6.5m is great after just a month. I think the other services, especially Spotify, must be worried.
I used the free trial, and I kinda liked it, but I can't subscribe at the price they charge us UK users. £9.99 a month (incl. tax) is > $9.99 (£6.52) and > €9.99 (£7.41). Even if you add tax to the US and Euro prices, UK users are still paying the most for the same service and same music. I can't see what the reason is for this other than to make the price a set "9.99" wherever it's available.
Of course, that won't work in Yuan where 9.99Y = £1.03, so if they can change the price there, why not here? £7.99 seems a more reasonable price.
On the privacy angle, I'm happy that Apple look out for me and my privacy. They make money from hardware and services, not advertising and tracking you. I won't use Google products specifically because I cannot trust them with any of my data.
For what it's worth, I don't like the Music app UI either. Too many 'pretty' images cluttering it up, I don't care about seeing album covers, I just want my data clean and precise in text format. Then show me the album cover when i actually play the tune (if you have to)
Me, as well. I really like Apple Music. I used Beats and thought that was actually pretty good. Is Apple Music perfect? No. Who cares. I tripled the size of my music library and I find new stuff all the time. It's a great service if you don't have a negative attitude about everything Apple does. I'll enjoy it even more soon when Sonos supports it later this year. We just need to chill out and have some patience. They'll get it right. And BTW -- 6.5M paid subscribers is huge for just over 3 months. Spotify seems to be the media's favorite yard stick, but they've been at it for about 7 years in order to get to 20M paid users. My prediction is in a year from now Apple Music is either right behind Spotify or surpasses them. And does it really matter anyway who is winning?
Off topic but indirectly related: just saw an article this morning about how the Swiss watch industry's exports are the lowest since 2009.
Interesting since the "Apple Watch is a flop" incessant drumbeat has been going on for the last 6 months and now *coincidentally* Swiss watch sales are hurting big time. Maybe the same negativity around Apple Music will play out in a similar manner.
Apple Music bundled with iTunes Match is a good combination for people who need to download the music for offline consumption. For the relatively small bump in monthly cost to add iTunes Match it might be good for Apple to bundle it in either free or for an extra buck. I also agree that iTunes is a hulking mess. Just the Music part of iTunes has six (6) major pages/tabs and the My Music tab has five (5) different display options. That's just the Music part, which is only one of nine (9) major UI sections. Add in the devices UI which randomly renames your &%3! devices and you're up to ten (10) major parts with each part having sub level navigation. Each device section has nineteen (19) additional pages... and so on. Yeah, it's a huge barely usable mess.
The Mini Player is not bad but still deceptively cluttered since every tiny UI element is a control of some sort.
Oh, and since Apple Music the entire music user interface is sprinkled with little hearts everywhere you look, like a 7 year old girl designed the damn thing. Not that 7 year old girls are not good UX designers, but how many little hearts do we really need? It's just plain silly and redundant.
Oh, and since Apple Music the entire music user interface is sprinkled with little hearts everywhere you look, like a 7 year old girl designed the damn thing. Not that 7 year old girls are not good UX designers, but how many little hearts do we really need? It's just plain silly and redundant.
You can turn off the hearts in iTunes' preferences > General tab > Ratings. Set it back to just "Stars".
Shall I wake my daughter to correct your math? Spotify has 20 million paid subscribers. 6.5 million represents 32.5%, which is almost 1/3, and a hell of a lot better than the 1/4 you mentioned.
And this is just over 3 months. Spotify better be worried. Then again, maybe not. I'm sure there are enough Apple haters to keep them going. Outside of that, I can't think of any reason why I'd choose Spotify over Apple Music. I can think of several why I'd choose Apple Music over Spotify.
Spotify announced 20 million some time ago; unless you assume their numbers froze in place, it's not unreasonable to assume they've gone up since then. And I'd consider another option as I dislike the way Apple Music tracks integrate with my iTunes tracks; it gives a sense of polluting my library.
