Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Verge)   Whoever named Google's new Spotify killer should be dragged out into the street and shot   (theverge.com) divider line 56
    More: Followup, Spotify, All Access, Rdio, Google, Google products, free trial, switches  
•       •       •

7454 clicks; posted to Geek » on 16 May 2013 at 9:21 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



56 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-16 08:45:46 AM  
Usually when I search for All Access I have something else in mind.
 
2013-05-16 09:26:33 AM  
Spotify is the name of the company and the name of the service and the name of the application used to access the service. When your whole purpose in life is to do one thing, it's a lot easier to name.

The person who should be taken out and shot is whoever at Spotify didn't groom their company specifically to be bought by Google, instead of crushed by it.
 
2013-05-16 09:32:22 AM  
Who pays for music?

Youtube in the background.
 
2013-05-16 09:33:38 AM  

mccallcl: Spotify is the name of the company and the name of the service and the name of the application used to access the service. When your whole purpose in life is to do one thing, it's a lot easier to name.


Huh? Are you saying Google couldn't name their new service using just one or two words?
 
2013-05-16 09:34:25 AM  

mrlewish: Who pays for music?

Youtube in the background.


That's rumored to be going subscription later this year.
 
2013-05-16 09:35:56 AM  
*sigh*

*looks around thread*

*heavy sigh*

*rolls up sleeves*

Dammit.

Fine. I guess I'll get it started.

c.cslacker.com
 
kab
2013-05-16 09:36:03 AM  

digistil: That's rumored to be going subscription later this year.


And there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth, especially from folks who claim to be true artist supporters.
 
2013-05-16 09:36:45 AM  
wrong thread, sorry. Ignore me.
 
kab
2013-05-16 09:36:47 AM  

Snapper Carr: *sigh*


Good job picking the right thread, chief.
 
2013-05-16 09:40:21 AM  

Snapper Carr: wrong thread, sorry. Ignore me.


Honest question: How does that happen?
 
2013-05-16 09:43:47 AM  
Couldn't be worse than Knol.

I would have gone with Google Play Music All Access Super Happy Fun Time Rock n Roll Chieftain.
 
2013-05-16 09:44:50 AM  

digistil: Snapper Carr: wrong thread, sorry. Ignore me.

Honest question: How does that happen?


At the bottom, the geek section is just above the entertainment section. If one is distracted (as I was) by, say, doing a quick GIS in another tab, one might click the wrong headline since they are so close together.
 
2013-05-16 09:47:29 AM  
Why is google so hell bent on killing everything?
 
2013-05-16 09:51:59 AM  
Aside from the name being awkward, AllAccess.com already exists and it's a music-related news site. It's going to be tough for Google to pick up trademark rights there, unless they're going to buy the pre-existing AllAccess and their domain.

I would've gone with Google Listen. Or gListen.

images3.wikia.nocookie.net
/Wait, no, that's taken too.
 
2013-05-16 09:58:41 AM  
i1032.photobucket.com
They can still listen to their music in the street!
 
2013-05-16 10:09:34 AM  

mccallcl: Spotify is the name of the company and the name of the service and the name of the application used to access the service. When your whole purpose in life is to do one thing, it's a lot easier to name.

The person who should be taken out and shot is whoever at Spotify didn't groom their company specifically to be bought by Google, instead of crushed by it.


Spotify got bought up by the record labels.  They own a large stake in the success of the company and can control the value of music streaming services to some extent.  Apple tried to make a case that they reach such a large audience that they should get a price break on royalties compared to other services except since Spotify is in their back pocket and on EVERYTHING those kind of arguments hold no weight now.  This is a marked change from when iTunes took a large segment of the download market with very friendly terms for Apple.
 
2013-05-16 10:31:22 AM  
signed up this morning for the trial.  all my spotify songs are there plus all the ones that got taken down by spotify for whatever reasons over the time i've had it.

better sound quality, too.   if the 7.99  price holds true, i'm probably switching.

