Now, I'm not sure who controls the music on free music sites or internet radio. But in the old days, and probably even today, the music industry controls a lot of what get played on over the air radio. Which was why many performers and artist depended on the music labels for PR. I remember that when iTunes was first introduced, there was a way for independent artist to get their music on iTunes to sell, without belonging to one of the big music labels. And I'm sure it still possible for today. Now of days, there not much of a barrier that prevents any performer and artist from selling their own music and promoting it.
...
Didn't they point out an unknown artist who self published his music and they said that he would be big? I thought the artist that got on stage told his story of doing it himself through Itunes. (If I interpreted his segment correctly.)
That's from 6 years ago, and the guy who wrote it now works for Spotify (they bought his employer a little over a year ago), but maybe the trick still works. I tried it in the app on my phone and it didn't seem to work for me.
His employer created sophisticated analytics to support music recommendation, which is especially important with a catalog that is this big and growing all the time. Without this sort of thing, do you hire people to listen to your 30M+ songs, and 20,000 new songs every day, to know what to recommend to whom? Of course, most of the functionality has been documented online and in academic papers, so Apple can probably hire people to build something similar if they haven't done it already.
Apple owns 600M accounts many of whom loyally buy/use what Apple puts up because it is usually better, more integrated or easier to use or pay for than the competition. See AppleMaps crushing the superior Google Maps on iOS from the start.
Less than 7% uptake and you've beaten Spotify's total numbers, but the reality is that Spotify's paid/premium tier is much smaller but more valuable and when AppleMusic starts taking those users (which it will)... Spotify is toast. They can't survive financially off the free tier users.
I don't think that Beats1 is getting the credit it may deserve... it will be the discovery channel for many artists/bands, signed and unsigned... playing to some large segment of 600 million users. It has the potential to disintermediate labels and to promote independent music far beyond where it is today. Loren Kramar was test #1 - let's see where he goes. Apple are investing money that Spotify, Pandora etc. just don't have to spend.
Connect seems far better than Ping since it is artist driven rather than listener driven. If Apple Music can create a critical mass of listeners (which it should given how account holders seem to take up Apple solutions massively disproportionately to other groups - see ApplePay vs. Google Wallet) then artists would be fools not to publish on Connect (which would not preclude their other channels - YT/FB/Tw/etc. - or add significant work given the simple publishing tools).
I think Apple learned a lot from Ping and are leveraging the experience from Apple Pay, Healthkit, etc. about the power of the Apple community. I think AppleMusic will be a success and even mildly gamechanging.
I don't think Apple had much latitude to do anything hugely disruptive to existing music streamers without getting the DOJ all over them.
In my humble opinion these all you can eat music services have made music a little less relevant, less valuable, and more disposable. You can now spend your whole life weeding out what you like from what you don't like which means spending less time with the music that means the most to you. It has the potential to change the consumption model from eating a well planned celebratory meal with friends to a 30 million item all you can eat buffet of mass indulgence. I guess it depends on how your music preferences fit into your life and lifestyle. Choice is great but when competitors start quoting big numbers with music and apps it all fades into insignificance for individual consumers.
I rest my case... If they were so confident in their business model / health, they wouldn't feel the need to match Apple with anything!
Quote:
Originally Posted by d4NjvRzf
Ironically, in Android circles The Verge is frequently dismissed as a bunch of pro-Apple shills.
What can I say, Android users tend to have very low standards...
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrboba1
iTunes saved the industry, I'm not sure why they would be "bracing themselves." They were being dragged down by the P2P music sites and needed a way out that didn't make them look like the big ugly ogre shutting down "our access to music"
iTunes did that for them and made them a boatload of money. It sounds like this person "bracing themselves" is the former Napster CEO.
I totally forgot about Napster!
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirLance99
Funny how anyone in the Android world would say The Verge is a Apple loving site and call it iVerge all the time.
