Briefly: Mac OS X 10.6.8 build; Spotify near US launch; iTunes video market share

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 43
    kozchriskozchris Posts: 209member
    I think the current iCloud setup is just the start to work out any bugs. Once that period is over Apple will let you move your video to iCloud and add a music streaming service. My prediction anyway.
  • Reply 22 of 43
    firefly7475firefly7475 Posts: 1,502member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by juandl View Post


    Does any other company put out builds like Apple?

    To have their upgrades get tested to the max?



    I think so. Windows 8 releases turned up a couple of months ago (18 months or more before retail) and dont forget Gmail's 5 year beta!
  • Reply 23 of 43
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BlueLaw View Post


    With Spotify there's a massive shared library in the cloud, and you just type what you want to listen to.



    Of course the music is stored on Spoify's servers, but when you play a song it's using peer-to-peer it seems:



    ?The contents of each client's cache is summarized in an index which is sent to the Spotify stream hub upon connecting to the service. This index is then used to inform other clients about additional peers they can connect to for fetching streamed data for individual tracks being played. This is accommodated by each client, upon startup, acting as a server listening for incoming connections from other Spotify users, as well as intuitively connecting to other users to exchange cached data as appropriate. There are currently no official details from the developers about how many connections and how much of a user's upstream bandwidth the Spotify client will use when streaming to other users; the Spotify client offers no way for the user to configure this.?



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spotify
  • Reply 24 of 43
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mzl View Post


    I think the track-library is around 13 million, and about 10k are added each day.



    For me, the killer feature in Spotify is the speed: the median time for starting playback of a song is around 260ms. With that kind of low-latency you quickly forget that it is an internet-based service.



    I'm a little worried that it won't launch with the same selection of songs because they're renegotiating with the labels. If the selection is indeed better than the other services then that is a major plus for me, much more so than the speed. Most of those services start playback in a second or two at most, which while not as fast is more than acceptable, at least for me. I'll definitely be more motivated by song selection.



    Either way I'll be looking forward to trying it out, if nothing else just to see if it lives up even in part to the hype!
  • Reply 25 of 43
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by markvdrheijden View Post


    I've been using Spotify for 5 months now (I live in the Netherlands) and it simply rocks. Since then I've never bought or downloaded music. Everything's there, instantly. Search for any song and within five seconds you can play it. This beats the iTunes cloud. Even on my iPhone together with my Airport Express it works perfectly. I cannot recommend Spotify enough. Try it for a week and you'll get hooked.



    Doesn't it require a network/cell connection to work. Not all of us have that you know.
  • Reply 26 of 43
    clemynxclemynx Posts: 1,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by irnchriz View Post


    I listen to music on the go so no streaming service is of any use to me.



    You can listen music offline, on the computer and on the iPhone. You could even put 30 gigs of offline music if you wanted. After that you have 10 days, if I remember correctly, to sync back to your computer.
  • Reply 27 of 43
    joseph ljoseph l Posts: 197member
    Why would anybody subscribe to a new, unproven service when Apple is offering everything they do with iClod, and more?



    I mean, everybody knows that Apple never releases anything until it is 100% ready for prime time, while Spotify is a complete unknown, a one trick mule?



    This is a giant fail for them. Apple beat them to the punch, and nobody cares about Spotify.
  • Reply 28 of 43
    I can only "pray" that 10.6.8 will allow support for iCloud.



    I have the original Intel iMac Core Duo, which is officially NOT supported under Lion.



    I can almost appreciate that, with the whole 32-bit/64-bit thing, but if Apple could see building in support for the upcoming iCloud service into 10.6.8, this would be HUGE for our family.
  • Reply 29 of 43
    jonamacjonamac Posts: 384member
    This is just a silly survey. If someone asked me what my preferred place to watch online video would be I wouldn't even think of iTunes, because I think of iTunes as offline video that has been downloaded. YouTube is undoubtedly king of the online video hill but it's streaming isn't as good as some of its rivals like Vimeo. It also kills audio quality if you choose anything below 480p which can only save tiny amounts of data. I have to tell my subscribers to watch the higher quality streams to get the sound as intended.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post


    I'm not sure their contracts with the labels are transferable.



