Spotify announce App store

[moon]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/8925213/Spotify-to-launch-app-store.html

 

[MajorFubar]

I'd rather they announced they'd solved the gapless playback issue on their player applications, which apparently is the number-one most requested upgrade/fix.

 

[Anonymous]

I'd rather they announced they'd solved the gapless playback issue on their player applications, which apparently is the number-one most requested upgrade/fix.

Works fine through squeezebox. And if you can be arsed, it works with the Server software and softsqueeze, with no player.

 

[Anonymous]

I must admit i wish they would fix the basics first before getting all moanbook on me.

The integration with sonos hasnt worked properly for a year now and theres no sign of it being fixed anytime soon. They probably dont see it as a big issue.

I got so anoyed with it not working I cancelled my tenner a month and gave it to napster instead (who's sonos integration is excellent)

 

[Farmitou]

It's working fine on the Mac (and my broadband is poor to say the least!), however an update that allow the native swoosh navigation would be a valued upgrade! Can't see the apps being of any added value to myself however.

 

[MajorFubar]

And if you can be arsed, it works with the Server software and softsqueeze, with no player.

I did actually try that after you suggested it before, downloading the squeezeserver software, softsqueeze, registering myself on it, downloading the Spotify app to it...then it came back with a message saying that it didn't recognise the Spotify filetypes. At which point I officially gave up :wall:

 

[Andrew Everard]

Our News Ed, Joe Cox, is as we speak hotfooting it to the London relay of the New York announcement, and will be reporting as it happens, both here and on Facebook

 

[gowiththeflow]

I have to admit to being baffled.

All I want to do, is listen to and enjoy music.

Streaming services - fantastic. The higher the quality the better too.

However (this is going to sound like a rant).....

I have no interest in seeing what other people are listening to,

no interest in their playlists,

have no inclination to tell the world what I'm listening to,

come to that I don't want anyone to see what I'm listening to (why should that be necessary?)

I don't want to have to go through Facebook to access a service,

I don't want anything to do with Facebook,

"our subscribers are social", W T F does than mean?

I don't want my computer to become a host server on a peer-to-peer music service network (i.e. Spotify)

and now I'm not sure what use apps on a music service are?????

Am I so out of touch or disconnected?

All I want is to listen to music, when I want to. I don't see what it has to do with anyone else and I certainly don't want information on me "harvested" by some dubious American corporation. There's already far to much of the latter IMHO.

(Pheh!)

.

 

[Anonymous]

I have to admit to being baffled.

All I want to do, is listen to and enjoy music.

Streaming services - fantastic. The higher the quality the better too.

However (this is going to sound like a rant).....

I have no interest in seeing what other people are listening to,

no interest in their playlists,

have no inclination to tell the world what I'm listening to,

come to that I don't want anyone to see what I'm listening to (why should that be necessary?)

I don't want to have to go through Facebook to access a service,

I don't want anything to do with Facebook,

"our subscribers are social", W T F does than mean?

I don't want my computer to become a host server on a peer-to-peer music service network (i.e. Spotify)

and now I'm not sure what use apps on a music service are?????

Am I so out of touch or disconnected?

All I want is to listen to music, when I want to. I don't see what it has to do with anyone else and I certainly don't want information on me "harvested" by some dubious American corporation. There's already far to much of the latter IMHO.

(Pheh!)

.

Don't use it then 🙂

Simples. (And your username is rather ironic 🙂 )

Personally I'm looking forward to apps. In fact I may write one if I can drum up the willpower. Just need to see what the SDK is like.

Vive la Spotify! 🙂

Well worth £10 a month of my money...

 

[Anonymous]

And if you can be arsed, it works with the Server software and softsqueeze, with no player.

I did actually try that after you suggested it before, downloading the squeezeserver software, softsqueeze, registering myself on it, downloading the Spotify app to it...then it came back with a message saying that it didn't recognise the Spotify filetypes. At which point I officially gave up :wall:

Ah indeed. Must check out an easier way.

 

[moon]

use Spotify or don't . it makes no odds. But the fact remains its still probably the most important influence on listening habits to come along since the iPod.

For what it's worth I have never had a single problem with the service, have discovered tonnes of new music , found the sound quality excellent.

Yes Faceache is annoying but as I discovered, all that stuff can be turned off.

 

[Lee H]

I have to admit to being baffled.

All I want to do, is listen to and enjoy music.

Streaming services - fantastic. The higher the quality the better too.

However (this is going to sound like a rant).....

I have no interest in seeing what other people are listening to,

no interest in their playlists,

have no inclination to tell the world what I'm listening to,

come to that I don't want anyone to see what I'm listening to (why should that be necessary?)

I don't want to have to go through Facebook to access a service,

I don't want anything to do with Facebook,

"our subscribers are social", W T F does than mean?

I don't want my computer to become a host server on a peer-to-peer music service network (i.e. Spotify)

and now I'm not sure what use apps on a music service are?????

Am I so out of touch or disconnected?