Why do you want all other music streaming companies to fail? I hope Apple Music does well, I don't think it'll do as big and awesome as some of you are claiming but it'll hold its own. But I definitely don't want Apple Music to be the ONLY service to have because all others went out of business. Which I don't think will happen either.
I know I won't switch from Google Play Music as it does everything that Apple Music does for what I use it for. I have no interest in Beats One Off station. I'll try Apple Music for the three months and if for some reason I do like it I might switch but it'll be hard to pay $2 more per month for the same service.
Pirate sites are not toast. Get over your self. You're putting way too much stock into Apple Music as it is now. It'll do well but not to the extent that it blow everything else away.
Love it when people put what I say out of context... If companies like Pandora and Spotify want to survive against a competitor like Apple, whose ?Music service is thinking "outside the box" just like iTunes did for its time, they'll need to adjust their strategy. In fact, Spotify already smells the threat on their doorstep by this move:
And especially nowadays the threat ?Music presents is MUCH more potent than iTunes and iPod was to commodity MP3 players; ?Music will land on more than half a BILLION users' devices within a very short period of time as iOS 8.4 starts rolling out at the end of this month. That rate should further increase later this fall when iOS 9 and the new iPhone's get launched. This growth rate was a pipe dream back in the iTunes and iPod days.
So my statement is not meant that I WANT them to fail, as I think competition is a good thing. But they WILL fail if they aren't nimble enough to see the threat ?Music presents. They are on the same precipice that Blackberry and Microsoft were on when the iPhone first launched, and look at how that ended for them...
Apple's official line is that there are over thirty million songs in the AppleMusic catalog; which is just about ALL of the iTunes Music Store. I suspect they're not saying "ALL" because there are one or two holdouts (I'm thinking it's either Taylor Swift, The Beatles, or some small groups) but overall that's a massive selection.
Taylor's catalogue is included. She objects to the Free tier, not to streaming per se. Several Taylor Swift tracks were visible among the Apple Music library.
I rest my case... If they were so confident in their business model / health, they wouldn't feel the need to match Apple with anything!
What can I say, Android users tend to have very low standards...
I totally forgot about Napster!
Love it when people put what I say out of context... If companies like Pandora and Spotify want to survive against a competitor like Apple, whose ?Music service is thinking "outside the box" just like iTunes did for its time, they'll need to adjust their strategy. In fact, Spotify already smells the threat on their doorstep by this move:
And especially nowadays the threat ?Music presents is MUCH more potent than iTunes and iPod was to commodity MP3 players; ?Music will land on more than half a BILLION users' devices within a very short period of time as iOS 8.4 starts rolling out at the end of this month. That rate should further increase later this fall when iOS 9 and the new iPhone's get launched. This growth rate was a pipe dream back in the iTunes and iPod days.
So my statement is not meant that I WANT them to fail, as I think competition is a good thing. But they WILL fail if they aren't nimble enough to see the threat ?Music presents. They are on the same precipice that Blackberry and Microsoft were on when the iPhone first launched, and look at how that ended for them...
Can we stop pretending that there can only be one winner? People are going to use the service that appeals to them the most, apple, google, and at this point, spotify, are all so big thats its possible for all 3 to be hugely successful. How about we stop talking about technology like its a war between giant nations and take it for what it is, which is something that makes life a little more convenient.
You can now spend your whole life weeding out what you like from what you don't like which means spending less time with the music that means the most to you. It has the potential to change the consumption model from eating a well planned celebratory meal with friends to a 30 million item all you can eat buffet of mass indulgence. I guess it depends on how your music preferences fit into your life and lifestyle. Choice is great but when competitors start quoting big numbers with music and apps it all fades into insignificance for individual consumers.
Nobody will listen to 30 million songs but the place to explore new music should be valuable for music lovers, especially if that place is also run by music lovers.
Why is it a threat to the music industry? If anything, the premium rates are much better than the competitors, which means more money for the music industry.
