You can't help fail to notice the news around the net that the music service Spotify is now available on the iPhone. What you might not (yet) have picked up on is this subscription based mobile service will soon be on S60. Just to keep everyone happy and eager, the team (based in Stockholm and London) have debuted a video of the client.
Read on in the full article.
Pretty clever to drive their subscription-based business model further. I'm glad they're keeping the PC client free, so far.
Excellent! Can't wait for it to come out. I signed up for the premium service just a few weeks ago to support the business modell, and since I expected the symbian version to be just around the corner...
I played around a bit with the Android version today, and it's just pure joy.
Best thing since tomatoes with sugar on top...
What I really want on S60v5 is for Nokia Internet Radio to be ported over.
Can the s60 version run in the background ? Looks like the iphone version cannot do so yet.
I would rather have fm radio over this though, streaming puts too much of a strain on battery life.
fleksnes wrote:best thing since tomatoes with sugar on top...
Wow! Wow! Wow!
I amazed at how few people in the real world (as in non-geeks) are missing just how huge this is! This way bigger than the vinyl to cd switch, bigger than the cd to mp3 switch.
Without being too over dramatic this reallyu could be the killer "mobile" app, one that truely brings the various mobile OS's to the masses.
Anyway, I guess you can see I'm kinda looking forward to spotify on S60 😊
Oniox said: "Can the s60 version run in the background ? Looks like the iphone version cannot do so yet. "
I didn't think any apps could run in the background on the iPhone by design (except possibly iTunes) so it could never happen there.
With S60 and its multi-tasking abilities I would be very surprised if it couldn't run in the background.
oniox wrote:I would rather have fm radio over this though, streaming puts too much of a strain on battery life.
The application stores on the phone all the music of the synchronized playlists. It is encrypted, and cannot be used otherwise than played by the Spotify player on the phone. There is no streaming involved when using it.
It's DRM all the way, baby.
way bigger than the vinyl to cd switch
Really??
Never in history did you need to subscribe to keep your collection. If you cancel your Spotify premium subscription you can only stream. You cannot take it anywhere. It is locked in a DRM service.
Sounds like an extortion racket to me.
From the first preview of the iPhone version to release in AppStore it took about one month, so hopefully wie will see Spotify on S60 in October. Spotify and N97 v20 will kick ass this autumn, hell yeah 😉
Unregistered wrote:It's DRM all the way, baby.Really??
Never in history did you need to subscribe to keep your collection. If you cancel your Spotify premium subscription you can only stream. You cannot take it anywhere. It is locked in a DRM service.
Sounds like an extortion racket to me.
Disagree. You get for 3 Big Mac Meal or 1 cinema ticket, 1 month unlimited access to more than 6 million songs on your computer and your mobile. I guess you do not know the younger generation, they don't wanna collect the music, they wanna have it immediately. That is what you get with Spotify. Nowadays the question is not owning any music per se, but being able to share with each other the newest and coolest playlists. I can have shared a playlist from my friend, and listen to it immediately. If I would do that by downloading by torrent, I would need to search and download each song 1 by 1 and then putting them together into a playlist. But again, with this method I am not able to share it to others for immediate listening.
Music consumption has changed dramatically by the new generation. Nowadays playlists (with the capability of listening to it) are more preferred then the music themselves.
MULTITASKING - Those above asking about multitasking did watch to the end of the video, right? The bit where they show you can 'minimize' Spotify and get on with other things on the phone...
😊
Nowadays the question is not owning any music per se, but being able to share with each other the newest and coolest playlists.
You're saying we can't have both. Neat trick, but we want ownership and we want to share what we own. We had both with Napster ten years ago. We will happily pay for both. Spotify provides half of the deal and fails. It's proprietary DRM ownership, and proprietary wall-garden sharing.
with this method I am not able to share it to others for immediate listening
Excuse me? Do you own your own taste and judgement and your own ears - or do other people own them for you? You are saying you cannot make these judgements - or do not want to. And why are you saying that waiting five minutes to share music is too long to wait to share? This sounds like a compulsive/obsessive behaviour.
You are a very strange person if you don't need to "own music", not typical of most people.