/sucks they don't have a stand alone app and it has to run in a browser window, but I'll live
 
2013-05-16 10:33:45 AM  

s2s2s2: Why is google so hell bent on killing everything?


what are they killing exactly?

works the same as spotify, plus you can upload your current music and have it available wherever you are (the app).   seems fine to me, but i guess your mileage may vary
 
2013-05-16 10:33:54 AM  

meatofmystery: signed up this morning for the trial.  all my spotify songs are there plus all the ones that got taken down by spotify for whatever reasons over the time i've had it.

better sound quality, too.   if the 7.99  price holds true, i'm probably switching.

/sucks they don't have a stand alone app and it has to run in a browser window, but I'll live


I read if you sign up by June 30, you'll get the $7.99 price for a full twelve months (more than fair IMO).
 
2013-05-16 10:44:17 AM  

meatofmystery: what are they killing exactly?

works the same as spotify,


They're attempting to kill Spotify.  The assertion is right in the headline.
 
2013-05-16 10:50:13 AM  

mrlewish: Who pays for music?

Youtube in the background.


People who want their favorite bands to make more music.
 
2013-05-16 11:08:09 AM  

12349876: mrlewish: Who pays for music?

Youtube in the background.

People who want their favorite bands to make more music.


Nah, they've already made the song I like, screw my favourite bands.
 
2013-05-16 11:16:12 AM  
I have to admit, and it's probably an indicator of my approaching flat lining, that out of Spotify, Google, and a couple of others, I find Rhapsody to have the least hip, least design porn UI (oh, excuse me, UX), but actually the easiest, most obvious UI to use.

Play song.
Stop playing song.
Add song to library.
Add album to library.
Add artist to library.
Add song to playlist.
Clear Queue.
Queue song.
Queue album.
Play artist's "radio"

I still find Google's interface pretty unintuitive.
 
2013-05-16 11:18:22 AM  

mrlewish: Who pays for music?

Youtube in the background.


8tracks.com for me. No commercials, unlimited playlists by people who actually love music.

/and no youtube jumping at work.
//easily distracted.
 
2013-05-16 11:23:04 AM  

digistil: mccallcl: Spotify is the name of the company and the name of the service and the name of the application used to access the service. When your whole purpose in life is to do one thing, it's a lot easier to name.

Huh? Are you saying Google couldn't name their new service using just one or two words?


Google Play is the name of their existing music brand.  All Access is the name of their streaming service, which is under the umbrella of Google Play.  So it is just using one or two words.  I don't see a problem with the name, All Access isn't catchy or anything, but it sends a direct marketing message to the potential customer what they're purchasing (access to further musical content).  A bad name would be either confusing or unrelated to what they're offering.
 
2013-05-16 11:24:03 AM  

Lumbar Puncture: I don't see a problem with the name


See the trademark problem above.
 
Slu
2013-05-16 11:34:02 AM  
I signed up for the trial.  I think it is pretty slick, but I have an Android phone.  I also prefer it be in the browser.  I don't need another app for a simple task.
 
2013-05-16 11:40:50 AM  
Meanwhile, as one of the few people who have an old Zune music account (now grandfathered into "Xbox Music") I get unlimited streaming of any song/video/album/artist on my phone, computers, and Xbox; can create and watch "smart DJ" mixes of related music & music videos; have my entire music collection cataloged, upgraded in quality and kept in the cloud; and get to keep 10 DRM free tracks a month.

What exactly, does Google's music service bring to the table that I don't already have?
 
2013-05-16 11:43:49 AM  

Snapper Carr: *sigh*

*looks around thread*

*heavy sigh*

*rolls up sleeves*

Dammit.

Fine. I guess I'll get it started.

[c.cslacker.com image 752x606]


LOL.  This needs to become the newest Fark meme, posting that picture in entirely wrong threads.
 
2013-05-16 12:14:54 PM  
My Zune died a year and a half ago. I got the IPod with the largest capacity. What I miss about the Zune service is that it mixed my current songs with some songs from Microsoft's  library. Itunes only uses my library. It was a good way to be exposed to new music. I'd like a service that does that. 1/2 my songs. 1/2 their genius/smart songs. Back to microsoft?
 
2013-05-16 12:32:09 PM  

LDM90: I would have gone with Google Play Music All Access Super Happy Fun Time Rock n Roll Chieftain.


Do not taunt Google Play Music All Access Super Happy Fun Time Rock n Roll Chieftain.
 