The free radio station is akin to the free Pandora and Spotify tiers, so it doesn't move the needle for the music industry, so to speak.
Why should they feel threatened by it?
I may have missed a few things due to a power outage for me during the stream.
By combining these various services, especially connect, they are giving Artists the ability to reach the huge number of Apple customers directly on one common platform. The ability to view Artists content on "Apple Music Connect" is avail of the fremium model. The paid version allows you to save content. If this takes off, artists then have platform where in theory, makes the labels less valuable/necessary. There is a reason Eddie called out a new unknown artist, He is hoping people follow them and others can see how a new artist can potentially balloon to a well known artist.
The Apple music platform can turn into a label in and of itself. Artists can then keep more of the profits. That means less touring necessary to bring in $$ off the music. Or a bigger overall slice. Apple's hire of beats basically brought in powerhouse talent who in an of themselves are a label. They know where the industry is going. So does Jay Z that is why he bought Tidal. If people aren't buying albums/songs and are just streaming, it makes the need for labels that much less important.
For those of you who are wondering why someone from the labels would consider Apple Music a potential threat: the major labels have money in Spotify. Last I checked they collectively owned about 15 or 16 % of the company. This is less about them being concerned about the model and more about them being concerned Apple will grab a big bite out of the pie again. Apple saved the music industry last time, but the labels KNEW they should have been able to do it themselves and that their failure to do so reflected poorly on them, and cost them dear over the years in nickels and dimes. They want Spotify to win because that way they get a bigger slice of pie
And by the way.. That radio channel is hopefully, probably the first of many to come. If this is a DJ channel with pop culture music, there will hopefully be a classical music channel to follow, a more contemporary jazz channel etc. I would love high quality radio channels to discover new music.
Here in Sacramento, we have a public-supported classical/jazz station. I happen to like (and support) both. I also hope that Apple does exactly what you say. I'll still support my local station, but I love the idea of having more options.
There is one piece missing for high adoption. SONOS support. I also think this is why iTunes radio never took off either. While you can easily play local iTunes music content on SONOS you couldn't do the same for iTunes radio. I am in that boat. You can play any other music service on SONOS like Spotify, Pandora, Rhaposdy, Tidal, etc. If Apple opens it up so you can play music on SONOS that would be a game changer.
I've heard this song before: Microsoft wasn't concerned about Apple Computers, phone makers weren't concerned about the iPhone, and watchmakers weren't concerned about the Apple Watch. Pretty sure this is going to turn out the same was as the others.
I don't necessarily agree with your correlation between the iPhone and the new Apple Music service. The iPhone was a revolutionary game-changer whereas the Apple Music service isn't that much different from it's competitors. I love Apple as much as you guys, but let's not forget that not everything they touch turns to gold, think iTunes Ping and MobileMe. When iTunes Radio was introduced there were plenty of comments here claiming it would be a Pandora killer. I'm sure the new Apple Music service will do quite well over time and will be amongst the top music streaming services, but I don't think it will dominate the streaming market as it is currently designed.
You're right. The two products don't compare well in every way. However, we need to remember that Apple has often had a long term plan that they don't reveal until they are ready to do so. By the time Apple drops the other shoe it's too late for competition to make an "saving" adjustment.
The presentation of ?music was the least smooth segment of the keynote. That may have been due to a last-minute change in the presentation, or maybe because the ?TV was jerked out of the program real late. I suspect there is a lot more to come with the ?music, and we are commenting with only knowing but a fraction of the whole picture.
Remember: Apple didn't let on that the watchOS would reach version 2 only 6 months after the watch became available, or that it would have native apps. Both of these things could have put to rest a lot of peeing and moaning by pundits, but Apple was willing to let their competitors crow for a few months before making their own announcements on Monday... and don't think this is the end of their planned rollout of advancements for the ?watch, or any of their products. I expect to see ?music morph into what will be a powerhouse service by the end of the year ... giving the music industry reason to rethink their early complacency. Apple's announcements are only the first rumblings of what the products will become.
