Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Last.FM To Require Subscription For Mobiles and Home Devices

Posted by Soulskill on from the if-thine-foot-offend-thee,-shoot-it dept.

Hummdis writes "If you, like so many others, listen to Last.FM on your mobile or home entertainment devices, then you're going to need to pay for this once-free service effective February 15th. It remains free to listen on the Last.FM website, Xbox Live, Windows Mobile 7 phones and the desktop app, but if you want to continue to listen on Android, your Blu-ray player, or any other device, you'll need to spend the $3.00 per month to be able to do so."

173 comments

  1. Died when they dropped Canada by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Last.FM died for me when Canadians needed to start paying while Americans didn't.

    1. Re:Died when they dropped Canada by kent_eh · · Score: 2

      Ahh... I was wondering why this was news..
      Apparently it's not news or stuff that matters until it affects the USA.

      Not that it affected me much, I just tossed my MP3 player back on the charger and carried on.

      --

      ---
      "I can't complain, but sometimes still do..." Joe Walsh
    2. Re:Died when they dropped Canada by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      "Apparently it's not news or stuff that matters until it affects the USA."

      Err...well, Slashdot.org IS a US centric website/forum you know...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    3. Re:Died when they dropped Canada by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Err...well, Slashdot.org IS a US centric website/forum you know...

      Err... no, it's not.

    4. Re:Died when they dropped Canada by cayenne8 · · Score: 2
      Actually it is. If you go to slashdot.org/faq and look under the editorial section you'll see:

      "Slashdot seems to be very U.S.-centric. Do you have any plans to be more international in your scope?

      Slashdot is U.S.-centric. We readily admit this, and really don't see it as a problem. Slashdot is run by Americans, after all, and the vast majority of our readership is in the U.S. We're certainly not opposed to doing more international stories, but we don't have any formal plans for making that happen. All we can really tell you is that if you're outside the U.S. and you have news, submit it, and if it looks interesting, we'll post it. "

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    5. Re:Died when they dropped Canada by mattcsn · · Score: 1

      Canadians can't get it streaming on Android at all, even if you have a paid account. It's about mobile broadcast licensing being different from desktop streaming, apparently. Frankly, it sounds like a load of horseshit.

      I'm not losing any sleep over it anymore, though. I canceled my lastfm subscription entirely after that and never looked back. Three bucks per month was worth it to me, but only as long as streaming worked on all devices for which there's a working client.

    6. Re:Died when they dropped Canada by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 1

      Yes, according to the labels, the bits & bytes you receive on a mobile device are magical and different then the ones you receive on a desktop device....

  2. Pandora it is then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Good call, dopes..

    1. Re:Pandora it is then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually paid for the pandora sub because I thought they were awesome for offering so much for free. Cant say I'm feeling the same way about last.fm...

    2. Re:Pandora it is then by xtracto · · Score: 1

      Ahhh Last.FM, another service that has become worse and worse with the time.

      When I first started using last.fm it was possible to create a radio station by specifying two or more artists. The actual music played was quite good. Then after some time, Last.FM had to break that feature constraining the radio creation to only one artist. Then they removed the ability to play the free radio outisde USA,, UK and Germany. Additionally, I kept getting more and more unrelated (and crappy) music after a very short time listening to a station. It seems the selection of Last.FM music is quite small in Speed and Progressive Metal.

      Nowadays I use Grooveshark for my music needs and could not be happier.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
  3. Last.Time.I.Use.Last.FM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is all

    1. Re:Last.Time.I.Use.Last.FM by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      Yep...I'd just recently discovered them and didn't really see much difference between them and Pandora.

      I sometimes throw one or the other one while at work with the headphones on...and it is ok for that.

      However, from time to time...it is hard to get signal, etc. And the time or two I tried to plug in and use it in the car was less than pleasant with all the dropouts.

      A fun toy if you're sitting in one place...but not something that works consistently enough to pay for.

      On the other hand...I can see that putting ads on the last.fm iPhone app like Pandora does is pretty useless, I mean.. who looks at the ads?