Nowadays playlists (with the capability of listening to it) are more preferred then the music themselves
Right. Only people who don't like music could think that. I guess you don't like music.
Finally, I know lots of people who are really looking forward to this client.
It amazes me as well to see how ignorant people are, people really need to wake up.
Some people here probably haven't used spotify and doesn't know what they are talking about.
Spotify doesn't have any competition to speak of, this is not wishful thinking, this is a fact.
Spotify stores the listened music locally in an encrypted cache, so it owns Shoutcasts.
It's laughably cheap. If you can't afford it, get a job!
Really looking fwd to this.
Just seen several tweets from iPhone users moaning about the lack of Spotify multitasking: can't listen and surf at the same time.
One was from someone who told me last week that multitasking was "the sort of thing only geeks care about".
Hahaha.
What goes around comes back around...
Unregistered wrote:Excuse me? Do you own your own taste and judgement and your own ears - or do other people own them for you? You are saying you cannot make these judgements - or do not want to. And why are you saying that waiting five minutes to share music is too long to wait to share? This sounds like a compulsive/obsessive behaviour.
Hey wise man, have you had a chance looking at those many Spotify playlist sharing sites? Just some examples:
http://sharemyplaylists.com/
http://spotifyplaylists.co.uk/
http://www.spotifyfriends.com/
and you can find many more with the help of Google. Why would someone operate such sites if there was no demand for? Anyway, I guess you don't get it. The new generation is based on online, virtual communities, with user generated content such as e.g. playlists. They do share playlist, its easier then sending over each other hundreds of tracks. And when everyone has Spotify subscription its easy. And it generates a network effect, more and more people will subscribe, to use then the playlist in a community.
And yes, for this new generation 5 minutes are long. Have you been recently at a party of young people? They don't torrent anymore, everyone is using Youtube for immediate listening. That is where again Spotify comes far ahead in picture then torrenting.
Unregistered wrote:It's DRM all the way, baby.Really??
Never in history did you need to subscribe to keep your collection. If you cancel your Spotify premium subscription you can only stream. You cannot take it anywhere. It is locked in a DRM service.
What an absolutely rediculous statement. Did you at all bother to get informed about this before you commented.
Your failure to understand that music "collections" are a thing of the past is the key point. Why bother "collecting" music at a VAST cost when you can have it all, instantly, forever.
Of course it is a DRM service but, and it is an important but, Spotify will not be the only one ot have this service! Therefore if someone else offers axactly the same service but cheaper you simply switch and listen to the same music from their servers instead.
The music doesnt change, just the service provider who allows you to "connect" to it.
Unregistered wrote:Sounds like an extortion racket to me.
Ten quid a month for millions and millions of tracks instantly available, with on and offline access compared to spending thousands and thousands on a music collection which may (just may) amount to a few thousand tracks sounds like a racket to you? You sound like a bit of a plonker who doesnt bother actually checking out what you are commenting on!
Tenoce, it's your head that's in the "Cloud".
On-demand streaming does not replace the desire to own music. It lives alongside it, and enhances it. I guess you don't remember the original Napster, nor have you ever used SoulSeek - where social groups both stream and share.
Go and look at some market research, you will have a better idea of what young people want. For 14-24 year olds:
* Music collections are rated higher than any other possession or service, including the internet.
* The average collection is 8,159 songs
* The average size of a CD collections is growing, not getting smaller from 2008
* Asked if they still wanted to "own music" with all these streaming services, 89 per cent yes.
Unregistered wrote:Asked if they still wanted to "own music" with all these streaming services, 89 per cent yes.
It gets worse! One stupid comment after another!
You can not take market research from the present to represent usage in the future. The people providing the answer to the market researchers have no frame of reference upon which to base their answers. They have not used the service, seen the service or understand the service, therefore they can not determine if they would want the service!
If you could go back in the time to the early 80's (before Sky) and conduct market research on whether people would pay a subscription service for television almost certainly they would say no. Fast forward 20 years and hey presto, mass market appeal.
Really, is that the best argument you can put forward? You can do better than that surely. BTW How about registering? Whats this unregistered business?