    They aren't. This is why Spotify hasn't been bought despite it being so good.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by pembroke View Post


    I've just opened up Spotify for the first time in months and was greeted by this:



    As of today, you´ll be able to listen to 10 hours of music a month and each track a total of 5 times - all for free. For unrestricted access to millions of tracks, upgrade to Unlimited or Premium.




    So they've changed their tune! Previously, we here in the UK had free 24/7 unlimited access with advertisements or paid the premium of £10 per month. Now the Free-with-advertising service gives us restricted access, otherwise we pay the premium which is now half of the old price - £5/month. Interesting. I balked at £10, but might bite at £5.



    It wasn't free 24/7. It was 20 hours of streaming a month free. I'm sad to see they've halved it but I'm not surprised. 20 hours was a lot to give away and the were having difficulty making money out of it.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by spliff monkey View Post


    and when I get tired of paying the monthly membership... ? I don't own anything?



    Completely agree. Spotify is superb. It's hard to knock it at all, but that is a downside. That said, you can purchase tracks in Spotify too.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    I do not have anything against Spotify. I just prefer to own my music. Further, I have an arsenal of about a thousand songs I like to listen over and over again. I only add a few songs to it a month. Sometimes, I get these from places like Starbucks and iTunes free selections. I also have a great local library. I check out the CDs and copy what I want (perfectly legal under USC 1008 of the Copyright Act). Friends occasionally make copy CDs and give them to me (also legal). Occasionally, at work I will use Pandora.



    I'm the same. I tend to listen to the same 1000 songs. It's actually probably far fewer than that. I'm just not one of these people who can listen to endless tunes I've never heard before. I like what I like. Spotify gets used when I want something specific that I don't own, not to listen to hours and hours of music.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by juandl View Post


    Does any other company put out builds like Apple?

    To have their upgrades get tested to the max?



    Yes. Beta testing is a fundamental part of software development. Microsoft release betas and then release candidates.
  • Reply 30 of 43
    jonamacjonamac Posts: 384member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Joseph L View Post


    Why would anybody subscribe to a new, unproven service when Apple is offering everything they do with iClod, and more?



    I mean, everybody knows that Apple never releases anything until it is 100% ready for prime time, while Spotify is a complete unknown, a one trick mule?



    This is a giant fail for them. Apple beat them to the punch, and nobody cares about Spotify.



    You are mistaken. Spotify is used all over Europe and is far from unproven. It is one of the best applications of its kind I've ever seen.



    As much as we all love Apple, let's not pretend they don't release things until it's 100%. I am a professional photographer who uses Aperture and I can assure you, Aperture 3 was a complete debacle at launch. MobileMe was so bad they gave me three months of my money back without me even asking for it. The iPhone 4, somewhat unfairly, got a lot of criticism at launch and Apple admitted the signal bars weren't displaying accurately etc. and released a software fix. The 27" iMac was plagued with screen flicker problems for months. Let's be fans, not fanboys.



    Spotify isn't at all unknown and does its one trick extremely well. Apple haven't beaten them to the punch at all. Not only has Spotify been around for a good while now but it still offers a streaming service that is different to Apple's iCloud. Some will prefer it, others won't, but it will be popular I'm sure.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BuffyzDead View Post


    I can only "pray" that 10.6.8 will allow support for iCloud.



    I have the original Intel iMac Core Duo, which is officially NOT supported under Lion.



    I can almost appreciate that, with the whole 32-bit/64-bit thing, but if Apple could see building in support for the upcoming iCloud service into 10.6.8, this would be HUGE for our family.