And people throwing around "oh my one billion in revenue", well, it takes ten billion to even really register on Apple's balance sheet at this point, and they spend most of that paying licensing and other costs. Add in marketing and overhead and I bet they've lost money on it so far.
Headline says 6.5 million and the article 8.5. Which is it?
Clearly you don't seem to understand what you are reading! It clearly said 6.5 million are paid users and another 8.5 million are free users trying it out right now, which is a combined total of 15 million people currently using Apple Music.
Shall I wake my daughter to correct your math? Spotify has 20 million paid subscribers. 6.5 million represents 32.5%, which is almost 1/3, and a hell of a lot better than the 1/4 you mentioned.
And this is just over 3 months. Spotify better be worried. Then again, maybe not. I'm sure there are enough Apple haters to keep them going. Outside of that, I can't think of any reason why I'd choose Spotify over Apple Music. I can think of several why I'd choose Apple Music over Spotify.
I'd be interested to know what is the device user breakdown for paying Spotify subscribers. In other words, are those sales going to iOS or Android users? (And I think we probably already know which makes up the larger paying audience.)
Ben Thompson said something similar a few months ago on his blog Stratechery. Basically he argued that Apple didn't have to get into streaming music. I'm not sure I agree but I do think Apple should have focused on something simple instead of trying to boil the ocean. No Connect, No Beats 1, just a really good streaming music service with a simple intuitive interface. That's not what we have now.
I think it's partly an emotional argument. Apple definitely didn't have to get deeper into music. But it's about pride and about Apple's mission. If you set steaming aside for the moment, Apple built the music industry we have today. They feel the need to tend to it as it shifts from owning to streaming content. Apple also feels a deep connection to music. These are not business decisions but decisions that come from a more emotional place. That sometimes leads to great things but not always. I think Apple Music is fine but there are plenty of choices and competition even within iOS. People that complain about Apple Music should just go to one of the many alternatives instead of listening to the sound of their own voice.
Spotify announced 20 million some time ago; unless you assume their numbers froze in place, it's not unreasonable to assume they've gone up since then. And I'd consider another option as I dislike the way Apple Music tracks integrate with my iTunes tracks; it gives a sense of polluting my library.
And people throwing around "oh my one billion in revenue", well, it takes ten billion to even really register on Apple's balance sheet at this point, and they spend most of that paying licensing and other costs. Add in marketing and overhead and I bet they've lost money on it so far.
It's not unreasonable to say Apple Music affected any alleged gain in Spotify numbers.
Apple definitely didn't have to get deeper into music.
Actually, you're wrong here. Since the advent of music streaming services like Pandora and Spotify, iTunes sales dropped by 14%. They had to get into the streaming game to stem the flow.
Actually, you're wrong here. Since the advent of music streaming services like Pandora and Spotify, iTunes sales dropped by 14%. They had to get into the streaming game to stem the flow.
Apple was never making much money on iTunes sales for music and TV. The apps and movies (to lesser extent) are the one truly profitable business in the store. They could've easily dropped music sales altogether and just concentrated on selling hardware to play music using other streaming services.
Clearly you don't seem to understand what you are reading! It clearly said 6.5 million are paid users and another 8.5 million are free users trying it out right now, which is a combined total of 15 million people currently using Apple Music.
Yeah I realize that, I just skimmed through the article and jumped the gun on the post. Tried to delete it but you can't seem to do that from Safari mobile. Oh well.
I love the functionality of Apple Music, and do subscribe. But it only costs $10 per month, and I use it every day. I cannot believe Apple makes money on this. I assume the purposes to deepen the "moat", not to make money directly. Is this true?
Unfortunately Windows is the problem; Apple's not going to produce iBooks.app, Music.app, Movies.app, Podcasts.app, etc for Windows, so we get the mess that is iTunes.
But even with all that stuff stripped out in iOS, the Music app is still a mess.
AM is starting to feel like a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' situation. If they'd focused on user experience by making it a separate app, then it's not integrated with your iTunes library (and then the question becomes, 'why does this exist'?). But by integrating it with your iTunes library they turned the UI into a mess and buried things in submenus galore.
