Microsoft Readies a Rival To Spotify
Barence writes "Microsoft has confirmed it is preparing to launch a music streaming service. The service will be a direct rival to Spotify, hugely popular in the UK (but unavailable in the US), which allows users to stream music for free in return for listening to around a minute's worth of advertisements every half hour. 'It will be a similar principle to Spotify but we are still examining how the business model will work,' said Peter Bale, executive producer of MSN." The article claims that the new service will boost the popularity of the Zune player, though how this is to happen is not explained. There doesn't seem to be a close tie-in between device and service, as there is between the iPod and the iTunes Store.
Just how relevant are they these days?
How we know is more important than what we know.
Launching their own in house streaming music service allows them to compete with both iTunes and Pandora in the music market, something they care currently getting their ass handed to them in. After all who would pay for music when they can just stream it for free on their Zune HD? It's a smart move on Microsofts part.
A Magic the Gathering Article and Forum Aggregator
Last.fm is good enough. There are others. I don't see the value in another service like theirs. Last.fm has no commercials. I wouldn't want to trade a commercial free site for one with commercials.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
Hopefully this will lead to Spotify speeding up their work towards a US launch.
which allows users to stream music for free in return for listening to around a minute's worth of advertisements every half hour.
I've had one of these for decades--it's called a radio.
So hugely popular I've never heard of it? Nor have two of my online contacts?
I've used Last.fm before they cut the UK off, and Sky.fm for streaming radio. I'm not sure what "Spotify" is.
In what is becoming an increasingly competitive marketplace, Mr Bale thinks Microsoft can bring "scale and a quality of product" to the music streaming scene.
is this the same microsoft i know?
Isn't this like trying to buy a ticket for the Titanic as it's going down?
Also...where's the outrage that a specific music service is available only in the UK? I live in the US! Information wants to be free! FREEEDOMMMMMMM.
I kid, I kid. Mostly though, I'm sick of seeing those comments from posters who can't access content because they live in a different country. WAAAAH.
Sent from your iPad.
That's your own interpretation of the sentence. Others, like myself, read it more like They aren't trying to do that stupid shit.
And I presume that the promotion of Zune, might be something like a free (popular/crappy/whocares) song a week if you have your Zune registered ("Free exclusive only for Zune owners"), or maybe a points system, for each X song you purchase for your Zune, you get X points towards a free song, or higher quality versions, etc.
why anything Microsoft fails is because they too strongly believe in DRM. the entire iTunes store for example is now completely DRM free, and all the market leaders right now are so DRM free. rental services have died a horrible death because DVD/CD media has become affordable enough not to pirate them (as in costing more time to download, then the money it costs to buy).. i put into account my minimum wage is at least 6euro's, put that over the time it costs to download 3 to 8 hours it's too expensive after about 2 hours. the same goes for subscription movies, it's a fucking waste of my money as its cheaper time wise to just get the dvd..
I think good music streaming services is what will get many pirates to pay for their music, be it by a subscription or by listening to Commercials. While there are now some good non-DRM music to buy online, I usually wish to listen to hundreds of new tracks each month. At around 1$/track this would limit my listening in a fashion I would not consider. Streaming music on the other hand could work, since I would listen to any amount of music available. It also has the advantage of the music being available immediately instead of in a very short time.
Currently I use Spotify, and it seem to be the best streaming service available as of yet. It is still however too limited both when it comes to the amount of music available and the functions of the client. Allowing plugins could fix most of the limitations of the client however. I really hope more and better streaming options becomes available.
Is it me, or lately MS looks like a fireman with a watering can, running around trying to put out fires everywhere?
I mean, Zune (iPod), Bing (Google), this (Spottify)... Lagging behind the competition a little, are we?
My 0.02 cents
My linux box keeps ripping some shoutcast stations 24/7. Everything I dislike is moved to a folder, a shell script adds them to a blacklist and another one deletes these tracks if they are played again (sort of local last.fm). :)
This way I keep getting new tracks in mp3 format which are more or less ready to copy to my mp3 player - and it is legal where I'm located
It is accessible to someone in USA.
What you need to do is use an UK based proxy to register, claim that you are from UK and use a postcode that is valid in UK. (The proxy needs to support using the POST method to get the registration form sent.)
After you have registered, you can log in and use the service from anywhere without further need for proxies. I did this a while ago and it is really worth testing out.
As a related note... Spotify doesn't have an Linux client but the windows client works very well under Wine. (Or well, in theory. I'm having some ALSA relate problems but I'm pretty sure that the cause is my Wine configuration.) It also has a mac client.
So why should i use this instead of lastfm which features no adverts per half hour of music
The Apple reference is justified here - MSN spokesman claims new project will benefit Zune, but the two are not closely tied. Summary then cites an example of where a strong tie between device and service has benefited another company in a comparable situation.
Seems like a desire to attack Apple/Slashdot/both has clouded your reading comprehension.
Already persuing a streaming service right after making a big announcement that we'll be able to listen to last.fm from our Xbox 360s?
This is like all their music stores/PlaysForSure that have come before, where they announce one thing, and then drop it because some exec in another department wants to do a similiar project.
"We need to get over this notion, that, for Apple to win... Microsoft must lose." - Steve Jobs, 1997
You must be pirating music. The MPAA/RIAA (or your local equivalent) will be knocking on your door shortly.
Seriously, some people out there (Music publishers are you listening) would like to make using bittorrent akin to proof that you are illegally downloading music. They can see no legal reason for this type of application.
Then AFAIK, some ISP's throttle Bittorrent use as a sop to the Music/Movie biz for the above reasons.
