Even though Spotify's approach is petty, I really don't like the idea of music streaming services having exclusives.
- For TV streaming it is somewhat annoying not to have all content in one app because you need to switch apps and maintain multiple watch lists, but since each show is half an hour and watching TV is something you are actively engaged in it is acceptable.
- For games, I'll just skip the games that are on another console. Some people and up buying multiple game consoles for the exclusives.
- For music streaming, it only works if all songs that I want to listen to are in one playlist. If each streaming service has exclusives, then we all end up having to subscribe to multiple streaming services and have to switch apps after each song. I'll go back to buying and ripping CDs if that happens.
If Siri can search across services on TV I assume Apple could make a universal playlist that allows us to save what we want to watch later and link us to whichever service from the list without making us switch apps
If there was a cross platform aggregation service that could play music from multiple music streaming services, then the only downside of exclusives would be the additional cost of redundant streaming services. Spotify songs can be played from other apps like Djay 2, but I don't think Apple Music and Tidal can be accessed the same way.
Without an aggregator, I would not be able to put on a playlist with music exclusives to different services and listen to that while driving in my car. I watch TV shows at home with access to a remote. Switching apps and searching for songs is a lot harder while driving. Then again, I would not subscribe to multiple services. I have not heard an album yet that makes me pay $120 per year for a redundant streaming service.
Unless my memory fails, I think certain stations got exclusive rights to play certain records for a period of time before they became generally available.
Your memory did not fail. It's correct. And in my country still happening.
It's one thing to not put them on featured or promoted playlists, a bit petty, but not completely crooked. It's another to tamper with your search algorithms to punish artists you don't like. To me that's a real crappy move that should be slapped down by public opinion and artist outrage.
It's one thing to not put them on featured or promoted playlists, a bit petty, but not completely crooked. It's another to tamper with your search algorithms to punish artists you don't like. To me that's a real crappy move that should be slapped down by public opinion and artist outrage.
So you were expecting them to say "Yes, it's all true. Those artists should no better than to cheat on us with Apple"??
Nope, if it were true I'd expect them to shut up and wait for the news to go away. Of course there are always those that love to believe rumors with no factual evidence behind them and coming from "un-named sources".
Comments
Without an aggregator, I would not be able to put on a playlist with music exclusives to different services and listen to that while driving in my car. I watch TV shows at home with access to a remote. Switching apps and searching for songs is a lot harder while driving. Then again, I would not subscribe to multiple services. I have not heard an album yet that makes me pay $120 per year for a redundant streaming service.
A move like this would simply drive artists away to competing services.
So you were expecting them to say "Yes, it's all true. Those artists should no better than to cheat on us with Apple"??