They really should have just not bothered and left it to third parties.
The solution to iTunes is iCloud. Move it from the desktop to the web. If you like, you could download the seperate desktop apps for offline listening. Just like Slack. This way everything would still be unified (on the web) while you could tailor your desktop experience by downloading the seperate apps according to your needs.
Somehow I hope Apple merges iCloud.com into Apple.com as I already have a profile page (with credit card details) on Apple.com.
EDIT: One more thing: Apple should simplify their subscription services to just one '? Life' subscription. It would take care of all your photos, music, mail and movies.
Comments
6.5m is great after just a month. I think the other services, especially Spotify, must be worried.
I used the free trial, and I kinda liked it, but I can't subscribe at the price they charge us UK users. £9.99 a month (incl. tax) is > $9.99 (£6.52) and > €9.99 (£7.41). Even if you add tax to the US and Euro prices, UK users are still paying the most for the same service and same music. I can't see what the reason is for this other than to make the price a set "9.99" wherever it's available.
Of course, that won't work in Yuan where 9.99Y = £1.03, so if they can change the price there, why not here? £7.99 seems a more reasonable price.
On the privacy angle, I'm happy that Apple look out for me and my privacy. They make money from hardware and services, not advertising and tracking you. I won't use Google products specifically because I cannot trust them with any of my data.
For what it's worth, I don't like the Music app UI either. Too many 'pretty' images cluttering it up, I don't care about seeing album covers, I just want my data clean and precise in text format. Then show me the album cover when i actually play the tune (if you have to)
Yes. One here, at least.
And quite happy I did. Apple music is fantastic.
Me, as well. I really like Apple Music. I used Beats and thought that was actually pretty good. Is Apple Music perfect? No. Who cares. I tripled the size of my music library and I find new stuff all the time. It's a great service if you don't have a negative attitude about everything Apple does. I'll enjoy it even more soon when Sonos supports it later this year. We just need to chill out and have some patience. They'll get it right. And BTW -- 6.5M paid subscribers is huge for just over 3 months. Spotify seems to be the media's favorite yard stick, but they've been at it for about 7 years in order to get to 20M paid users. My prediction is in a year from now Apple Music is either right behind Spotify or surpasses them. And does it really matter anyway who is winning?
Off topic but indirectly related: just saw an article this morning about how the Swiss watch industry's exports are the lowest since 2009.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/swiss-watch-industry-posts-largest-093522286.html
Interesting since the "Apple Watch is a flop" incessant drumbeat has been going on for the last 6 months and now *coincidentally* Swiss watch sales are hurting big time. Maybe the same negativity around Apple Music will play out in a similar manner.
Apple Music bundled with iTunes Match is a good combination for people who need to download the music for offline consumption. For the relatively small bump in monthly cost to add iTunes Match it might be good for Apple to bundle it in either free or for an extra buck. I also agree that iTunes is a hulking mess. Just the Music part of iTunes has six (6) major pages/tabs and the My Music tab has five (5) different display options. That's just the Music part, which is only one of nine (9) major UI sections. Add in the devices UI which randomly renames your &%3! devices and you're up to ten (10) major parts with each part having sub level navigation. Each device section has nineteen (19) additional pages... and so on. Yeah, it's a huge barely usable mess.
The Mini Player is not bad but still deceptively cluttered since every tiny UI element is a control of some sort.
Oh, and since Apple Music the entire music user interface is sprinkled with little hearts everywhere you look, like a 7 year old girl designed the damn thing. Not that 7 year old girls are not good UX designers, but how many little hearts do we really need? It's just plain silly and redundant.
Apple can do better.
My other personal issue with Music is that electronic music is not catered for very well. About 1% of the music I listen to is available.
Oh, and since Apple Music the entire music user interface is sprinkled with little hearts everywhere you look, like a 7 year old girl designed the damn thing. Not that 7 year old girls are not good UX designers, but how many little hearts do we really need? It's just plain silly and redundant.
