Live data from Hacker News

Apple Fires Back at Spotify for Asking for 'Preferential Treatment'

buzzfeed.com

221–222 of 222 posts

Re: Apple Fires Back at Spotify for Asking for 'Preferential Treatment'

#221
post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if Apple did open Siri up and provide a "music playing intent" for Siri like they did for messages, it would still be something like "play something by the Rolling Stones using Spotify". Is that much different from "open Spotify" and once Spotify is open "Play something by the Rolling Stones"?

Definitely yes. So, I have an iphone 6s -- and I use Siri a _lot_. Mostly I use it when I'm talking to friends or family... e.g. today someone told me he didn't know any of Dylan's songs... and I went "oh, well let me tell you of some!" Usually when you're talking to someone, and you spend half the time on your device suddenly disconnected from the person you're talking to, that makes things tough. Generally one shou…

That still didn't answer the question. If Apple added a "music playing intent" for Siri in IOS 10 like they are doing for other intents, the probable workflow would be

1. Activate Siri (hey Siri/button on your car, etc.) 2. Say "play a song by Bob Dylan using Spotify" 3. Spotify would get a message with a parsed command to play.

There is nothing stopping Spotify today from licensing a speech recognition engine and working with voice. You can already launch Spotify using Siri and after that let Spotify do its own voice recognition like Google does on iOS.

Re: Apple Fires Back at Spotify for Asking for 'Preferential Treatment'

#222

I'm curious, for the people in this thread who think Apple is within their rights, would you buy a DVD player that only played DVDs purchased through their own store, charged 30% to list in the store, and disallowed companies setting a different price that covers the 30% fee?

I'm pretty sure that brick and mortar stores retain more than 30% of the sales price of DVD's.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN