listen to stuff that I'd never gamble a tenner or more on (I probably don't spend much more on Spotify than I did on albums that I didn't like when HMV was my sole source of new music).

I think it's brilliant value.

 

[Athos]

And that's it, really. Good value if you use it a lot, terrible value if you use it occasionally.

There needs to be a low price point option, I think. I'd take something cheap that gave me a handful of hours a month (but only if the credits rolled over if I didn't use them, because my use would likely be sporadic)

How many hours a month would you use, on average? And what would you think a fair price for that?

 

[kabbes]

How many hours a month would you use, on average? And what would you think a fair price for that?

Some months, 3 or 5. Other months, none. As I say, I'd pay a couple or three quid a month. But a tenner a month adds up to a hell of a lot. I similarly don't pay for TV services or more than bare minimum for a mobile. I'm not fond of these direct debits that add up over time to a right old bundle.

 

[kabbes]

It's not just that though - I'm paying to have virtually every song ever recorded in my pocket 24/7

I neither want nor need virtually every song ever recorded. It's massive overkill. Not to mention that if I really want a specific song, I can almost certainly find it on YouTube.

Access to my own existing music is more than enough. On the move, I rarely listen to music anyway. I listen to podcasts.

I'm paying for the personalised recommendations, I'm paying to be able to listen to stuff that I'd never gamble a tenner or more on (I probably don't spend much more on Spotify than I did on albums that I didn't like when HMV was my sole source of new music).

I'm not interested in its generated recommendations.

I think it's brilliant value.

Honestly, that's great. I can understand why it is indeed brilliant value for lots of people. It is not, however, brilliant value for me. Something cheap would be moderate value for me, the full product is terrible value for me.

 

[Athos]

Some months, 3 or 5. Other months, none. As I say, I'd pay a couple or three quid a month. But a tenner a month adds up to a hell of a lot. I similarly don't pay for TV services or more than bare minimum for a mobile. I'm not fond of these direct debits that add up over time to a right old bundle.

We seem to agree that a pound an hour isn't bad value; it's just that you'd need fewer hours per month. Maybe Spotify is missing a trick with not offering a wider range of packages, to cater for that.

 

[kabbes]

We seem to agree that a pound an hour isn't bad value; it's just that you'd need fewer hours per month. Maybe Spotify is missing a trick with not offering a wider range of packages, to cater for that.

Yeah, I think they are. I agree that a pound an hour isn't too bad, but a fiver an hour is too much.

 

[Athos]

Yeah, I think they are. I agree that a pound an hour isn't too bad, but a fiver an hour is too much.

Get better value by using it more,then!

 

[Mojofilter]

I neither want nor need virtually every song ever recorded. It's massive overkill. Not to mention that if I really want a specific song, I can almost certainly find it on YouTube.

Access to my own existing music is more than enough. On the move, I rarely listen to music anyway. I listen to podcasts.
I'm not interested in its generated recommendations.

Honestly, that's great. I can understand why it is indeed brilliant value for lots of people. It is not, however, brilliant value for me. Something cheap would be moderate value for me, the full product is terrible value for me.

Sorry, I wasn't saying you were wrong - just putting over my perspective. Should have been clearer.
It has been a revolution for how I err... consume music though.

You're right though, it's very all or nothing. Maybe they should look at a PAYG model - put a tenner on it and pay per stream sort of thing.

 

[editor]

Looks like quite a few people aren't so impressed with Apple's offering.

Apple refutes survey that says Apple Music users are jumping ship

Apple Music's panoply of bugs, cluttered user interface and overall instability has given the service a bit of a bad reputation in its first few months, but that doesn't appear to be driving away users. In a statement given to The Verge, Apple says that 78 percent of users who signed up for Apple Music are still using the service. This statement was meant to refute a study from research firm MusicWatch. According to the company's survey of 5,000 US consumers, 48 percent of those that tried Apple Music had stopped using it, despite the fact that it's free through at least September.

MusicWatch's survey also made it seem like more users could drop off before long, as well: 61 percent of Apple Music users surveyed turned off the service's auto-renew feature.
http://www.engadget.com/2015/08/18/apple-music-survey-usage-rates/

 

[elbows]

I don't think it will be good for everyone if its too successful and dominates, so I'm rather glad a lot of people don't like it.

 

[Jon-of-arc]

It's not. Apple is a minority seller of smartphones. For it to be a monopoly they'd have to sell the majority of phones and do this.

There's some ambiguity around what "legally" constitutes a monopoly. It can be as low as 40%.* Certainly when I did my company compliance "e-learn" about monopolies when I was working for a pharmaceutical giant, 40% market share was the number advertised as to when they had to start being "extra careful" about business practices that might otherwise be acceptable, if they didn't have a monopoly.

No idea what Apples market share is, but it's market share of the "app store" market is probably different from its market share of the smart phone market, and completely different from it's market share of streaming services. And those are just 3 of the markets most relevant to the discussion - they are in others.


* https://books.google.co.uk/books?id...#v=onepage&q=monopoly 40 market share&f=false

 

[Mojofilter]

Looks like quite a few people aren't so impressed with Apple's offering.

Apple says that 78% are still using the service? Considering that it's still free for everyone that's a pretty low number!

I prefer Spotify and will be going back but not until the free trial ends.

 

[grit]

No idea what Apples market share is,

It hovers between 15-20%, but they have something ridiculous like 80% of the profits in the market.

 

[Kid_Eternity]

When I'm at home I reckon I must listen to around 5 new albums a day. So £10 a month is ridiculously cheap.

I moved to Spotify years ago because I worked out I was spending £200-300 a year on new music. Paying £120 for anything I wanted was a no brainier...

 

[Kid_Eternity]

It hovers between 15-20%, but they have something ridiculous like 80% of the profits in the market.

Indeed. They also have the majority of mobile web use too.

 

[editor]

Indeed. They also have the majority of mobile web use too.

Um..

For The First Time Ever, Android Is Beating iOS In Web Usage
Apple has lost yet another battle to Android.

According to the latest data from Net Applications (via 9to5Mac), Android usage is now higher than iOS, Apple's iPhone and iPad operating system. Net Applications measures web traffic across 160 million monthly visits.

For the longest time, Apple CEO Tim Cook would mock Android — Android tablets in particular — bysaying no one uses them. Last year he said, "I don't know what these other tablets are doing. They must be in warehouses, or on store shelves, or maybe in somebody's bottom drawer!"

But, he can't make fun of Android any more. Web traffic to Android is higher than iOS for the first time in history. This shows that Android users are getting more engaged with their devices, using them more and more.

http://www.businessinsider.com/android-is-beating-ios-in-web-usage-2014-8?IR=T

 

[High Voltage]

I've been an Apple user for coming up to 30 years now - but I'll stick with my paid for Spotify for the time being I think - just because I will - £9.99 a month for 2 hours listening minimum a day often more, is an absolute bargain - I'd probably be prepared to pay a little bit more if the artists got paid more, maybe £15 / month\