Can we stop pretending that there can only be one winner? People are going to use the service that appeals to them the most, apple, google, and at this point, spotify, are all so big thats its possible for all 3 to be hugely successful. How about we stop talking about technology like its a war between giant nations and take it for what it is, which is something that makes life a little more convenient.
Until IBM handed Bill Gates the biggest gift in the world and enabled a virtual monopoly, the economic model most believed was that every market would coalesce around three market leaders. Since then the model allows for one giant leader and several much smaller players who are followers.
It may not be a war, but the rules of Sun Tzu spelled out in his "Art of War" still apply... maybe even more then ever.
Until IBM handed Bill Gates the biggest gift in the world and enabled a virtual monopoly, the economic model most believed was that every market would coalesce around three market leaders. Since then the model allows for one giant leader and several much smaller players who are followers.
It may not be a war, but the rules of Sun Tzu spelled out in his "Art of War" still apply... maybe even more then ever.
So by that definition, Apple was a follow for many years since they were one of the smaller players until just recently? I don't believe in that smaller companies are always followers as you put it. Apple is amazing and they are doing well but they won't be in this position forever. Another company will one day can me alonge and over take them. That's just how it works.
Comments
...
Now, I'm not sure who controls the music on free music sites or internet radio. But in the old days, and probably even today, the music industry controls a lot of what get played on over the air radio. Which was why many performers and artist depended on the music labels for PR. I remember that when iTunes was first introduced, there was a way for independent artist to get their music on iTunes to sell, without belonging to one of the big music labels. And I'm sure it still possible for today. Now of days, there not much of a barrier that prevents any performer and artist from selling their own music and promoting it.
...Didn't they point out an unknown artist who self published his music and they said that he would be big? I thought the artist that got on stage told his story of doing it himself through Itunes. (If I interpreted his segment correctly.)
This link is from last year but AppleMusic may have the most songs
http://www.imore.com/on-demand-streaming-music-services-compared-spotify-rdio-beats-music-slacker-google-play-music
Amazon Music - 1 million
Spotify - 20 million
Google Play - 18 million
I think Spotify is closer to 40 million now, and they officially claim "over 30 million," with over 20,000 added each day.
https://press.spotify.com/us/information/
If any of you run Spotify on your computer, you may be able to get the exact number this way:
http://musicmachinery.com/2009/05/02/cool-spotify-trick/
That's from 6 years ago, and the guy who wrote it now works for Spotify (they bought his employer a little over a year ago), but maybe the trick still works. I tried it in the app on my phone and it didn't seem to work for me.
His employer created sophisticated analytics to support music recommendation, which is especially important with a catalog that is this big and growing all the time. Without this sort of thing, do you hire people to listen to your 30M+ songs, and 20,000 new songs every day, to know what to recommend to whom? Of course, most of the functionality has been documented online and in academic papers, so Apple can probably hire people to build something similar if they haven't done it already.
Apple owns 600M accounts many of whom loyally buy/use what Apple puts up because it is usually better, more integrated or easier to use or pay for than the competition. See AppleMaps crushing the superior Google Maps on iOS from the start.
Less than 7% uptake and you've beaten Spotify's total numbers, but the reality is that Spotify's paid/premium tier is much smaller but more valuable and when AppleMusic starts taking those users (which it will)... Spotify is toast. They can't survive financially off the free tier users.
I don't think that Beats1 is getting the credit it may deserve... it will be the discovery channel for many artists/bands, signed and unsigned... playing to some large segment of 600 million users. It has the potential to disintermediate labels and to promote independent music far beyond where it is today. Loren Kramar was test #1 - let's see where he goes. Apple are investing money that Spotify, Pandora etc. just don't have to spend.
