IreneW

GeorgeBMac said:

IreneW said:

GeorgeBMac said:

mjtomlin said:

jdw said:

LOL.  I've known about Apple Music's first 3 months free deal since the debut, but I've never had any desire to try it.  Why?  I've always been happy to buy music, and I'm not a big fan of the modern stuff coming out anyway.  This is probably true of many people in my age group (48 and up).  Then again, I don't even own AirPods, so I'm clearly not a huge music fan.  Even so, I'm curious as to the average age of Apple Music users.

I’m 47 and still listen to new music. For someone like me who listens to music all the time (have several AirPlay speakers set up all over the house) it is definitely worth the $10/month. Even more so considering I like pretty much like all genres of music and would cost me a fortune to purchase 1% of what I listen to.

"New" and "Music" is an oxymoron.  Mostly it's a single, lonely, monotone voice backed by Thump-Thump.

Grumpy old guy much?

Yeh.   So, did you have a point?

GeorgeBMac said:

mjtomlin said:

jdw said:

LOL.  I've known about Apple Music's first 3 months free deal since the debut, but I've never had any desire to try it.  Why?  I've always been happy to buy music, and I'm not a big fan of the modern stuff coming out anyway.  This is probably true of many people in my age group (48 and up).  Then again, I don't even own AirPods, so I'm clearly not a huge music fan.  Even so, I'm curious as to the average age of Apple Music users.

I’m 47 and still listen to new music. For someone like me who listens to music all the time (have several AirPlay speakers set up all over the house) it is definitely worth the $10/month. Even more so considering I like pretty much like all genres of music and would cost me a fortune to purchase 1% of what I listen to.

"New" and "Music" is an oxymoron.  Mostly it's a single, lonely, monotone voice backed by Thump-Thump.

macplusplus said:

elijahg said:

The whole music app's GUI isn't great. It is quite a bit better in iOS 13 however. The Airplay UI is pretty clunky still, especially since they shoehorned in the ability to control currently playing devices - which is great, but needs a better implementation. Maybe a grid of playing devices rather than having to scroll through a linear list. But I digress..

My main complaint with Apple Music is its algorithm isn't anywhere near as good as Spotify's imo. When Siri is shuffling with music that I'll apparently like, there're two problems: one being a lack of new music, second is when it does insert new music it isn't remotely similar to music already in my library. More often than not it ends up with "Hey Siri, skip this". The "new music mix" is generally terrible and weighted toward pop crap which I don't like, and have none of in my library. It knows I don't like pop/hip hop, I've told it enough times, and yet it still pushes it over and over. Friends who have had both Spotify and Apple music seem to prefer Spotify's algorithm, which may be part of the reason people aren't taking up Apple Music quite as they were.

The curated playlists on Apple music are great, but again they're weighted strongly toward hip-hop, R&B and pop stuff and even the slightly less popular genres have a very limited number of curated playlists to choose from. For example, the "throwback" section of Apple Music has 21 playlists, 12 of those are "pop."

Not sure Iovine has had much to do with the highly computer sciencey art of algorithm writing, and there doesn't seem to be that much to show for the money he's apparently spent.

Playlists are for consumers, not for music enthusiasts, IMVHO. As such it doesn’t matter which one is better, Apple’s or Stupify’s, curated or robotic. I personally take Apple Music as a huge repository of world music, where I find what I look for almost every time. Suggestions in search results are more important for me than ready-made playlists or radio or alike. I can always find my way by following Apple Music’s search results and suggestions.

apple ][ said:

This machine is not for idiot Vloggers on youtube. They're not pro.

StrangeDays said:

pakitt said:

This new Mac Pro is for “Pixar”, and the such. By that I mean the true professionals out there that need all this “beef” to do whatever they need that an iMac Pro cannot do. And have the money for it. 

I am more interested about people like “NASA”: will macOS be the right OS to support their needs? An OS that is anything but “Pro” and hardly has a Finder fit for the 21st century?...

Although based on Unix, macOs is far from being a Linux-like OS.... 

macOS is certainly a pro OS, whatever that means. macOS is a POSIX-certified UNIX OS, .