Monday's presentation of the new music streaming service from Apple was impatiently watched not only by fans of the Californian brand, but also by the biggest competitors of the newly created Apple Music. It will launch on June 30, but at least for now, the rival service at the forefront of Spotify is not too scared.
Apple Music is Apple's answer to Spotify, Tidal, Rdio, YouTube, but also Tumblr, SoundCloud or Facebook. The new music service will offer streaming practically the entire iTunes catalog, a 1/XNUMX Beats XNUMX radio station whose content will be created by people, and finally a social part to connect the artist with the fan.
At WWDC, Apple paid a lot of attention to its new music service. Eddy Cue, Jimmy Iovine and also rapper Drake appeared on stage. The first two appointees who are in charge of Apple Music then shared other details in several interviews that did not fit into the keynote.
Streaming is in its infancy
"We're trying to create something bigger than streaming here, bigger than radio," he said pros The Wall Street Journal immodestly Eddy Cue, who says that music streaming is still in its infancy because "there are billions of people in the world and only 15 million [streaming music] subscribers". At the same time, Apple did not come with any revolution. Most of what he showed on Monday is already here in some form.
The very fact that Apple didn't come up with anything that would make everyone switch to it immediately seems to have left the managers of competing companies relatively calm. "I don't think I've ever been more confident. We've all been waiting impatiently, but now we feel really good," said an unnamed executive from a music streaming company.
After Monday's keynote, Apple interviewed the server The Verge quite a few people in the music industry, and they all agreed on one thing: they don't believe that Apple Music can affect the world of music in the same way that iTunes did more than a decade ago.
A place for everyone
An important part of Apple Music will be the previously mentioned Beats 1 station, which should stand out above all because the broadcast content will not be compiled by computers, but by a trio of experienced DJs. They are supposed to present content to listeners that they can't get anywhere else.
“I saw that the record industry was becoming more and more limited. Everyone's just trying to figure out what type of song to make to get it on radio, which is machine radio and advertisers tell you what to play." he explained pros The Guardian Jimmy Iovine, whom Apple acquired in the acquisition of Beats. “From my point of view, a lot of great musicians hit a wall they can't get over, and that turns a lot of them off. We hope this new ecosystem will help change that.”
For Beats 1, Apple has roped in acclaimed BBC DJ Zane Lowe, who is known for discovering new talent, and believes the exclusive streaming station could attract customers. However, the competition does not think that Apple Music should threaten them in any way. “I honestly don't think they're trying to convince anyone to switch to them. I think they're trying to get people who haven't used streaming before," said the unnamed music executive, who says there's room for everyone in the market.
Even before Apple unveiled its service, there were rumors that it wanted to negotiate cheaper subscription prices than the competition. It is entering the fray late and could attract customers at a lower price. But Eddy Cue said that he didn't think too much about the $10 that Apple Music costs per month. Much more important, he said, was the price for a family subscription - up to six family members can use Apple Music for $15 a month, which is less than Spotify. Although a quick reaction is expected from the Swedes.
“I think the price for a monthly subscription like a single album is fair. You could suggest $8 or $9, but nobody cares.” he said Cue for Billboard. Much more important to him was the family plan. "You've got a wife, a boyfriend, kids... it wouldn't work for each of them to pay their own subscriptions, so we spent a lot of time negotiating with the record companies and convincing them that this was a real opportunity to get the whole family involved," explained Cue.
Apple will drive the entire segment forward
At the same time, according to the head of Apple's internet services, there is no danger that streaming should destroy Apple's existing, albeit recently stagnant, business - the iTunes Store. "There are a lot of people who are very happy with downloading, and I think they will continue to do so," Cue said when asked what will happen to music downloads if they don't actually need to download at all with the streaming trend.
“We shouldn't be trying to kill the iTunes Store or kill people who buy music. If you're happy with buying a couple of albums a year, then go ahead… But if we can help you discover new artists or a new album through Connect or by listening to Beats 1 radio, great,” he explained Apple's Cue philosophy.
The mood in the world of streaming music is quite positive after the introduction of Apple Music. Apple certainly hasn't created a service that should drive other competitors to extinction. For example, Spotify rushed to announce shortly after Monday's keynote that it had already reached 75 million users, including 20 million paying users, to show how much of a lead it currently has on Apple Music.
Welcome, Apple. Seriously. #applemusic pic.twitter.com/AnoeKZ5ZIa
— Rdio (@Rdio) June 8, 2015
In the end, however, only Rdio responded directly to the new player in the industry. That is, if you don't count the soon-to-be-deleted tweet from Spotify CEO Daniel Ek, who only wrote "Oh ok". Rdio did not delete his post from Twitter. It says “Welcome, Apple. Seriously. #applemusic”, it is accompanied by a short message and is an obvious allusion to 1981.
Then Apple exactly in this way he "welcomed" in its industry IBM when it introduced its own personal computer. It seems that Rdio, but also Spotify and other competitors believe in each other so far. How for The Verge stated an unnamed executive from the record company, "when Apple is in the game, everyone brings out their best, and I think that's exactly what we're going to see". So we can only look forward to what the future of music streaming will be like.
Google Music: 50 recorded songs stream for free, complete catalog for 000 CZK.
Apple Music: 250 CZK complete catalog.
Believe me..
And there are more than 37 million songs in the iTunes Store
30 million on Spotify as well
Spotify has it too, and it's free.
It is certainly not excluded that the price of Apple Music in Europe will not be lower, just as it is with Google Music or Spotify, when it costs $10 in America, but here the price is lower. We'll see.
Information is already appearing that the subscription will cost half of what you write, and at that moment, according to me, the competition may start to slip on things from Apple
I don't remember a representative of a company introducing a new product ever saying that the new product is worthless, that it's a shunt, uncompetitive and that it will turn out badly, so don't buy it :-) So similar announcements are kind of folklore. As well as expressing what is behind it. Behind it is always the vision of financial potential, not the good of the world, although sometimes the good of the world is at least a side effect.
For Apple, the financial side of Apple Music is paradoxically probably the last thing it looks at. At least in theory. Unlike Spotify and others.
I don't want to argue, but I'll give an example. Imagine if this service did not bring Apple anything. Would he keep her? Has Apple maintained all the services it introduced? Imagine if Apple gave this service completely free, because "something". Let's say that something should bring him 10% more devices sold than without the service. However, the benefit will be 1%. Service operation, licenses and everything costs something. The costs are greater than the benefits. Would he keep the service? Whatever the reasons, for example just that all the big ones have it and Apple must too, the reason is profit, whether direct or indirect. But always a profit.
Yes, I agree with you, it's always about profit. But as Nilay Patel from The Verge rightly noted about Apple's latest news, Apple Music (and, for example, the new News application) is actually just another "feature" that supports the sale of iPhones. It's certainly not possible for Apple Music to be free, but unlike Spotify, it doesn't have to make a huge profit for Apple when it comes down to it.
It has to be profitable, but it doesn't have to be directly from the service, but I think we get the point :-)
Of course, Apple's first priority is profit.
He has certainly calculated very well how many billions Music will bring him, but in connection with iTunes, similar to Google Music in connection with the Play store, it can be a very interesting and profitable product.
For 15 USD monthly flat rate for the whole family for streaming, the main advantage is that you can listen to everything in peace and then you can decide whether to buy the Album in iTunes.
Why would I buy an album when I can download it offline to my phone?
because if one day you decide to end your subscription, all the saved albums will also disappear from your phone.
Yes, if I decide, then I will buy them. No need to buy when I have unlimited access to music even offline.
Do you also remember how in 2007 the head of BlackBerry was calm when Jobs introduced the iPhone? They say it's a toy for nerds and real pros can't live without a keyboard.
Where is Apple and where is BlackBerry today?
Do you also remember how in 2007 the head of BlackBerry was calm when Jobs introduced the iPhone? They say it's a toy for nerds and real pros can't live without a keyboard.
Where is Apple and where is BlackBerry today?
15 million subscribers? When only Spotify has 20 million paying customers and other services work without a free version? Here someone is adjusting the numbers to make their service look good ;-)
15 million subscribers? When only Spotify has 20 million paying customers and other services work without a free version? Here someone is adjusting the numbers to make their service look good ;-)
quote – “We shouldn't be trying to kill the iTunes Store or kill people who buy music. If you're happy with buying a few albums a year, then keep doing it…
Wow, I remember (musician) Bárta taking up one page in an unnamed magazine(s) with the slogan "copying kills music".