Connect seems far better than Ping since it is artist driven rather than listener driven. If Apple Music can create a critical mass of listeners (which it should given how account holders seem to take up Apple solutions massively disproportionately to other groups - see ApplePay vs. Google Wallet) then artists would be fools not to publish on Connect (which would not preclude their other channels - YT/FB/Tw/etc. - or add significant work given the simple publishing tools).
I think Apple learned a lot from Ping and are leveraging the experience from Apple Pay, Healthkit, etc. about the power of the Apple community. I think AppleMusic will be a success and even mildly gamechanging.
In my humble opinion these all you can eat music services have made music a little less relevant, less valuable, and more disposable. You can now spend your whole life weeding out what you like from what you don't like which means spending less time with the music that means the most to you. It has the potential to change the consumption model from eating a well planned celebratory meal with friends to a 30 million item all you can eat buffet of mass indulgence. I guess it depends on how your music preferences fit into your life and lifestyle. Choice is great but when competitors start quoting big numbers with music and apps it all fades into insignificance for individual consumers.
That didn't take long. Spotify intends to price-match Apple Music's family plan.
http://www.androidauthority.com/spotify-to-match-apple-music-price-615283/
I rest my case... If they were so confident in their business model / health, they wouldn't feel the need to match Apple with anything!
Ironically, in Android circles The Verge is frequently dismissed as a bunch of pro-Apple shills.
What can I say, Android users tend to have very low standards...
iTunes saved the industry, I'm not sure why they would be "bracing themselves." They were being dragged down by the P2P music sites and needed a way out that didn't make them look like the big ugly ogre shutting down "our access to music"
iTunes did that for them and made them a boatload of money. It sounds like this person "bracing themselves" is the former Napster CEO.
I totally forgot about Napster!
Funny how anyone in the Android world would say The Verge is a Apple loving site and call it iVerge all the time.
Why do you want all other music streaming companies to fail? I hope Apple Music does well, I don't think it'll do as big and awesome as some of you are claiming but it'll hold its own. But I definitely don't want Apple Music to be the ONLY service to have because all others went out of business. Which I don't think will happen either.
I know I won't switch from Google Play Music as it does everything that Apple Music does for what I use it for. I have no interest in Beats One Off station. I'll try Apple Music for the three months and if for some reason I do like it I might switch but it'll be hard to pay $2 more per month for the same service.
Pirate sites are not toast. Get over your self. You're putting way too much stock into Apple Music as it is now. It'll do well but not to the extent that it blow everything else away.
Love it when people put what I say out of context... If companies like Pandora and Spotify want to survive against a competitor like Apple, whose ?Music service is thinking "outside the box" just like iTunes did for its time, they'll need to adjust their strategy. In fact, Spotify already smells the threat on their doorstep by this move:
http://www.androidauthority.com/spotify-to-match-apple-music-price-615283/
And especially nowadays the threat ?Music presents is MUCH more potent than iTunes and iPod was to commodity MP3 players; ?Music will land on more than half a BILLION users' devices within a very short period of time as iOS 8.4 starts rolling out at the end of this month. That rate should further increase later this fall when iOS 9 and the new iPhone's get launched. This growth rate was a pipe dream back in the iTunes and iPod days.
So my statement is not meant that I WANT them to fail, as I think competition is a good thing. But they WILL fail if they aren't nimble enough to see the threat ?Music presents. They are on the same precipice that Blackberry and Microsoft were on when the iPhone first launched, and look at how that ended for them...
Every company isn't confident in their business model/health. They constantly do what the other gut is doing. Even Apple does that.
The Beatles are likely to be missing though.
Can we stop pretending that there can only be one winner? People are going to use the service that appeals to them the most, apple, google, and at this point, spotify, are all so big thats its possible for all 3 to be hugely successful. How about we stop talking about technology like its a war between giant nations and take it for what it is, which is something that makes life a little more convenient.
