or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by elehcdn

If the first thing you do is to is to go to the apps page, why not simply click on the iTunes app?
From a marketing standpoint, I think it would be difficult to differentiate between the current iPad Air 2 and the iPad Air 3. The iPad Air 2 was built with iOS 9 in mind - most of the upgrades in the iPad Air 2 weren't all that impressive until the announcement of iOS 9. As an owner of an iPad Air, I really didn't see the need to upgrade on release, but now with iOS 9 I am covetous of the multitasking ability. Still, I am looking to upgrade to an iPad Pro as opposed to a...
Yes you can set up stations within certain parameters such as artist or song title, but you are not guaranteed it will always play that artist, album, or even the song. That is why there are on-demand streaming services - so that when you want to hear a song or album, you get direct access to listen to it immediately.
The LA deal had Pearson as a partner ... they even had a former Pearson exec as part of the implementation team. Pearson is not Apple friendly and is a huge international cartel that looks to control the whole education market. The whole project was doomed when Pearson came on board.
1989 was released last October. I doubt that even Taylor Swift would have kept it off of streaming forever. It's now almost 9 months out and it is already solidly part of the summer playlists. She probably would have allowed it anyway if any of the other streaming services would have asked.
The surprising thing about this is that Apple is only paying another 1.5% in royalties over the other streaming services. Meanwhile, most reports are that while Apple negotiated that extra 1.5% instead of paying through the trial period, they are going to keep that rate and pay 0.2 cents for each song during the trial period. Not sure how all the math works, but in the end, even with the extra now being paid in the trial period, it seems like Apple brought Taylor Swift's...
I really don't think this was orchestrated, but you can't buy this kind of publicity. For all those people that talked about how this was an embarrassment to Apple ... they just helped to give Apple more press.
If Google is always listening, maybe they can better tailor your playlists ...http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jun/23/google-eavesdropping-tool-installed-computers-without-permission
Pot meet kettle,   http://consequenceofsound.net/2015/06/concert-photographer-calls-out-taylor-swift-for-hypocritical-apple-open-letter/   Your move Taylor ...
I agree whole heartedly with this. Apple may have misstepped (intentionally or non-intentionally) by not being willing to pay artist royalties for 3 months, but they have still been the friendliest corporation to artists. If Apple Music fails, the artists that would have been getting royalties after the first 3 months will receive nothing, or will have to try to negotiate with other corporations that have generally not been as friendly as Apple.  I don't think that Apple...
New Posts  All Forums: