"Apple is also venturing deeper into video than Spotify, preparing exclusive shows
like "Planet of the Apps" and its "Carpool Karaoke" spinoff. Some
exclusive long-form content includes a Taylor Swift concert movie and
the documentary "808." "
Interesting! I have Apple Music. Listen to it every day. I had no idea that they were providing these things.... it's a good product, but they need a better interface.
Jeez! Obviously they have increased membership by a lot in a short time. They introduced a free option with ads. the ad revenue will barely cover the cost of these members. It's just another Android style race to the bottom.
No they didn't just introduce a free option. It's always been there. Besides this article is talking about premium subscribers. That's users who pay for the service one way or another (as others have mentioned sometimes via phone plans or other means not necessarily directly).
i don't get all the hate for Spotify on here. I understand this is an Apple focussed site and Spotify are (to a degree) a competitor of Apple but competition is good right?
I used Apple Music during the 3 month trial and then went back to Spotify. I prefer to keep my streaming music and the music I own totally separate and I much prefer the UI of the Spotify app. I also prefer Spotify's discovery service which for me works much better than Apple's did. Plus Apple Music messed up my library.
Relatively recently Spotify introduced a family subscription for £14.99 per month. I prefer this to Apple's family plan because with Apple I have to link everyone's iTunes account to my credit card. My son and daughter are old enough to pay for their own apps and having to reimburse me for every app or IAP would be an inconvenience for them and me.
I wonder whether I'm being classed as 1 subscriber or 6? I'm the only paying member but there are 6 users on the family account. Maybe that's how they've grown so quickly?
Spotify regularly do 99p promotions, "99p for 3 months access" etc. That's still a "paid subscriber" even tho it would need 30 people to bring in the same as 1 regular subscriber.
Never seen a "cheap" apple-music promotion, it's always a free trial so wouldn't count towards paid subscriber numbers.
Here in the U.K. there's a mobile phone provider that's offering 6 months free Apple Music with any iPhone so there are also offers available for Apple Music (though probably not as many as Spotify).
There might be some "Spotify" hate...but for the most part it is more defensive around "are those *really* paying subs like in Apple Music case". As noted, there is a lot of information that Spotify has gone very hard with promotions, bundling with other services, etc. Those are all for the "paid tier". So, 50M is accurate number, but it is fair to question the revenue/user for many of those recent additions. Apple Music does it to some degree in a few locations, but not nearly as much.
Does it matter? Not really - just something that can rile people up on the Internet. And the media can spill billions of gallons of digital ink writing about how Apple is losing yet again.
For Spotify, this is their method to try and grow a base aggressively now, with the hope that more of these recent subs that might not pay much now, will continue with service later. Nothing wrong with that - been done for decades in many industries.
My biggest problem with Apple Music is e twofold. The interface with iTunes is awful and the sound quality is not up to par with Spotify. I
iTunes is bloated. The "integration" is terrible. Listening through a decent hifi system and the difference is pronounced. Spotify experimenting with a lossless tier? Sign me up.
Im also surprised the author not aware of all the promotions out there that would swell numbers.
My biggest problem with Apple Music is e twofold. The interface with iTunes is awful and the sound quality is not up to par with Spotify. I
Apple Music streams at 256kb AAC. As far as I know, Spotify streams at 320 kbps, and I think it's OGG.
Both are virtually equivalent. If Spotify is streaming at 320 kbps OGG Vorbis, though, then it'll be *slightly* better on paper. On paper. But you will have to really strain to hear any difference when comparing to 256 AAC. The two are virtually identical in sound. You won't get anything better in quality than a decent bitrate AAC or OGG below Lossless.
But your ears are your ears. If one format sounds better to you, or you *think* it does, then that's what you'll keep on thinking. Just don't assume that your personal experience is the same for others.
My biggest problem with Apple Music is e twofold. The interface with iTunes is awful and the sound quality is not up to par with Spotify. I
Apple Music streams at 256kb AAC. As far as I know, Spotify streams at 320 kbps, and I think it's OGG.
Both are virtually equivalent. If Spotify is streaming at 320 kbps OGG Vorbis, though, then it'll be *slightly* better on paper. On paper. But you will have to really strain to hear any difference when comparing to 256 AAC. The two are virtually identical in sound. You won't get anything better in quality than a decent bitrate AAC or OGG below Lossless.
But your ears are your ears. If one format sounds better to you, or you *think* it does, then that's what you'll keep on thinking. Just don't assume that your personal experience is the same for others.
It has nothing to do with ears, been proven many times over that unless you have a golden ear, a perfect acoustic environment, a source with a high dynamic range that been recorded with the highest standard and perfect speakers or headphone, you can't really make out the difference in a reliable way, though you may be able to distinguish one encoding from another and prefer one or the other. Doesn't mean there is a higher fidelity, just a preference in what you like. Almost no one has this kind of setup and ears.
My biggest problem with Apple Music is e twofold. The interface with iTunes is awful and the sound quality is not up to par with Spotify. I
Apple Music streams at 256kb AAC. As far as I know, Spotify streams at 320 kbps, and I think it's OGG.
Both are virtually equivalent. If Spotify is streaming at 320 kbps OGG Vorbis, though, then it'll be *slightly* better on paper. On paper. But you will have to really strain to hear any difference when comparing to 256 AAC. The two are virtually identical in sound. You won't get anything better in quality than a decent bitrate AAC or OGG below Lossless.
But your ears are your ears. If one format sounds better to you, or you *think* it does, then that's what you'll keep on thinking. Just don't assume that your personal experience is the same for others.
It has nothing to do with ears, been proven many times over that unless you have a golden ear, a perfect acoustic environment, a source with a high dynamic range that been recorded with the highest standard and perfect speakers or headphone, you can't really make out the difference in a reliable way, though you may be able to distinguish one encoding from another and prefer one or the other. Doesn't mean there is a higher fidelity, just a preference in what you like. Almost no one has this kind of setup and ears.
Comments
Interesting! I have Apple Music. Listen to it every day. I had no idea that they were providing these things.... it's a good product, but they need a better interface.
However, their net losses are increasing and they have yet to turn a profit.
Apple has no such problem with Apple Music.
Does it matter? Not really - just something that can rile people up on the Internet. And the media can spill billions of gallons of digital ink writing about how Apple is losing yet again.
For Spotify, this is their method to try and grow a base aggressively now, with the hope that more of these recent subs that might not pay much now, will continue with service later. Nothing wrong with that - been done for decades in many industries.
iTunes is bloated. The "integration" is terrible. Listening through a decent hifi system and the difference is pronounced. Spotify experimenting with a lossless tier? Sign me up.
Im also surprised the author not aware of all the promotions out there that would swell numbers.
Apple Music streams at 256kb AAC. As far as I know, Spotify streams at 320 kbps, and I think it's OGG.
Both are virtually equivalent. If Spotify is streaming at 320 kbps OGG Vorbis, though, then it'll be *slightly* better on paper. On paper. But you will have to really strain to hear any difference when comparing to 256 AAC. The two are virtually identical in sound. You won't get anything better in quality than a decent bitrate AAC or OGG below Lossless.
But your ears are your ears. If one format sounds better to you, or you *think* it does, then that's what you'll keep on thinking. Just don't assume that your personal experience is the same for others.
Agreed.