71–80 of 114 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because iTunes is the only way to get stuff onto your iPod/iPhone.
Not entirely true. I have been using Winamp to load my iPod for a few years now. Yes Winamp is still around and it still whips the llamas a .
Shazam: music discovery while mobile
KEXP Twitter feed: music discovery while streaming at work
Amazon: one-click purchase
Clementine: Linux media manager including iPod sync
AllMusic: artist research
Someone has to say it: why do people keep using it? If it's not doing the job it's supposed too, or worse, actively deleting your music it's time to scrap it!
Because iTunes is the only way to get stuff onto your iPod/iPhone.
When I was a young teenager in the early nineties I dreamt about having all the worlds music available to me via the internet. This is more or less the reality today. Access beats ownership anyway IMO.
Now, it is quite likely that you have no interest in at least the vast bulk of those, because they're obscure bands from my youth, live recordings of acts you don't care about, experimental music from the 80s, etc.
But rental access to the RIAA machine is a far, far cry from "all the world's music".
As for access, well. To each their own. I subscribe to the cliche that if you don't own the substrate, you don't own the data, and it can go away against your wishes. Now, Spotify an friends don't seem to play games like the studios do with Netflix, but that's almost certainly a matter of a business environment that doesn't encourage it, not "dedication to serving music lovers" or whatever.
It isn't that I need to "own" music. I don't know what exactly that's even supposed to mean in a world of bullshit IP laws that make less sense daily. It is that bits on your own platter is the only way to ensure your own continued access. And again, maybe you don't care - maybe the menu is more important for you than the particular flavors on it. But I know I'm not the only one who likes listening to things that are utterly unavailable on any service, for streaming or "purchase".
I hate to be rude but this author is a dumbass. In big bold letters he has "On a basic level, I don’t have a music collection anymore because Apple made it too hard and frustrating to maintain one." when instead it should read "I didn't take care of my own music library and instead left it to a third party who didn't do what was in my interest."
I currently use MusicBee and love it. It's somewhat lightweight and its tagging tools are great. I've also used Media Monkey for a few years and that also has great tagging tools, but it's not as lightweight as MusicBee.
I only ever use iTunes for purchasing songs I can't get via other channels such as b-sides or whatever.
When I was a young teenager in the early nineties I dreamt about having all the worlds music available to me via the internet. This is more or less the reality today. Access beats ownership anyway IMO.
I don't understand why you say access beats ownership. Do you think this only about music? Or books? Or movies? If so, do you apply it to other things in your life? Do you own a car, or do you only rent? How about your home? Is it better to rent, or buy a place to live? Clothes? Why buy a pair of jeans, when you could pay a monthly fee to have new jeans delivered to your house and return the (month) old ones? For me,…
If I could I would rent everything. Some things I would rent for a long time others for a short.
But each to their own of course.
When I was a young teenager in the early nineties I dreamt about having all the worlds music available to me via the internet. This is more or less the reality today. Access beats ownership anyway IMO.
Except it isn't all the world's music. I have literally thousands of recordings that you can't stream, because they aren't available. Now, it is quite likely that you have no interest in at least the vast bulk of those, because they're obscure bands from my youth, live recordings of acts you don't care about, experimental music from the 80s, etc. But rental access to the RIAA machine is a far, far cry from "all the w…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Streaming Music in the cloud is not going anywhere. Not sure why that would change that? There have never been as much access to music as there is today. It's a good thing.
Price conflicts. The streaming system is obviously worthwhile, but we haven't negotiated a price point where users, streamers, and artists are all willing to play ball. At the moment, it seems like someone always has to take a loss, and the rationalization might be ugly.
When I was a young teenager in the early nineties I dreamt about having all the worlds music available to me via the internet. This is more or less the reality today. Access beats ownership anyway IMO.
I'm sympathetic to this (well, if I trusted access to continue uninterrupted and offline), but for me we're nowhere near there yet. Anyone with sufficiently unusual music tastes can't possibly get their content via 'access'. And that's not a high bar - even tame interests like EDM, jam, or jazz are completely unsolved via access in my experience.
So there are many ways to look at this.
I've used it as a compete replacement for iTunes with the exception of when I want to add music to my iPhone.
[1] www.coppertino.com