All I want is to listen to music, when I want to. I don't see what it has to do with anyone else and I certainly don't want information on me "harvested" by some dubious American corporation. There's already far to much of the latter IMHO.

(Pheh!)

.

I'd suggest a CD or Radio then

 

[Anonymous]

Spotify and Facebook joining up is good for both parties. I can't imagine Spotify will be paying anything (I may be wrong).

The fact is, that (for the UK at least), Spotify is the largest, and best in terms of SQ. It's strugglingi financially itself, so I'm not convinced of the long-term survival of rival services.

Here we have one which is at least as good quality (I had a free 60 day trial of WiMP), it's 256 kbps AAC, and has a far nicer front end, and I felt the quality was supeb. For now though it's only Norway, Sweden and Denmark (I think). It doesn't use P2P either and has some really nice features...but in the end I ditched it, as I like the Facebook integration. The new Apps is a really cool idea in my opinion, and will hopefully mean that the likes of Winamp etc will be able to play Spotify directly...

 

[SonofSun]

I have to admit to being baffled.

All I want to do, is listen to and enjoy music.

Streaming services - fantastic. The higher the quality the better too.

However (this is going to sound like a rant).....

I have no interest in seeing what other people are listening to,

no interest in their playlists,

have no inclination to tell the world what I'm listening to,

come to that I don't want anyone to see what I'm listening to (why should that be necessary?)

I don't want to have to go through Facebook to access a service,

I don't want anything to do with Facebook,

"our subscribers are social", W T F does than mean?

I don't want my computer to become a host server on a peer-to-peer music service network (i.e. Spotify)

and now I'm not sure what use apps on a music service are?????

Am I so out of touch or disconnected?

All I want is to listen to music, when I want to. I don't see what it has to do with anyone else and I certainly don't want information on me "harvested" by some dubious American corporation. There's already far to much of the latter IMHO.

(Pheh!)

.

I pretty much with you on this one, I don't use facebook and will never use facebook. I understand that new users to spotify will have to have a farcebook account.

Apart from that issue, I think the premium service is superb.

 

[gowiththeflow]

Don't use it then 🙂

Simples. (And your username is rather ironic 🙂 )

I've used a couple of streaming services similar to Spotify and have been doing so for around 12 months or so. Spotify isn't the only fish in the sea, although it is now becoming the largest.

Why is my user name ironic?

I've had internet radios for a few years and these are used quite intensively, providing me and my son with various forms of music that ordinary radio doesn't supply.

As I've said, I've also been using other streaming services for about a year. These are not very different to what Spotify provides, whether or not the user interface is any worst or better than it.

This last summer I bought a Sonos system and have extended it around the house. My teenage kids have added their own Play 3's to our network as well. My wife has now finally realised and appreciates that she has access to her music at anytime and anywhere in the house. When not used for streaming services they are used to access our music librarys, or for internet radio.

We have two internet capable TV's ( although it's not much more than a gimmick for us at the moment), Xbox live, Video streaming blah blah !

As you can see, my family and I are very much in the "flow" as it were.

I'd suggest a CD or Radio then

I've got a couple of ad-free full service trials with other services to work through yet and internet radio still plays a big part around here. I do however play the odd CD from time to time ! :wave:

I was considering putting Spotify Premium on an unused old laptop and then accessing it solely via the Sonos, but the requirement to join Facebook killed that one off for me.

My daughter gets the Deezer mobile service for free on her mobile phone. It's a standard free add-on as part of her contract. There's no £10 pm fee, either. I considered signing up for the full Deezer service (catalogue size roughly on a par with Spotify), but they've also jumped into bed with Facebook, so I've backed off from that.

Have you considered what's in it for each of those partners? In order to access the huge Facebook membership, Spotify and Deezer had to offer Facebook something in return. I have my own ideas about that.

.

 

[gowiththeflow]

Spotify and Facebook joining up is good for both parties. I can't imagine Spotify will be paying anything (I may be wrong).

It's undoubtedly good for both parties.

For Spotify it opens up a huge potential market and further extends their brand presence and customer awareness.

But you may ask yourself what's in it for Facebook?

Spotify would be worth nothing to them unless there was something coming in return.

You simply have to look at what Facebook is all about, its raison d'etre if you like. Social networking is just a vehicle for its primary purpose, which is marketing personal data and this is where the bulk of its income comes from.

I would wager a bet that Spotify (and others who've done a similar deal) have signed up to access of personal data, possibly financial data and listening habits, for the use of Facebook and its vast array of analytical tools.

The fact is, that (for the UK at least), Spotify is the largest, and best in terms of SQ.

It is now certainly now the largest and the one with the biggest brand awareness, although when talking about it with half a dozen work colleagues the other day (all but one in the 22-31 age range) only one person had ever heard of it !

SQ wise, the 320kbps service is only available on the highest Premium tariff. Otherwise it's 160kbps. In fact there's still quite a bit of 160kbps content on the Premium service too.

Regardless, I agree Spotify offers one of the best options SQ wise.

However there are other providers who have a 320kbps Premium service too (e.g. Deezer), so Spotify are not alone in this regard.