I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
I know the story's only a rehashed press release, but this service seems to do precisely nothing that Spotify doesn't. So what would I want with it?
...is that will use Silverlight. My initial reaction to this was "My God, it will suck: it won't be cross platform". Then it occurred to me - Silverlight is cross-platform. So not only would this allow MS to target a larger market, it would get SL on to a huge amount of machines. Oh, and it could be an additional 'pull' factor for Windows: You get free streaming, but you can only download (onto a device) if you have a Zune. And you can only use the Zune if you have Windows... or some such strategy like that
Obviously this is only my personal prediction, but I'm personally expecting this to be an offline app with embedded Silverlight stuff. Either that, or a .NET app (but I'm uncertain on that - what's the status of Mono with OS X?)
The only way they will make the Zune less unpopular, is when they give it away. (I really couldn't say 'more popular' - and I still can't keep a straight face)
I have a suggestion for a brand: "StreamsForSure" and then it will not play on a Zune, and after 3 years it will be abandoned... OK, I admit PlaysForSure was some prior art.
30 minutes of Vista ads followed by 'Against The Wind', then 'Free Bird', and back to Windows ads. No thanque.
I read it as GP, probably too used to slashdot summaries trolling, but I think MS will been keen to avoid behaving like apple because anything even close to the lockin that apple use on their portable products would definitely land MS with an antitrust suit.
IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
Because someone at Microsoft feels the need to answer every existing web service with one of their own, they will ultimately fail.
This strategy is ludicrous and speaks volumes about the corporate mentality at the software giant. This "we must have our hand on the top of every arena" mentality will be their downfall. They are spreading too thin and have lost sight of their purpose. When you try to compete with everyone, you compete with no one.
They're using their grammar skills there.
Err, my previous comment was obviously intended for the AC, not yourself.
Promote a free song? You mean like Apple has been doing for several years now? Their Single of the Week.
http://www.apple.com/itunes/features/#discoveringmusic
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
I hope they become successful with this project, but not in the "Let's-create-PlaysForSure-just-to-lure-them-in" kind of way.
Or else why do quite a few sites that you access with Moonlight refuse to play but direct you to download Silverlight.
Duh! If I was accessing it using Moonlight I conld not install Silverlight on the same Operating System.
Ok, that is Microsoft's explanation of 'interoperability' so it is fine and dandy.
I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
I'm all for competition, but previous music efforts by Microsoft have been hilariously bad. This interview is comedic gold for cluelessness. An actual Q&A with Hugh Griffiths, Head of Mobile at Microsoft UK:
why not build an app for it, and sell it on the itunes store?
there's no reason to tie this to a single product. if they are making money off of one advertisement per half hour per user, then it should hold that raising the number of users significantly would also raise their profits.
who cares if it's from microsoft or apple? if the service is good, and can attract enough users to survive, then it could be a good product.
If you think about it, they target multi platform things.
If you only use Google services, Last.fm, Youtube like flash video hosting sites, why would you need Windows for? Netbook vendors proved it until they probably had a call from MS reminding their usual business is owned by Microsoft pyramid scheme.
Their real panic is about web applications/services which works anywhere. It is absolutely related to panic since there is no point doing another jukebox service. Last.fm owns it. They were clever doing the thing open source, multi platform, documented and they now enjoy it. My Nokia E65 can stream last.fm from an 3rd party instant messenger. Can you imagine the degree of the compatibility? 3rd party instant messenger has SDK (Fring BTW), last.fm has sdk too. So, one can code a plugin for it using its SDK with last.fm SDK&API.
Someone really buries his head to sand in this already crazy scene which nothing which doesn't tie to some standard and multi platform succeeds.
imeem has been doing something similar for a long time - supposedly it was started by some ex-napster people and has basicly turned into napster in a browser, where people can share any music by uploading it to the site, and anyone can listen to it. Advertising is all over the plance and is used to pay the labels/artist/lawyers.
OMG, Can anyone here post without a clue??
Silverlight is the runtime (think: JVM) of course you can't have a windows JVM and install it on Linux. That's stupid.
It's not the Silverlight runtime thats cross platform, it's whatever apps you build for that platform that makes it portable.
Let me break it down for you:
Silverlight Runtime ~= JRE
Silverlight Runtime ~= Moonlight runtime
These runtimes only runs on the platform it was built for, i.e. you can't run a windows JRE, on OS X, an OS X jre on Linux, etc, etc.
Silverlight .xap ~= Java applet .jar .xap ~= Flash .swf
Silverlight
The exact same .xap will run *NOW* on Silverlight+Windows/IE/FF/Chrome or Silverlight+OSX/Safari/FF
That my friend is what we call cross-platform, the same .xap I developed with VS.NET (or eclipse: www.eclipse4sl.org) will run unmodified now on OSX and is likely to run on Moonlight+Linux.
Once Moonlight is feature complete and all tests pass, the exact same .xap will run on Moonlight+whatever platform moonlight supports.
The state I was describing is where the site you are trying to get the file from checks to see what browser you are using and what version of Silverlight you are using. As (AFAIK) Moonlight reports this differently the servers thinks it can't send the data for display and redirects you to Microsoft to download the latest version of Silverlight.
Ther are blogs that go into this quite clearly. However I have not heard much about this recently. This might be fore several reasong including, people giving up using moonlight, the sites being changed to accept moonlight as a valid display susbsystem as well as silverlight . I am sure that there are other. I don't know as I rarely visit sites (since I encountered the above situation) that use either (or heavy flash for that matter). I won't install Silverlight on my Mac either. I just don't need it.
Still, I don't call the above situation interoperable at all. As I say, it might not be a problem any longer.
I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.