2013-05-16 12:53:21 PM  

Slaxl: 12349876: mrlewish: Who pays for music?

Youtube in the background.

People who want their favorite bands to make more music.

Nah, they've already made the song I like, screw my favourite bands.


I already like "Killer Queen" screw them + everybody = no "Bohemian Rhapsody" for you
 
2013-05-16 01:08:58 PM  
Spotify lets me stream plenty of music for free.  Google practically owns my soul, but I don't see why I would pay $10/month for something Spotify already does free.

That said, not a big fan of Spotify's interface... so if Google had a free, ad-supported option I'd be there in a second.

/Hint, hint
//to all the Google execs who read Fark
 
2013-05-16 01:18:12 PM  
I'm waiting for Samsung's music app: shiats
 
2013-05-16 01:26:18 PM  

12349876: Slaxl: 12349876: mrlewish: Who pays for music?

Youtube in the background.

People who want their favorite bands to make more music.

Nah, they've already made the song I like, screw my favourite bands.

I already like "Killer Queen" screw them + everybody = no "Bohemian Rhapsody" for you


I hope you got that I was joking. Nothing would upset me more than to miss out on fat bottomed girls.
 
2013-05-16 01:34:24 PM  

12349876: mrlewish: Who pays for music?

Youtube in the background.

People who want their favorite bands to make more music.


You don't know how royalties and music publishers work, eh?

Chances are the bands don't make very much on this sort of thing. The record companies make a lot, but the bands probably get a penny per play, if even that. Some of them signed away the right to such revenue in their contract.

If you want to support the bands, go to their concerts and buy their merchandise (shirts, hats, etc.) -- They make way more at that then they do with online radio services.

However, if you want to support the record companies and Google/Spotify/Rhapsody/Microsoft/Apple, then pay for an online service.
 
2013-05-16 01:43:13 PM  

Devo: My Zune died a year and a half ago. I got the IPod with the largest capacity. What I miss about the Zune service is that it mixed my current songs with some songs from Microsoft's  library. Itunes only uses my library. It was a good way to be exposed to new music. I'd like a service that does that. 1/2 my songs. 1/2 their genius/smart songs. Back to microsoft?


Sounds like you might actually get use out of this, then. Upload your own music, and you can play it, as well as mix in new stuff.
 
2013-05-16 01:49:54 PM  

Slaxl: 12349876: Slaxl: 12349876: mrlewish: Who pays for music?

Youtube in the background.

People who want their favorite bands to make more music.

Nah, they've already made the song I like, screw my favourite bands.

I already like "Killer Queen" screw them + everybody = no "Bohemian Rhapsody" for you

I hope you got that I was joking. Nothing would upset me more than to miss out on fat bottomed girls.


Or more Queen songs, right?

/rimshot
 
2013-05-16 02:52:41 PM  

ZeroCorpse: 12349876: mrlewish: Who pays for music?

Youtube in the background.

People who want their favorite bands to make more music.

You don't know how royalties and music publishers work, eh?

Chances are the bands don't make very much on this sort of thing. The record companies make a lot, but the bands probably get a penny per play, if even that. Some of them signed away the right to such revenue in their contract.

If you want to support the bands, go to their concerts and buy their merchandise (shirts, hats, etc.) -- They make way more at that then they do with online radio services.

However, if you want to support the record companies and Google/Spotify/Rhapsody/Microsoft/Apple, then pay for an online service.


Whoa.  You didn't understand my post did you.  I was explaining. why I BUY music from Amazon or Bandcamp rather than just stream all the time (though I do use the streaming as a glorified record store listening station and some back catalogs of bands I have bought).  It's about the best I can do since almost no one I like does live shows near me.  Many have never even been to America.
 
2013-05-16 03:18:04 PM  
"Google Play Music All Access" doesn't exactly roll off the tongue, does it?
 
2013-05-16 03:45:17 PM  

Faddy: Spotify got bought up by the record labels.  They own a large stake in the success of the company and can control the value of music streaming services to some extent.


Record labels only control what they have, which is a smaller and smaller percentage of content every year. It's the listeners that control the value of music streaming, and they only have so much time to listen to music in the day. They don't care what label the music is on, or if it's on one at all.

We're seeing our first generation of kids that never bought physical music in their lives. Record labels don't have much relevance in that world. Once "the classics" go out of style, or out of copyright, labels will be irrelevant forever.

I'm in my late 30s and haven't listened to label-produced music in months. Soundcloud is my primary listening source.
 
2013-05-16 03:58:14 PM  

Theaetetus: Lumbar Puncture: I don't see a problem with the name

See the trademark problem above.


You're right, that could be a problem, surprised that they wouldn't have Googled that first :)
 
2013-05-16 03:58:48 PM  

Telos: Spotify lets me stream plenty of music for free.  Google practically owns my soul, but I don't see why I would pay $10/month for something Spotify already does free.

That said, not a big fan of Spotify's interface... so if Google had a free, ad-supported option I'd be there in a second.

/Hint, hint
//to all the Google execs who read Fark


It's not just streaming.  You can tag the stuff for download as well and keep a copy.  I assume it's DRM'd like Zune, but there are ways around that.

/I've had a Zune pass for years now.  It's paid for itself many times over.
//Got a DLNA receiver, and the Zune software won't kick ass like the wife's airplay, so it's time to go full Google.
///You never go full google.
 
2013-05-16 04:28:34 PM  

Slu: I signed up for the trial.  I think it is pretty slick, but I have an Android phone.  I also prefer it be in the browser.  I don't need another app for a simple task.


Agreed, the only benefit I see in a dedicated desktop app is the ability to recognize multimedia keyboard functions (skip, pause, back). Maybe someone can just write a Chrome plugin to do it.

I'm liking it and unlike Spotify, the radio's pretty decent. Interface is good and Google's years of data mining seems to have paid off. For instance, I go into an artist and click on related, I'm actually finding other artists who I think sound similar to each other.
 
kab
2013-05-16 04:40:30 PM  

mccallcl: We're seeing our first generation of kids that never bought physical music in their lives. Record labels don't have much relevance in that world. Once "the classics" go out of style, or out of copyright, labels will be irrelevant forever.


As long as bands need up-front tour money, or advances to produce merchandise etc, pr to ensure a LOT of record reviews / word of mouth, advanced distribution, etc, labels will always have relevance.

Semi-related reading:

http://trustmeimascientist.com/2013/05/06/how-long-is-this-gonna-tak e- recording-an-album-in-the-21st-century/
 
2013-05-16 04:52:07 PM  

mrlewish: Who pays for music?

Youtube in the background.


Uh huh. You mean the same YouTube where users think that Bob Marley sang Don't Worry, Be Happy? No thanks, I'd rather get my music from professionals who are paid to know what they're doing when they distribute content.
 
2013-05-16 05:49:21 PM  

mccallcl: The person who should be taken out and shot is whoever at Spotify didn't groom their company specifically to be bought by Google, instead of crushed by it.


Well said. Yeah, people are eventually going to catch on, if they haven't already, that Google is trying to monopolize every aspect of media. Thing is, they're going to make some smart entrepreneus multi-millionaires in the process. The idiots at Groupon messed up by not selling when they had the chance. I think it was Groupon. Might've been one of the spin-offs. Point is: Google is Mighty. The cliche with the line over the E I can't type is: "If you can't beat them; join them." It rings true. No shame in it.
 
2013-05-16 07:07:59 PM  

s2s2s2: Why is google so hell bent on killing everything?


Here's the Google product recipe:

Step 1: Copy your competitor's product.
Step 2: Use your massive size to crush them.
Step 3: Announce that the product is canceled.
Step 4: [CLASSIFIED]
 
2013-05-16 07:14:23 PM  
Eh, screw all of them.  I wish Soundclick.com was doing better - found them thanks to Fark.  Sound quality could be better, but a hack musician like me can find slightly better hack musicians and learn from each other, all whilst getting tons of free music from musicians who share their tunes.
 
2013-05-16 09:51:32 PM  
I noticed they were giving a 30 day free trial and it's $7.99 a month if you sign up in the next week or so.. so I'm giving it a shot, so far so good.

To add I pay $3.99 a month for unlimited skips and no ads in Slacker, I'm willing to pay $7.99 for radio plus specific artists on demand....
 
Displayed 50 of 56 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report