So Apple raises it to a higher level :)))
The "unfortunate" wording probably came about through translation, but the idea is fun (so far). Until the drone taps the window pane with its claw .. it will be too late. Ha ha ha!
I'm probably old (42), but I've already bought the music I like. Either on CD or mp3. I follow a bit of what's being created now, but mostly it's nothing that would make me want to buy an album. Radios give me shit. Advertising itself, primitive advice for fools. Sometimes I turn on the radio in the car for traffic news. I have so many sound stimuli throughout the day that I often sit quietly at home. I don't even use the TV as a backdrop anymore. I tried activating Google Music once. I enjoyed playing around with it for a day. Then I used it as an ad-free radio in the gym. I was sorry to pay 149Kc for it, so I deactivated it. If I want to listen to something, I go to YouTube. I have that on TV too. I'm sorry to pay for data on my mobile phone. But the user will definitely find it.
I'm probably old (42), but I've already bought the music I like. Either on CD or mp3. I follow a bit of what's being created now, but mostly it's nothing that would make me want to buy an album. Radios give me shit. Advertising itself, primitive advice for fools. Sometimes I turn on the radio in the car for traffic news. I have so many sound stimuli throughout the day that I often sit quietly at home. I don't even use the TV as a backdrop anymore. I tried activating Google Music once. I enjoyed playing around with it for a day. Then I used it as an ad-free radio in the gym. I was sorry to pay 149Kc for it, so I deactivated it. If I want to listen to something, I go to YouTube. I have that on TV too. I'm sorry to pay for data on my mobile phone. But the user will definitely find it.
To be honest, this "new Apple" gets on my nerves... Only what Jobs introduced and what this group is doing is improving, it's just hocus pocus... I've owned Apple products since the first iPhone and I've actually bought something from each of their segments and built I'm working on it and at home, but it seems to me that it's all going to hell... They've been announcing everything lately like "we're giving iPads multitasking" and "we've put music at home"... oh my god, they're so innovative... it's clear to me that they're here you can fill in the comments, but sorry, last time I read the discussion on the article "to copy movies or download" and some of you are no longer fans, but something like Islam...Fanatics...if Apple gave a price of 200 dollars for a movie without the ability to set the sound and subtitles, there would still be magor, what will he try to defend... constant bragging about sales and not knowing how to give Siri to Cestina in x years? don't they know how to sell watches everywhere? and similar, especially since they have 700000000000000000 billion to their credit... I don't know, but everyone in the family uses everything from them, but I don't see it in the future...
PS: I'm a fan, but just my opinion.
A lot of things also annoy me, but I can see it in the future. Because everywhere else I would only make myself worse.
but that is not a complete justification, it is like saying that our level is falling but Ghana is falling more
Well, I certainly don't agree with the statement that the level has dropped, just that a few things annoy me.
where you are pretty limited. if you don't understand Apple's philosophy, you're hitting the competition. pack yourself up and take stuck android and windows.
anton slap yourself..., we have things from apple because they are good, when we see how it goes to maria's ass, we point it out. if you have any problem with a person and you can't stand their opinion because your heart only beats for apple and if any criticism makes you happy like that, it's time to visit professional help. discussion is about opinions, if you can't stand it, don't discuss.
Adam got it exactly right... I'm saying this is no longer a fan but a lunatic... If I met him in person I would pack it myself, but at home with the computer, everyone is clear... I just feel like giving an example... Someone makes a watch with a water fountain, then at 8 years, Apple will come and proudly let the world know "we have watches with iVodotrysk" as if they didn't see that half of the stuff has been here for a long time... but I say find an article about downloading movies here on Apple and read it, just like Anton, you idiots... 60000 korum for the movie and can't set the sound? it doesn't matter at home, I still listen without it, and if they turn on the sound and it goes to 70000, I'll buy the movie again... and I'll also subscribe to iTunes and Apple music and everything... If that's the case, I won't be, but I'll just support them
If what I read on one competitor's website about the price is true, then I think that the competition should definitely not be left cold.
I wish they would finally upgrade the cinema display :D I probably won't get enough of it..
There are two of us, I'm glad I'm not waiting alone. I think Skylake is being waited for because of 4/5K
.
There are already three of us, I'm also waiting for that display... I just hope they don't shine like a mirror.
well, they are excited about everything....I've never seen them unenthusiastic...so I wonder if it's some kind of illness or obsession