[quote="paulylaw"]If you could go back in the time to the early 80's (before Sky) and conduct market research on whether people would pay a subscription service for television almost certainly they would say no. Fast forward 20 years and hey presto, mass market appeal.[/quote]
Thanks for proving my point for me. New forms of consumption sit alongside older models, they don't displace them.
You said [bold]music collections[/bold] are not important to young people now, so they won't matter in the future. I've now destroyed that assertion using hard evidence of consumer demand. Your original argument has collapsed.
When you're older, you may get the hang of this internet thing....
Unregistered wrote:Thanks for proving my point for me.
Erm, No. I proved my own point! Do you actually read the posts before you comment?
Unregistered wrote:You said [bold]music collections[/bold] are not important to young people now, so they won't matter in the future. I've now destroyed that assertion using hard evidence of consumer demand. Your original argument has collapsed.
I never said music collections are not important to young people. Again, you comment before you think. Someone else made that point, not me, although there is some validity to this.
You didn't present a single original thought in the form of a coherent argument. You simply cut and paste some handy statistics from Google. Anyone can do that, I wouldn't take too much credit for that. An intelligent argument is formed by not just blabbing out statistics but rather analysing them by applying them to social trends and drawing a conclusion. In that you failed, quiet miserably frankly.
Unregistered wrote:When you're older, you may get the hang of this internet thing....
And this is what you call a reasoned argument? Not so impressive if you ask me 😉
Running Spotify while other applications are running on the IPhone
It is a pitty Apple do not allow applications to run in the background (except for there application) They say this is for quality control, but i reckon it might be for consumer control. I found another cool tutorial that could be usefull for some.
http://www.sugarbean.com/2009/09/running-spotify-in-background-on-iphone.html
I reckon the 3Gs is more than capable of running many applications simaltanously.
[quote="tenoce"]
I never said music collections are not important to young people.
[/quote]
Yes you did. Look:
[quote="tenoce"]
I guess you do not know the younger generation, they don't wanna collect the music, they wanna have it immediately. [/quote]
Read the market research of 15-24 year olds by the University of Hertfordshire on their music habits and desires. This evidence that destroyed your argument.
You have completely and utterly failed to justify your original argument. So you pretend you never made it. Were you this dumb at school, tenoce? Or are you still at school?
Unregistered wrote:Yes you did.
Erm, No I didnt. Someone with the username Tenoce did. My username is Paulylaw. You're really not very good at this are you? Again you have made yourself look a proper muppet by simply not checking your facts before you speak. That's not really a surprise though judging by your total lack of understanding of this issue overall.
Unregistered wrote:Read the market research of 15-24 year olds by the University of Hertfordshire on their music habits and desires. This evidence that destroyed your argument.
Again, no it doesn't. It completely confirms my argument. Seriously "Unregistered" are you capable of presenting a single original thought. All you have done is completely misrepresent the findings of googled studies and claiming that they somehow back up your completely flawed (non) arguments.
Unregistered wrote:You have completely and utterly failed to justify your original argument. So you pretend you never made it. Were you this dumb at school, tenoce? Or are you still at school?
Well, as Tenoce is not my username I would have no idea how they did at school.
As above you have further demonstrated your inability to get your facts right. And as before you have failed to present a single, intelligent and original thought and so have resorted to personal insults hidden behind an unregistered status.
You really are starting to look very silly now aren't you!
Tenoce has left the building - maybe because school has started again.
What were you blathering on about, Paulylaw? Oh, I remember:
[quote="paulylaw"]Your failure to understand that music "collections" are a thing of the past is the key point. Why bother "collecting" music at a VAST cost when you can have it all, instantly, forever.[/quote]
Because collections matter to people, they provide a value streaming services don't. People pay for that value. Collections are especially valued by the 15-24 age group. See the market research I linked to for roof.
You ignore the research because it destroys your assertion that "collections are a thing of the past". Got better research? Thought not.
Excited by this. I am a premium subscriber AND an avid CD collector. Love to use Spotify to discover new music. If I find something I love I'll order the CD from play.com/amazon.co.uk Otherwise I find Spotify to be brilliant at allowing me to discover new music for a very low cost (or free if you are not a subscriber).
Pandora radio and Spotify are not available at my country...
Have found tv243.com a great alternative for Music