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

The audacity of Apple Podcasts

basta.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 327 posts

Re: The audacity of Apple Podcasts

#91

Post by makeitdouble »

tokamak-teapot wrote: post #35
voytec wrote: post #28

I remember having an iMac with 3TB hard disk on which I stored all my CDs ripped in an lossless format. iTunes had an option to stream the library to local network and since this iMac was on 24/7, this was a perfect solution for me to have an audio-NAS and also kind-of remote streaming when I was connecting via VPN to my home network. Than there came Tim Cook's "upgrades": OS X was renamed to macOS, iTunes to Music,…

Apple seem to believe what you’re talking about is supported via Home Sharing [1]. I have attempted to get this to work with a little success but I wonder if it was too little too late for you? [1] https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT202190

Home Sharing covers some of it, but the limitations of requiring everything physically on the same network and logged into the same Apple ID sound way more stringent.

Even for a family for instance, it means they'd all have to share the same ID, which would be a royal PITA, especially if you're setting parental controls for the kids.

Re: The audacity of Apple Podcasts

#92

Post by filoleg »

makeitdouble wrote: post #88
filoleg wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I upload a podcast to Apple, it's physically inaccessible unless you have a Mac or an iOS device. Unless I am misunderstanding your claim, this is not true. You can listen to Apple Podcasts using iTunes for Windows. You can also listen to them on Android. But dealing with it on Android is indeed annoying, because it requires downloading podcasts in itunes on your desktop, and then manually transferring them to y…

> requires downloading podcasts in itunes on your desktop, and then manually transferring them to your Android phone after finding the locally stored files. TFA says they're DRMed, are they still readable on a random android client just by moving the files ?

That part of TFA confused me as well, because I just tested it out on my Win10 desktop, and it worked effortlessly.

I didn't even have to search for the local files. iTunes had a nice "Show in Windows Explorer" button next to the episode I downloaded, which opened a directory with the mp3 audio file for the episode (neatly tagged and named and all). I opened it with VLC and confirmed that the playback works perfectly fine.

Disclaimer: I haven't tested the part with transferring the file to an Android device specifically. But if an mp3 audio file plays fine in any third-party media player on Windows, I think it is safe to assume that it would play fine on Android as well.

Re: The audacity of Apple Podcasts

#93

Post by pfranz »

voytec wrote: post #28

I remember having an iMac with 3TB hard disk on which I stored all my CDs ripped in an lossless format. iTunes had an option to stream the library to local network and since this iMac was on 24/7, this was a perfect solution for me to have an audio-NAS and also kind-of remote streaming when I was connecting via VPN to my home network. Than there came Tim Cook's "upgrades": OS X was renamed to macOS, iTunes to Music,…

I think what you experienced is a shift in philosophy at Apple and rot by low maintenance. In the early 2000s Apple's approach seemed to be having your computer be "the hub" and things could sync or stream from your computer (like your iPod requiring a computer). That seemed to cause problems when you had multiple computers, take your devices away from home, requiring your computer to be on and connected, requiring you to own a computer to use devices, etc. They seemed to abandon that for awhile and later shift to the cloud being the hub...along with ongoing subscriptions.

Re: The audacity of Apple Podcasts

#94

Post by CharlesW »

karaterobot wrote: post #20
crazygringo wrote: post #15

> You could sign up to allow Apple to host your show and its audio (for a cool $20/year). In exchange, you could charge a subscription fee to your listeners... If you host your show with Apple, the only listeners you can have are folks with the Apple Podcasts app... The audio will be protected with DRM. The author presents this as "audacity" and bad... but doesn't it make perfect sense? If you're charging a subscript…

> Apple isn't taking away self-hosted RSS podcast feeds. It's presenting a separate paid subscription experience within its Podcasts app. No "audacity" about it. If you don't want that as a creator, don't use it. It sounded to me like the audacious part was that they don't make it clear that, once you sign up for this service, your users cannot get your podcast in any other way than using Apple Podcasts, and you will…

> It sounded to me like the audacious part was that they don't make it clear that, once you sign up for this service, your users cannot get your podcast in any other way than using Apple Podcasts…

You definitely can.

What the author said was, "What I learned is that Apple does not produce an RSS feed for podcasts that they host". But this is misplaced outrage on the author's part, since Apple has never produced RSS feeds.

Re: The audacity of Apple Podcasts

#95

Post by Daniel_sk »

paulette449 wrote: post #14

I listen to hours of podcasts each day (dog-walking, walking, running etc) and am fully immersed in the Apple ecosystem, but the Apple Podcast app is a turkey. Shallow feature set, bugs that never get fixed and an environment that doesn't evolve. It's software that can only be developed by a company that hates its user base. Ugh. I've been using and loving iCatcher for years [1]. [1] - https://joeisanerd.com

Apple Podcast app is pure garbage, it doesn’t even sync your library correctly between devices (e.g. marking something as played).

Re: The audacity of Apple Podcasts

#97

Post by freetime2 »

> 40% is nothing to shake a stick at. If you entered the podcasting space (like Spotify did) and captured 40% of users, you’d have an amazing product.

Didn't Spotify spend hundreds of millions of dollars to get exclusive rights to podcasts (Joe Rogan comes to mind)? That isn't very innovative, and it actively reduces the choice and competition in the marketplace.

Good for Joe Rogan though (allegedly) getting $200+ million out of Spotify.

Re: The audacity of Apple Podcasts

#98

Post by smithza »

janalsncm wrote: post #70
SllX wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you’re paying money, signing an agreement and uploading files, Apple isn’t tricking you: you’re not doing your due diligence OR you just don’t care if anyone outside the Podcasts app can listen (there are podcasters who for reasons—good or not—assume their reach is only about as far as iTunes/Apple Podcasts). This is crap, but it’s not because the deal Apple is offering to podcasters is crap: $20/year hosting and…

I can’t agree that signing an agreement means Apple gets to behave however they want within the confines of the law. A contract should not be something that one hides behind, but something that someone holds up as enshrining a shared, common sense understanding of an agreement. The fact that an Apple Podcasts user tried to do something that is 1) not unreasonable given other podcasting platforms and 2) not clearly un…

The "is-should" gap here is irrelevant. In our ideal worlds Apple "should" not hide the data and protect the audio files with DRM. Apple argues against this position with their business interest in mind.

Re: The audacity of Apple Podcasts

#100

Post by CharlesW »

> Here’s what’s fucked: once you’ve started using Apple for hosting, you’re stuck.

The fundamental misunderstanding is that Apple is not hosting the source RSS feed or media. As someone who operates a podcast hosting service, it's bizarre to me that the author doesn't understand this.

> This customer was pasting their Apple listing URL, but the import tool was not getting a feed back.

Of course, because it's not an RSS feed URL. And again, I'm shocked that this person doesn't understand the difference.

Post reply on HN