181–190 of 269 posts
I think Apple is being abusively extractive here. I also believe that Spotify's audiobook play will be bad for consumers and worse for artists.
Why would i buy a full price audiobook through Spotify when I can just use Audible?
I tend to only finish my audiobooks when they're on Spotify.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Spotify is saying the cut should be 0% for Apple?
The discussion hasn't been framed around what the percentage should be. It's been that Spotify disagrees with the entire model.
Spotify complaining about a “mandatory 30% tax” doesn’t mean they want zero tax. The people who dismiss questioning heavily centralized systems as only wanting anarchy are being purposefully misleading. Just like every other time that happens.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone with a few Patreon feeds, yes it is widely supported, and the few that don't support it do support URL parameters so a token works fine as well.
I Patreon (verb?) two podcasts and for both it was just a custom URL, I don't recall an option to use a password though maybe I missed the option.
I pay for a couple podcasts as well and I’m pretty sure they just sent me a custom RSS feed to drop into my player.
No way in hell am I going to fall for Spotify’s middle-manning attempts here. Hopefully they don’t manage to close off too much.
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…
>My podcasts arrive using a different app with the backing of the RSS standard, not Spotify's internal standard. I know a lot of people will disagree, but I think Spotify did a good job of handling the problem of "premium" podcasts. There's no way to make a "premium" podcast (one you charge people to access) that is fully compatible with the original open vision of podcasting. You can either pervert the original RSS…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Simple solution: enforce IAP as an option whilst allowing alternatives. The other option would be to not tax 30% on value Apple did not produce.
Apple does produce value though. They built the platform that allowed Spotify to even exist. And then they built the distribution channel that directed customers to Spotify. No different to Spotify itself.
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…
Afterall, Apple always had the Podcasts app and they make computers. So I don't think it's much of a stretch for Spotify. Perhaps if they branched into video I'd start to be concerned.
I quite like the fact that my music library and podcasts are all from the same app and I do find that Podcasts are less "in your face" than music.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"IAP is easy and simple and secure and well-known, and should be used." Is that better? I will never use a purchase method on iOS that isn't IAP. Never, and I'm not alone.
Who cares if you prefer IAP? Use IAP then. The discussion is not that IAP is bad, the discussion is that it's the only option, hence no option. You can't even talk of other options.
Yes, it's dumb that they're not allowed to link to the website for people to purchase directly. I would prefer that they handle it like "login with Apple," where you can support others, but must support Apple alongside. I would always choose IAP, others could click and go through the extra steps to buy directly from Spotify. But it also isn't that hard to deal with. Amazon does it for ebooks, and people still buy ebooks from Amazon by going to the website.
Spotify is throwing a fit because they don't want to even allow IAP. They want the advantages of being on iOS with zero consideration of Apple or iOS users. Apple is going too far, but if I have to choose, I side with Apple here, because Spotify is throwing a dishonest tantrum.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I think it's just levels of granularity. Podcasts and music are both audio entertainment. It's like Netflix adding TV shows to their lineup of movies. But the broader point is simply that in subscriptions to services you usually pay for some aspect of the service that you don't use and never have any intent to use -- and you can partition off that aspect of the service in a simple way (at least simple to you).
Movies, tv, and video games are all visual entertainment, but video games are different enough that most people are generally not happy about the idea of raising the price of Netflix to finance a video game studio. Art museums are visual entertainment as well, but raising the price of Netflix to build art galleries in select locations wouldn't fly well, either.
In this case, Spotify is doing anything but partitioning off podcasts. As many comments here reveal, most people are seeing podcasts pushed heavily in their music interface.