    I hope you get your wish. I think it's fair enough that Apple drop support for older hardware as they move on and Snow Leopard is excellent and will continue to be for as long as you need it but it is hard to watch others enjoying the iCloud services while you miss out. I'm afraid I don't think you will get your wish though.
  • Reply 31 of 43
    elrothelroth Posts: 1,201member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aderutter View Post


    Spotify barely has half the music I want to listen to, same as itunes. At least iCloud will allow me to listen to what I want to.



    I totally agree. No Spotify here - not interested.
  • Reply 32 of 43
    elrothelroth Posts: 1,201member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    I do not have anything against Spotify. I just prefer to own my music. Further, I have an arsenal of about a thousand songs I like to listen over and over again. I only add a few songs to it a month. Sometimes, I get these from places like Starbucks and iTunes free selections. I also have a great local library. I check out the CDs and copy what I want (perfectly legal under USC 1008 of the Copyright Act). Friends occasionally make copy CDs and give them to me (also legal). Occasionally, at work I will use Pandora.



    Sorry, but you're fooling yourself. Copy CDs from friends is not actually legal (though you'll never get caught). Copy CDs are legal for your own use, but not to distribute to others. I like how you brag about never paying for music - if everyone did that, musicians would be in trouble. Of course, if you only listen to a thousand songs and free Starbucks selections then you're probably listening to mainstream popular stuff, which who cares about anyway.
  • Reply 33 of 43
    joseph ljoseph l Posts: 197member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by elroth View Post


    Sorry, but you're fooling yourself. Copy CDs from friends is not actually legal (though you'll never get caught). Copy CDs are legal for your own use, but not to distribute to others. I like how you brag about never paying for music - if everyone did that, musicians would be in trouble. Of course, if you only listen to a thousand songs and free Starbucks selections then you're probably listening to mainstream popular stuff, which who cares about anyway.



    i wish iOS would be set up to reject anything that was copied illegally. Unless you own the CD, there should be some way to prevent iTunes from ripping it. Maybe you should need to register your rip with the RIAA? And only be allowed to listen to songs that you have registered?



    That would be a lot more fair to the artists, instead of guys like this just illegally copying CD after CD using Steve's software and stealing from the entire music-listening community. In this day and age, maybe iTunes should only play stuff you, like, actually pay for? Is that crazy?
  • Reply 34 of 43
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    I do not have anything against Spotify. I just prefer to own my music. Further, I have an arsenal of about a thousand songs I like to listen over and over again. I only add a few songs to it a month. Sometimes, I get these from places like Starbucks and iTunes free selections. I also have a great local library. I check out the CDs and copy what I want (perfectly legal under USC 1008 of the Copyright Act). Friends occasionally make copy CDs and give them to me (also legal). Occasionally, at work I will use Pandora.



    That's how I play my music. With iTunes it's free off-line and that's fine with me as I'm not interested in renting music. I pick few new tracks now and again so it's not worth the rental fee.



    But I can see that Spotify could be useful to discover new music because access to their on-line library appears to be free, so I don't need to pay until I buy a song.



    I don't want another application to manage my music, but if I can hear a bunch of on-line tracks and buy them in bulk it could be tempting. At present Spotify offers a tiered discount for bulk buying, which is a nice feature. For me the only thing itunes doesn't do well is the visualizer, especially when compared to the old WinApp.
  • Reply 35 of 43
    patranuspatranus Posts: 366member
    Netflix streaming use to be nice.

    That is until I watched the 1% of their catalog that was actually interesting.



    I have no need for the 100 titles beginning with 'megashark'.



    iTunes has quality. Netflix has quality.
  • Reply 36 of 43
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member
    Apple just got served. No subscription? Not even streaming? They just want to protect iTunes music sales so much (much like Microsoft tried to protect Windows & Offices) they kind of got left behind. The best part is Spotify will likely launch before iTunes Match. I hope this competition will stir Apple to be more forward thinking.
  • Reply 37 of 43
    hittrj01hittrj01 Posts: 753member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Patranus View Post


    Netflix streaming use to be nice.