You can now spend your whole life weeding out what you like from what you don't like which means spending less time with the music that means the most to you. It has the potential to change the consumption model from eating a well planned celebratory meal with friends to a 30 million item all you can eat buffet of mass indulgence. I guess it depends on how your music preferences fit into your life and lifestyle. Choice is great but when competitors start quoting big numbers with music and apps it all fades into insignificance for individual consumers.
Nobody will listen to 30 million songs but the place to explore new music should be valuable for music lovers, especially if that place is also run by music lovers.
Why is it a threat to the music industry? If anything, the premium rates are much better than the competitors, which means more money for the music industry.
The free radio station is akin to the free Pandora and Spotify tiers, so it doesn't move the needle for the music industry, so to speak.
Why should they feel threatened by it?
I may have missed a few things due to a power outage for me during the stream.
By combining these various services, especially connect, they are giving Artists the ability to reach the huge number of Apple customers directly on one common platform. The ability to view Artists content on "Apple Music Connect" is avail of the fremium model. The paid version allows you to save content. If this takes off, artists then have platform where in theory, makes the labels less valuable/necessary. There is a reason Eddie called out a new unknown artist, He is hoping people follow them and others can see how a new artist can potentially balloon to a well known artist.
The Apple music platform can turn into a label in and of itself. Artists can then keep more of the profits. That means less touring necessary to bring in $$ off the music. Or a bigger overall slice. Apple's hire of beats basically brought in powerhouse talent who in an of themselves are a label. They know where the industry is going. So does Jay Z that is why he bought Tidal. If people aren't buying albums/songs and are just streaming, it makes the need for labels that much less important.
And by the way.. That radio channel is hopefully, probably the first of many to come. If this is a DJ channel with pop culture music, there will hopefully be a classical music channel to follow, a more contemporary jazz channel etc. I would love high quality radio channels to discover new music.
Here in Sacramento, we have a public-supported classical/jazz station. I happen to like (and support) both. I also hope that Apple does exactly what you say. I'll still support my local station, but I love the idea of having more options.
There is one piece missing for high adoption. SONOS support. I also think this is why iTunes radio never took off either. While you can easily play local iTunes music content on SONOS you couldn't do the same for iTunes radio. I am in that boat. You can play any other music service on SONOS like Spotify, Pandora, Rhaposdy, Tidal, etc. If Apple opens it up so you can play music on SONOS that would be a game changer.
You're right. The two products don't compare well in every way. However, we need to remember that Apple has often had a long term plan that they don't reveal until they are ready to do so. By the time Apple drops the other shoe it's too late for competition to make an "saving" adjustment.
The presentation of ?music was the least smooth segment of the keynote. That may have been due to a last-minute change in the presentation, or maybe because the ?TV was jerked out of the program real late. I suspect there is a lot more to come with the ?music, and we are commenting with only knowing but a fraction of the whole picture.
Remember: Apple didn't let on that the watchOS would reach version 2 only 6 months after the watch became available, or that it would have native apps. Both of these things could have put to rest a lot of peeing and moaning by pundits, but Apple was willing to let their competitors crow for a few months before making their own announcements on Monday... and don't think this is the end of their planned rollout of advancements for the ?watch, or any of their products. I expect to see ?music morph into what will be a powerhouse service by the end of the year ... giving the music industry reason to rethink their early complacency. Apple's announcements are only the first rumblings of what the products will become.
Until IBM handed Bill Gates the biggest gift in the world and enabled a virtual monopoly, the economic model most believed was that every market would coalesce around three market leaders. Since then the model allows for one giant leader and several much smaller players who are followers.
It may not be a war, but the rules of Sun Tzu spelled out in his "Art of War" still apply... maybe even more then ever.
https://play.google.com/about/music/allaccess/#/
So by that definition, Apple was a follow for many years since they were one of the smaller players until just recently? I don't believe in that smaller companies are always followers as you put it. Apple is amazing and they are doing well but they won't be in this position forever. Another company will one day can me alonge and over take them. That's just how it works.
Google Play Music has almost double that.