We7 provide 192 kbps at all levels of service. Not as good as 320 kbps on Premium, but better that 160 kbps on the other levels of service.

In the USA there are a wealth of competing options. MOG seems to get a much better write up and they provide a complete 320 kbps service.

It's strugglingi financially itself, so I'm not convinced of the long-term survival of rival services.

The incredible growth and expansion into other areas is pushing Spotify into a major brand. They are getting the service integrated in home audio and AV devices, making it available through TV, internet and mobile carriers (e.g. Virgin Media). But mostly, the launch into the USA with an attendant big PR push and the tie-up with Facebook, will see them grow considerably. If they don't start to make money, something is seriously wrong.

I'm also not convinced of the viability of some of the rival services, even those with (IMHO) a better service model. There's already some "rationalisation" going on in the US market.

One dark cloud on the horizon is the increasing withdrawl by a number of minor record labels, from licencing music for use by streaming services. Several labels covering niche areas like Metal, Hip Hop, Dance and Classical, have recently pulled out and some of the large labels are known to be jittery about their own financial prospects if streaming starts to put a dent in download sales (...and they've only just about come to terms with that market !).

....as I like the Facebook integration.

OK fine.

However there are a lot of people who no interest, or no intention of going anywhere near Facebook, many of who might like to try a service like Spotify or Deezer etc.

.

 

[MajorFubar]

I've never figured out how Spotify et al have actually managed to sell their business model to so many record companies and labels to start with. I just can't see how it makes them and their artists anywhere near as much money as selling downloads, CDs and records.

If that's the case, then that says to me that it only works because it's a minority interest, ie the record companies and labels aren't currently worried about streaming-services denting their sales of downloads and physical media.

But what happens if it starts to get really popular, when punters realise that for £5 a month they can stream their favourite music limitlessly and they don't have to spend £7-15 a shot on downloads and CDs?

What I *have* noticed recently is that some labels and major artists are withholding their latest release from Spotify but allowing their back-catalogue to be on. For example, no 21 by Adele but 19 is on there. Also Oxy-wotsit by Coldplay is notable by its absence, but their older stuff is on.

Maybe that's how it's going to work long term? Major artists and labels will withhold their latest releases initially to allow for downloads and physical sales, then they'll upload them to Spotify at a later stage.

 

[Farmitou]

I found that although I do listen to spotift probably 90% of the time, I do now buy more music. With the fall in price of CD's and records being cheap via ebay. Ownership is a strange one - even though I can listen to it included in the monthly fee - I like to have a physical copy (some of which haven't even been played as I just run them through online). Downloads have always seemed too expensive and although cheaper than when physical singles were around, still don't compete with 5 cd's for a tenner that many shops now do.

Online music is the future though, even if you don't like the idea. Got to admit though - 5 million CD's (and then fave's duped on vinyl) in my listening room would take up more room than a mac, dac and router 🙂

 

[gowiththeflow]

I found that although I do listen to spotift probably 90% of the time, I do now buy more music. With the fall in price of CD's and records being cheap via ebay. Ownership is a strange one - even though I can listen to it included in the monthly fee - I like to have a physical copy.......

This is often said on various forums, but the same was said about downloads. People said that they first bought the download and later wanted the physical copy too.

Well we all know what's happened to CD sales numbers, they've been falling constantly for several years now, whereas sales of downloads have skyrocketed.

if the same applies to the streaming model and download sales also suffer significantly, then the record companies will have nothing to fall back on and artists will not get paid anything like what they do today.

It's a dilema facing the music industry and there doesn't seem to be any easy answer.

At a guess it'll cut either of two ways. Either the record industry will withdraw all rights to the streaming services, or they'll insist on a significant hike in the fees that the streamers will have to pay.

Judging by the reports of what the record companies currently earn from the streaming services per track (miniscule amounts), it's anyone guess at what price will have to be passed on to the subscribers if the second course of action is taken.

Premium services at £30 per month anyone ?

.

 

[MajorFubar]

Premium services at £30 per month anyone

this is it...if streaming takes off in a big way and starts to threaten the sales of downloads and physical media, then such as Spotify can't carry on as it does currently because the labels and artists won't accept a reduction in income.

As I said above, maybe what will happen is the labels and artists will end up withholding new premium releases for a while and only put them on Spotify after sales have bottomed out (eg after 6 or 12 months).

It's either something like that or a huge price-hike. I'd rather have the former tbh.

 

[Anonymous]

I would pay double no problem. I save more than treble a month by not buying CDs any more (apart from a few more selected ones, maybe 1 or 2 in a year, and a few downloads (mainly from Boomkat)).

Ultimately if streaming services like this fail, then it's back to piracy for many people (that is exactly why they managed to sell it in the first place).

Physical media is in its death throes. The present, never mind the future, is downloadable or streamed content, and the record companies know this. Some may pull out from time to time, but it won't be for long.

The only issue I have with Spotify, is I disagree with their royalty policy. A major label will receieve far more per play than an indie...which is totally unfair.