      Heck, the screen blanks out after a few seconds to conserve battery power while it is playing. Who clicks the screen to have it come on just so you can see an ad?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re:Last.Time.I.Use.Last.FM by digitig · · Score: 1

      Yep...I'd just recently discovered them and didn't really see much difference between them and Pandora.

      You would if you lived outside the USA.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
  4. Fair Enough by artor3 · · Score: 1

    Content costs money. They've been providing it for free for a long time, and will continue to provide it for free in many cases. Asking a small fee to support their efforts hardly seem unreasonable. I already pay for Pandora (also $3/month) and it's well worth it.

    1. Re:Fair Enough by mywhitewolf · · Score: 1

      so why only slug particular users though? why not everyone? does it cost the company more money to host to android devices? i wouldn't think so, certainly no more than off the internet.. maybe its harder to survive on advertising income stream on android devices?

    2. Re:Fair Enough by alostpacket · · Score: 2

      Someone linked to this from the Ars article on the subject, seems quite relevant: How Much Do Music Artists Earn Online?

      --
      PocketPermissions Android Permission Guide
    3. Re:Fair Enough by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      There is less value to advertisers when you don't see the ads. Computer screen? Xbox? $$$ is higher per impression. Note why Hulu requires a subscription for your iPad, PS3, etc while it doesn't on the web. Different platforms effect the value of the ad displayed.

    4. Re:Fair Enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Content requires money.
      And $3 a month isn't too bad depending on the number of users and the fixed costs.

      However, entertainment costs are *way* too high given the huge glut of entertainment available. A fair price might be $1 per month.

      I know cable TV has gotten too high. Look a way for a second and it's $80 without premium services.

    5. Re:Fair Enough by exomondo · · Score: 1

      There is less value to advertisers when you don't see the ads. Computer screen? Xbox? $$$ is higher per impression. Note why Hulu requires a subscription for your iPad, PS3, etc while it doesn't on the web. Different platforms effect the value of the ad displayed.

      That argument would have merit if the subscription fee included WP7 phones, which it does not.

    6. Re:Fair Enough by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Content costs money. They've been providing it for free for a long time, and will continue to provide it for free in many cases. Asking a small fee to support their efforts hardly seem unreasonable.

      OK... fine then... as long as there is no advertising, a small fee is quite reasonable.

    7. Re:Fair Enough by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      Microsoft may have made a deal to negate the need for the fee on the Windows phone platform. Capitalism 101. Personally, I'll stick to Android, but some people may see it as a perk.

    8. Re:Fair Enough by sortius_nod · · Score: 1

      Quite interesting. Aside from the financial side, I think getting stuff played via internet radio and the like is more about exposure, though it is good to see that self-pressed CDs make the most for the artist (not that this wasn't obvious already).

      The problem is that you will earn a lot less by changing from free to pay for (even if you only charge $3 p/m) due to people's perception of value. You've already set the value of the service at free, to charge feels like the subscriber is getting ripped off. These internet radio stations do make money via advertising, so there is no need to charge.

      I have stopped using sites/services that have either changed what is available to non-paying subscribers or started charging for the service. I see my friends doing the same thing. It's better to make a little off a lot of users than make a lot of a few users. It's a lot harder to expand your user base if you charge for something they can get elsewhere for free.

    9. Re:Fair Enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe when they can make their app work, I'd consider paying for it. As it is the Ban button has been broken for many users for ages and they refuse to even acknowledge it. Fat chance I'd ever pay for it. Note, Zune Pass is effectively the same price if you consider the 10 free songs per month to be worth 10 dollars.

    10. Re:Fair Enough by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Great point, for you and the one other guy that bought a zune. To this day I still have not seen one in real life.

    11. Re:Fair Enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know Zune Pass works fine without a Zune, right? I don't have one, but during the trial I was able to make it work on my gaming PC (my only Windows rig) and my XBox 360 fine. The Kinect integration is kind of meh, I expected better, but you can get everything out of Zune Pass without a Zune that you can get out of Last.fm, save an Android app.

    12. Re:Fair Enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To this day I still have not seen one in real life.

      Yeah, and you're a whole fucking statistical universe, you are.

    13. Re:