- Last Active
I use and enjoy Apple Music pretty much on a daily basis.
I think a lot of the issues people have with Apple Music can be explained by this: Apple Music / Beats 1 are an excellent service, better than the others, but because they try to do so much, they also have more flaws.
The glaring flaw, which would make up for most of the other, minor flaws (and which would be so, so simple to resolve), is lack of sufficient social engagement [you can't create a personalized page, which makes it near-impossible to effectively express yourself to others, which is the root of social engagement (just look at Facebook)]; how Apple still doesn't seem to understand this is beyond me.
It also seems like Apple Music / Beats suffers from a lack of promotion, something that is especially needed when you're battling terrestrial radio, which doesn't require an iPhone/app and and internet connection. Bozoma is an excellent Apple Music ambassador (loved her presentation at WWDC); but I don't think too many tweens and teens are going to be following her twitter feed anytime soon. I'm actually kind of shocked that Apple hasn't started hosting Beats branded concerts.
Those issues aside, Apple Music /Beats 1 are pretty remarkable. However, relying so much on curation is both a blessing and a curse: although Apple Music hits more home runs than the other services, it also strikes out more often. For Apple Music the playlists do flow very well together, and I come across some obscure, yet excellent music that I would not have otherwise found. However, there is a lot of inconsistency and bias still evident (even in the algorithm based radio stations, strangely). And some of the strikeouts are very frustrating to the user, who expects a personalized experience. For instance, Apple Music employees seem to have a strong bias towards pop and hip-hop, which affects the playlist suggestions focused on other genres. Speaking from my own experience, I listen to the EDM genre almost exclusively (a huge genre, believe it or not; Ive is also a fan, as I've read that he plays techno in the design studio). The "for you" playlists, and other playlists, can be really hit or miss. It seems as if there's only one person at Apple Music that is a genuine EDM fan and makes great selections, and then a lot of the time it sounds like the songs are being chosen by people not familiar with the genre due to the generic sounds and non-engaging tracks (in addition to annoying pop and hip-hop bias). It shouldn't be hard to hire people with a more diverse music experience/taste, especially if Apple is going for universal appeal, which it should. While pop and hip-hop are more popular, there should be more pop/hip-hop fans working at Apple Music; just please don't let those people pick music for people that like other genres (I wouldn't pretend to know what good pop, hip-hop, country, or indie music is).
Calling Google the leader in smartphones is like saying the U.S.S.R. won the Cold War because it afflicted the greatest number of individuals with its disastrous policies, because its ideologies warmed the hearts of a certain group of intellectuals, and because it achieved a variety of technical firsts, including Sputnik. How incredibly, briefly impressive, yet what incredible cost and misery.
How has no one singled out this gem yet!? Such a great analogy.
So refreshing to get another dose of reality from DED. Although, to most of the individuals caught up in the Apple-media weeds it will be reflexively spit out, like a child from the 1950's spitting out cod liver oil (analogies are fun).
There are so few pundits (e.g. DED, Ben E., Neil Cybert) that seem to have a healthy perspective on Apple. Even typically pro-Apple pundits seem to focus on the faults at the expense of the successes. (FWIW, I was surprised as well when Apple's revenues declined, but it doesn't take much thought to see that the party couldn't keep going on indefinitely at that level.)
Even though I sometimes complain about what seem to me some frustrating missteps*, it's easy to see that Apple is still an incredible, and incredibly successful company.
*Mainly, insufficient PR, and lack of willingness to effectively bolster/support their services ecosystems [e.g. siri still unable to sufficiently perform day-1 promised functions (e.g. shouldn't be so hard to figure out the 'right way' to get what you need), Apple Pay (lack-of/slow merchant adoption) and HomeKit (incentivizing early vendors and doing QA)].
I LOVE my AirPods. It's interesting how the design was a bit jarring at first (just like regular headphones with the wires snipped off??), but when you think about the design it makes perfect sense. Also, a lot of 'normal' people are really intrigued by them and ask me about them regularly. Another initially slightly jarring thing was realizing that the tap-to-siri is via accelerometer, and requires a significant tap relative to what we're used to with the capacitive iPhone; but of course, it makes sense to have it this way. The taking out one to pause works perfect and is so convenient.
asdasd said:patchythepirate said:I could see the appeal of wanting to join Tesla. A great case can be made for Tesla becoming very successful if you consider the synergy between EVs, powerwalls, and rooftoop solar installations. Like Apple, they're taking disparate technologies and businesses and making them work as one cohesive whole. The execution isn't exactly great, and the products not as refined as Apple's, but they still have a very compelling product portfolio.
The typical acquisition targets people talk about for Apple are usually beyond absurd, but it may make a lot of sense for Apple to buy Tesla (assuming it's even an option). The places where Tesla is lacking is where Apple excels.