    That is until I watched the 1% of their catalog that was actually interesting.



    I have no need for the 100 titles beginning with 'megashark'.



    iTunes has quality. Netflix has quality.



    I agree with you (although I'm sure you meant iTunes has quality, Netflix has quantity ). I have to admit, the only use I have for Netflix is for TV shows now. I really have gotten into a lot of tv shows I never would have watched otherwise, so that alone has made it worth it to me.
  • Reply 38 of 43
    tbelltbell Posts: 3,146member
    I think I will rely on the Statute, the history of the Statute, and the words of my esteemed copyright professor at the University Michigan of Law School who goes around to schools teaching children these very things UNLESS you have something better.



    The plain face of the Statute says as much: "§ 1008. Prohibition on certain infringement actions



    No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings."



    As far as musicians not getting paid, I am not bragging (although I am proud to actually know the law as opposed to what the copyright shills would have you think). Further, I hate to tell you, but most musicians don't get paid from the CD. They are advanced money to record the album. That money has to be recouped from the sale of the CD before the musicians gets a dime. Most musicians never pay off the advance (generally because of purposely faulty accounting by the labels). The money is made from performance rights (music played on the INternet or live performances).



    Finally, you also are operating under a faulty assumption when it comes to money not being made when I burn a copy of a CD and give it to a friend. The labels do get paid as there is a special tax on the blank music CD that gets paid to the labels. Follow the included link and go down to the US section. It provides a nice summary.



    OK one more thing. Even if I were "stealing, " like Robin Hood I wouldn't' feel bad about it. Copyright started as a 14 year term. It now is over a hundred years. Nothing is truly original anymore. It all is inspired by something else. It is absurd works don't fall into the public domain until well after the creator has died. The whole purpose of copyright is to provide a benefit to the public by giving the creators a "limited" monopoly. Look at the Fashion Industry where copyright protection does not apply. Designers are free to copy off one another, yet the industry is booming.



    We can differ on my last point, but not on the law which is clear. It is legal for me to copy CDs from the library and give the copy to a friend (the emphasis on give).



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by elroth View Post


    Sorry, but you're fooling yourself. Copy CDs from friends is not actually legal (though you'll never get caught). Copy CDs are legal for your own use, but not to distribute to others. I like how you brag about never paying for music - if everyone did that, musicians would be in trouble. Of course, if you only listen to a thousand songs and free Starbucks selections then you're probably listening to mainstream popular stuff, which who cares about anyway.



  • Reply 39 of 43
    joseph ljoseph l Posts: 197member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    Nothing is truly original anymore. It all is inspired by something else.



    Steve comes up with original stuff year in and year out. Haven't you noticed?
  • Reply 40 of 43
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,215member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    I also have a great local library. I check out the CDs and copy what I want (perfectly legal under USC 1008 of the Copyright Act). Friends occasionally make copy CDs and give them to me (also legal).






    i sure hope you aren't an IP lawyer cause you are wrong on both accounts.



    Said law allows you to make a copy of something you have bought for your own use. Period. You can't make copies for friends, copy from the library etc. And if you sell or give away the original CD, you are legally supposed to destroy your digital copies.



    Not that this stops anyone but it is by law not okay .





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Joseph L View Post


    i wish iOS would be set up to reject anything that was copied illegally. Unless you own the CD, there should be some way to prevent iTunes from ripping it. Maybe you should need to register your rip with the RIAA? And only be allowed to listen to songs that you have registered?



    That kind of stuff is a logistics nightmare. Not to mention a PR one.



    But Apple is making something of an effort by charging for the whole iTunes Match. That money is going back to the labels etc. While it isn't likely to ever be the total amount of money lost at least it is something.
Sign In or Register to comment.