You can turn off the hearts in iTunes' preferences > General tab > Ratings. Set it back to just "Stars".
(Please spare me the "Apple has said they won't release it so they don't". That's circular).
Spotify announced 20 million some time ago; unless you assume their numbers froze in place, it's not unreasonable to assume they've gone up since then. And I'd consider another option as I dislike the way Apple Music tracks integrate with my iTunes tracks; it gives a sense of polluting my library.
And people throwing around "oh my one billion in revenue", well, it takes ten billion to even really register on Apple's balance sheet at this point, and they spend most of that paying licensing and other costs. Add in marketing and overhead and I bet they've lost money on it so far.
How many were still paid because they forgot to turn off the automatic payment?
Headline says 6.5 million and the article 8.5. Which is it?
Clearly you don't seem to understand what you are reading! It clearly said 6.5 million are paid users and another 8.5 million are free users trying it out right now, which is a combined total of 15 million people currently using Apple Music.
I'd be interested to know what is the device user breakdown for paying Spotify subscribers. In other words, are those sales going to iOS or Android users? (And I think we probably already know which makes up the larger paying audience.)
Ben Thompson said something similar a few months ago on his blog Stratechery. Basically he argued that Apple didn't have to get into streaming music. I'm not sure I agree but I do think Apple should have focused on something simple instead of trying to boil the ocean. No Connect, No Beats 1, just a really good streaming music service with a simple intuitive interface. That's not what we have now.
I think it's partly an emotional argument. Apple definitely didn't have to get deeper into music. But it's about pride and about Apple's mission. If you set steaming aside for the moment, Apple built the music industry we have today. They feel the need to tend to it as it shifts from owning to streaming content. Apple also feels a deep connection to music. These are not business decisions but decisions that come from a more emotional place. That sometimes leads to great things but not always. I think Apple Music is fine but there are plenty of choices and competition even within iOS. People that complain about Apple Music should just go to one of the many alternatives instead of listening to the sound of their own voice.
It's not unreasonable to say Apple Music affected any alleged gain in Spotify numbers.
Apple definitely didn't have to get deeper into music.
Actually, you're wrong here. Since the advent of music streaming services like Pandora and Spotify, iTunes sales dropped by 14%. They had to get into the streaming game to stem the flow.
Information is power. It's an emerging market - why give competitors free intel?
Not having actual numbers means nothing except to analyst busybodies...
Actually, you're wrong here. Since the advent of music streaming services like Pandora and Spotify, iTunes sales dropped by 14%. They had to get into the streaming game to stem the flow.
Apple was never making much money on iTunes sales for music and TV. The apps and movies (to lesser extent) are the one truly profitable business in the store. They could've easily dropped music sales altogether and just concentrated on selling hardware to play music using other streaming services.
I love the functionality of Apple Music, and do subscribe. But it only costs $10 per month, and I use it every day. I cannot believe Apple makes money on this. I assume the purposes to deepen the "moat", not to make money directly. Is this true?
Unfortunately Windows is the problem; Apple's not going to produce iBooks.app, Music.app, Movies.app, Podcasts.app, etc for Windows, so we get the mess that is iTunes.
But even with all that stuff stripped out in iOS, the Music app is still a mess.
AM is starting to feel like a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' situation. If they'd focused on user experience by making it a separate app, then it's not integrated with your iTunes library (and then the question becomes, 'why does this exist'?). But by integrating it with your iTunes library they turned the UI into a mess and buried things in submenus galore.
They really should have just not bothered and left it to third parties.
The solution to iTunes is iCloud. Move it from the desktop to the web. If you like, you could download the seperate desktop apps for offline listening. Just like Slack. This way everything would still be unified (on the web) while you could tailor your desktop experience by downloading the seperate apps according to your needs.
Somehow I hope Apple merges iCloud.com into Apple.com as I already have a profile page (with credit card details) on Apple.com.
EDIT: One more thing: Apple should simplify their subscription services to just one '? Life' subscription. It would take care of all your photos, music, mail and movies.