Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Audiobooks on Spotify

timetoplayfair.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 269 posts

Re: Audiobooks on Spotify

#111

Post by mostlysimilar »

fleddr wrote: post #101
mostlysimilar wrote: post #23

No other company do I hate and love so much. I love their discovery algorithms and find new music through them so often. I look forward to my new Discover Weekly every Monday. But in every other way they drive me crazy. The UI is terrible and basic but I've learned to live with it. What I absolutely can't stand is inserting podcasts and audio books into the app with no option to opt-out. I get that they want to put t…

The funny thing is that they have many teams each doing a tiny part of the app's UI, and proudly advertise this model as a best practice: https://blog.crisp.se/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/SpotifyScal... Baffling how you can have so many engineers working on a music player, and it ends up worse than Winamp or Mediaplayer from 25 years ago.

Software interfaces in general have regressed severely since the mid-2000s. Media players are a perfect example. There was 10x more functionality in Winamp or Windows Media Player than we get in Spotify or Apple Music today.

What is going on? Why are things getting dumber? Are we just optimizing too hard for the lowest common denominator and the average user wants things to be dead simple?

I don't want to believe software has to be this basic. As software has become mainstream I think we've created a self-reinforcing myth that it has to be simplistic for people to want it. I think we can afford to ask users to think for a couple of seconds about the interface they're using.

Re: Audiobooks on Spotify

#112

Post by Maxburn »

smoldesu wrote: post #95
Maxburn wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you accept money from an advertiser and say something they don't like they can threaten to pull funding. Sort of like how none of the us "news" media will say anything against pharma, sponsored by phizer! Direct support of shows by listeners is a much more honest relationship and liberating for podcasters but there is nothing in PC2.0 saying you have to use these features, it is simply enabling an alternate fundin…

How is direct support limited in a traditional podcasting model, though? Nobody is forced to accept advertisements for their podcast. If you do, that comes with a risk that someone will stop paying you. With traditional podcasts you can still embed Paypal accounts/Bitcoin wallets if that's what you want. I just fail to see how Podcasting 2.0 is a significant change over Podcasting 1.0. Everything you've listed alread…

Paypal deplatforms people. They also don't have a way to stream revenue as you play.

I'm not a great ambassador for it but they are building the infrastructure to accomplish the streaming payments, boosts, cross platform chat, podping to get immediate notifications and reduce wasted polling, and a whole bunch of standardized metadata.

By the way the streaming payments also have value splits to support the show hosts, app used to play it, hosting platform, a guest that happens to be on that episode, etc, etc. Whatever they want. It's really impressive and no way can paypal match this.

Re: Audiobooks on Spotify

#114

Post by pwinnski »

kenjackson wrote: post #87
JadoJodo wrote: post #2

Does anyone else take issue with Spotify branching out into other arenas (e.g., Podcasts, TV, Audiobooks, etc.)? I'm honestly kinda tired of all of these services trying to gobble up any slightly related industry. I subscribe to Spotify to listen to music, not podcasts. My podcasts arrive using a different app with the backing of the RSS standard, not Spotify's internal standard. I don't want to get a subscription co…

Isn't it the case with almost every subscription service that there are aspects of it that you don't make use of? I feel like every subscription I have, from cellular to cable to Netflix, there's stuff I don't use that is part of the subscription. E.g., I don't watch horror movies, but apparently Netflix is still making them. Maybe I should take issue with it, but it just feels so mundane to me.

You're talking about genres, which is a different scenario.

This is more like Netflix raising prices for streaming subscribers to fund a new video-game studio. The fact that some people might enjoy both doesn't make them anything like the same thing.

Re: Audiobooks on Spotify

#115

Post by nerdjon »

waboremo wrote: post #110
nerdjon wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If apple opens the floodgates allowing these purchases outside of this option, why would a company give apple's option to consumers? Apple enforcing it is the only reason as a consumer I don't have to deal with park patterns for many of the apps I use. Which is a good thing for consumers

You mean Apple would have to be competitive regarding their own services for once? Actually have it make financial sense and provide a seamless experience for companies so they're encouraged to use it rather than forced? No... that can't be a good thing for consumers.

Are we talking about the same thing here?

I am talking about payment services. Most companies will do everything they can to screw over the consumer. Especially once they have you in a subscription.

As a consumer I would rather these companies be forced to not do shady practices and have to conform to a uniform way of purchases and subscriptions.

I have been in too many meetings about "User Retention", if given the chance very few companies will choose to loose the ability to bash the user over the head with "are you sure you want to cancel" or "please call to cancel".

Apple forces it.

Edit:

Put Another Way: Apple giving developer the choice of wether or not to use their system removes MY choice as a consumer to avoid scummy business practices (Which are often not on display until you no longer want to do business with them).

