Apple to name streaming music service 'Apple Music,' ask users to pick favorite genres
Apple's new streaming music service -- likely to be announced at a Worldwide Developers Conference keynote on Monday -- will be called "Apple Music," and will use personalization to help set itself apart, a report said on Friday.
The company is indeed basing the service on Beats Music, and plans to retain the idea of asking people for their favorite genres when signing up, sources told the Financial Times. This would address a problem sometimes encountered on platforms lke Spotify, where listeners have access to a huge library but only playlists and artist recommendations for finding new music. Apple Music should have artist recommendations as well.
Sources also backed previous reports that other draws will include exclusives and a revamped radio experience, with stations curated and hosted by celebrities such as Drake. The publication's sources added that Apple plans to put more emphasis on radio in Europe, where on-demand services like Deezer and Spotify are popular but Pandora Radio has no footprint, owing to music license restrictions.
In the U.S., Apple's current radio option -- iTunes Radio -- has failed to make a significant dent in the streaming market. Spotify and Pandora control overwhelming shares.
The Times supported claims that Apple Music will cost $10 per month, offering no free ad-based subscriptions a la Spotify or Pandora. People will, however, allegedly get a three-month free trial.
On Thursday, a report indicated that Apple is still negotiating with record labels, even with an announcement looming on Monday. The labels are said to be asking for a 60 percent cut of subscription fees, versus the 55 percent they earn from Spotify.
The company is indeed basing the service on Beats Music, and plans to retain the idea of asking people for their favorite genres when signing up, sources told the Financial Times. This would address a problem sometimes encountered on platforms lke Spotify, where listeners have access to a huge library but only playlists and artist recommendations for finding new music. Apple Music should have artist recommendations as well.
Sources also backed previous reports that other draws will include exclusives and a revamped radio experience, with stations curated and hosted by celebrities such as Drake. The publication's sources added that Apple plans to put more emphasis on radio in Europe, where on-demand services like Deezer and Spotify are popular but Pandora Radio has no footprint, owing to music license restrictions.
In the U.S., Apple's current radio option -- iTunes Radio -- has failed to make a significant dent in the streaming market. Spotify and Pandora control overwhelming shares.
The Times supported claims that Apple Music will cost $10 per month, offering no free ad-based subscriptions a la Spotify or Pandora. People will, however, allegedly get a three-month free trial.
On Thursday, a report indicated that Apple is still negotiating with record labels, even with an announcement looming on Monday. The labels are said to be asking for a 60 percent cut of subscription fees, versus the 55 percent they earn from Spotify.
Comments
Pretty sure that's all settled for good. Of course, Apple could buy Apple Corps outright with cash, so I doubt a lawsuit would be incoming anyway.
Great idea
They settled already with Apple, Inc. owning all the "Apple" trademarks.
And will there be a way to migrate playlists and starred music from other services. I have several playlists and thousands of songs (many offline) in Spotify. If there's not an easy way to migrate over no way would I switch to Apple Music. I have iTunes Match so if I want to listen to some Beatles music I don't need a subscription to do it.
Same here. If I have to pay the same price, actually I'll have to pay $2 more, and Apple Music doesn't do anything more than what I use now, which is Google Play Music, why switch? I have almost a 1000 songs thumbed and several meticulously made play lists that I don't want to lose. There is absolutely no reason to switch as of now.
One question I have is, will the streaming service include everything we can currently buy on iTunes? Will the Beatles catalog be included?
What I'd like to see in a music streaming service is one of the reason I used to love owning vinyl albums back in the 70's as a kid was a lot of the info they'd put on the album, such as what studios was the album recorded and mixed at, who was the mixing engineer, producer & song writers. Give some back ground and history of the artist and especially the particular album your listening to, photo's from the album. Now being a old guy maybe no one cares about this stuff anymore, but I would and I've been holding off on getting a spotify account to see what Apple offers.
Agreed. Liner notes were cool. I learned all sorts of things from them as a young person with Vinyl (and early CDs).
They settled already with Apple, Inc. owning all the "Apple" trademarks.
How do ya like them "apples"?
I hope Apple Music will offer complete albums to listen to like Spotify does. I'd like to listen to older albums by artists I never listened to much in the 1960's through the 1980's. Anyway, as long as Apple doesn't put Spotify out of business, I'll be satisfied. If I don't care that much for Apple Music I can go back to Spotify as long as it exists. I like having a choice of services. I don't believe in this "if you're not #1, you're no good" attitude. I don't understand why people always talk like that. I think there's enough people on the planet to be able to profitably support several streaming music services.
I agree. The last thing I'd want is for Apple to be the only game in town.
Most people probably listen to the same set of songs or artists. They may not realize it, but they do. So, say in a week, you listen to ten artists. Ok, now, say you can get their CDs, which you can get for SUCH a low price now, for $9.99. So say that artist had 5 albums out. That would be $50. Ok, now you pay $15.99 a month, to listen to those albums. Over time, you will be paying so much more than you would to just buy the hard or digital copies. I would never pay monthly to listen to music. My God, it's called the radio.
I can only hope that Apple does not go as far as to stop selling albums digitally. It would be a shame. I do not buy many albums, movies or shows right now. But, I like having the choice.
How many will bet that if Apple did call their music service "Apple Music" Samsung will change theirs to "Samsung Music"?
^^^ Only 10? You're right... for your usage scenario: stick to purchasing. Everything else to you will be unnecessary noise... kind of like most of your post. :rolleyes:
How do you realistically expect THAT to work? Each service would have to create an Export Playlist feature, which I seriously doubt they will EVER do... :rolleyes: