freerange

About

Username
freerange
Joined
Visits
57
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
561
Badges
1
Posts
1,597

Reactions

500Like0Dislike10Informative

  • Apple proposes flat streaming music royalties for songwriters, at the expense of Spotify, YouTube

    freerangefreerange
    RickeyP21 said:
    Poor Apple. "Only" making $45 million per year for playing someone else's content. However do you stay in business with your over priced laptops and $800 iPhone sales. I know, why don't you screw over music fans everywhere and force them to pay your over priced fees instead of using better products like Spotify!
    Uh oh, we have an ignorant troll among our ranks. So little Rickey, you think it's ok that these free streaming sites are ripping off the artists? It was an absolutely stupid business model from the start - an "all-you-can-eat" music site for free. And what has the impact been for artists? Their album sales have plummeted, and they are making next to nothing on their recordings except for a handful of top artists, all so you don't have to pay for what you use. Go get yourself a good education so that you have a better understanding of basic economics. And if you don't want to buy an Apple iPhone or computer don't. You won't be missed.
    calinolamacguyjason leavitt

  • Apple's Mac sheds marketshare in Q2, sinks to 5th place amid worldwide sales slowdown

    freerangefreerange
    Excuse me but IDC is known for espousing total BS when it comes to Apple so anything they say is irrelevant as it is simply estimated guessing on their part.
    lostkiwiration allolliverretrogustobaconstangmonstrosityai46

  • Spotify says Apple rejected update over App Store policies, 'causing grave harm' to service

    freerangefreerange

    slurpy said:
    latifbp said:

    All Spotify paying users should be questioning why Spotify needles its customers by forcing them to pay business operation expenses. That 30% fee is a business expense, one they can and I'm sure they do write off at tax time. BUT, not only do they write it off (so it doesn't cost them much or anything at all) but they force you, their customer, to pay more anyway. They're screwing you and any other dope who decides to believe this victim sob story.
    Yeah, it's complete horse-shit. Guess what- if you want the opportunity provide your app on the most lucrative appstore on the planet, with a base of hundreds of millions of paying customers, then there's a fucking cost to that. Instead of full or partially eating that cost, they pass 100% of it to their customers, which is utterly laughable. Is Spotify claiming that having an iOS app is worth zero to them and their business? If that's the case, then just pull it from the store. If not, then eat up the business expense, and quit the blatantly transparent whining. If Apple rejected an update, there's a very good chance there was a legitimate reason for doing so, not because "anti-competitive". Spotify is trying to exploit this narrative with baseless bitching and whining, playing the victim.
    Exactly! Well said!
    mwhitejbdragonEsquireCats

  • Spotify says Apple rejected update over App Store policies, 'causing grave harm' to service

    freerangefreerange
    rogifan_new said:
    I'm glad Spotify is doing this. Apple should allow subscription apps to offer a redirect to the browser to sign up. There's no reason Apple should be taking 30% of someone's monthly Spotify fee. They're not hosting any content. And it certainly doesn't cost them $3 to process the credit card transaction. Google allows alternate payment methods. Apple should do the same. How hard would it be for Spotify to have a link in the app that takes you out to Safari to sign up? It wouldn't be. This is all about $$$ for Apple. 
    Seriously????? That's an absolutely ridiculous position. Apple built and maintains their iOS platform at great expense, and has invested BILLIONS in developing their user base, and you think Spotify should get a free ride for their competitive paid subscription as they have access to over 1 BILLION Apple devices? Which would in fact be special treatment compared to every other paid service in the AppStore. The reality is that Spotify, an Apple Music competitor, is allowed in the Apple AppStore, and further, has their free ad supported program available for download in the store at ZERO cost to them and their users. What could be more fair than that for a direct competitor to Apple?
    brucemcdrewys808calimwhitenolamacguylondorsupadav03mejsriclolliver

  • Apple uses platform dominance to 'lock out' competition, says Elizabeth Warren

    freerangefreerange
    hface119 said:
    I'm all-in with Apple and proudly so, but the guy from Spotify has a very valid point. How can they make a straight profit from Spotify's monthly subscription, and far exceed their own services' profit? In and of itself that fact leads to shutting out the competition because pricing can't be competitive. 

    Then again, Apple created the App Store and should have full control over it and it's pricing if they want to, but when you become a platform allowing 3rd parties to participate and sell, that should have limitations in terms of competition. As it stands today, they're not breaking any laws and deserve to reap whatever income they can, but morally they can't be opposed to Prince's statement in my opinion. 
    Most importantly, Apple is granting them access to their marketplace, as well as to over 1 BILLION devices for which Apple provides all the infrastructure. Further, ios users have access to the free, ad supported, version of Spotify at no cost to Spotify. Cry us a river. Spotify can go build their own infrastructure and BILLION device network. Whose stopping them?
    latifbpindyfx