Re: Audiobooks on Spotify

#116

Post by smoldesu »

Maxburn wrote: post #112
smoldesu wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is direct support limited in a traditional podcasting model, though? Nobody is forced to accept advertisements for their podcast. If you do, that comes with a risk that someone will stop paying you. With traditional podcasts you can still embed Paypal accounts/Bitcoin wallets if that's what you want. I just fail to see how Podcasting 2.0 is a significant change over Podcasting 1.0. Everything you've listed alread…

Paypal deplatforms people. They also don't have a way to stream revenue as you play. I'm not a great ambassador for it but they are building the infrastructure to accomplish the streaming payments, boosts, cross platform chat, podping to get immediate notifications and reduce wasted polling, and a whole bunch of standardized metadata. By the way the streaming payments also have value splits to support the show hosts,…

> Paypal deplatforms people. They also don't have a way to stream revenue as you play.

Then don't use them. PayPal is not intrinsically linked to Podcast 1.0, it's just an example of how you can use any payment (including crypto) without upgrading to Podcasting 2.0 or whatever. Adding YouTube style feature is something, but personally seems like a lot of hubbub for little payoff.

None of this strikes me as an upgrade over RSS, even still. XML trumps the Blockchain for this sorta stuff.

Re: Audiobooks on Spotify

#117

Post by pwinnski »

waboremo wrote: post #109
r2222 wrote: post #91

Yeah the App Store rules suck and that’s all on Apple, but I find it a bit silly for Spotify to repeatedly act surprised about them. It’s the same cycle: Spotify wants go around App Store rules → Apple says no → Spotify fires up the timetoplayfair dot com with slightly tweaked text to fit whatever issue they have this time.

How else are they going to challenge the status quo? I'm confused by people acting shocked and appalled every time any other company brings up issues with the status quo. Spotify wants to get into Audiobooks, Apple won't let them, Spotify wants to make a social ruckus so people are aware of who to blame and to demand change. Before you consider the idea they should just quietly try to push regulation, consider withou…

> Apple won't let them

Not true at all. Apple's rules haven't changed in ages, they've defended them against Epic in court, and Spotify knew what they were when they started down this road, just like they knew the last couple of times they've tried to argue with Apple publicly (they're 0-for-2 so far, last time I checked).

Spotify can get into Audiobooks in multiple ways, they just don't like any of them. Apple isn't stopping them, they're just requiring their usual cut on IAP, and enforcing the usual rules. As usual.

Re: Audiobooks on Spotify

#118

Post by ggrelet »

techsupporter wrote: post #32
crazygringo wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no issue with it business-wise -- if they don't, they'll eventually die because a podcast/audiobook app expands into music. I just have a major issue with it UX-wise. I wish podcasts and audiobooks were their own separate apps. I've totally given up even trying to understand Spotify's UX anymore. I always eventually manage to play what I want through some combo of scroll/filter/search/history but I just feel l…

> While I'm wishing, I've always wished they'd separate classical music into its own app too... For what it's worth, a lot of Spotify's customers agree with you and have made third-party apps that try to do this. (I only know they exist but not how good they are since classical music is not my thing. But I kind of understand where classical music fans are coming from since a lot of electronic music, especially earlie…

Do you know anything similar for electronic music ?

Re: Audiobooks on Spotify

#119

Post by pwinnski »

fleddr wrote: post #105
sdfhbdf wrote: post #69

Quoting from the page: > TLDR: Apple rules mandate a cumbersome Audiobooks purchasing process This is very much a lie. Apple’s way is the easy way - use IAP. And it seems that like with facebook [1] they’re trying to apply the rules evenly to everybody. Spotify religiously denies using Apple’s In App Payments. The attempt to send emails on how to purchase audiobooks is their sneaky way of bypassing the rules. They no…

Your argument is "they are the rules". I think the point is that the rules are anti-competitive, user-hostile, extractive.

Not GP, but I think the argument was: "IAP is easy and simple and secure and well-known, and should be used." Spotify is acting as if Apple is blocking them in many different ways, but all would be solved if Spotify would use IAP, which is super-simple for users, but doesn't make Spotify as much money.

Re: Audiobooks on Spotify

#120

Post by [deleted] »

pwinnski wrote: post #117
waboremo wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How else are they going to challenge the status quo? I'm confused by people acting shocked and appalled every time any other company brings up issues with the status quo. Spotify wants to get into Audiobooks, Apple won't let them, Spotify wants to make a social ruckus so people are aware of who to blame and to demand change. Before you consider the idea they should just quietly try to push regulation, consider withou…

> Apple won't let them Not true at all. Apple's rules haven't changed in ages, they've defended them against Epic in court, and Spotify knew what they were when they started down this road, just like they knew the last couple of times they've tried to argue with Apple publicly (they're 0-for-2 so far, last time I checked). Spotify can get into Audiobooks in multiple ways, they just don't like any of them. Apple isn't…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN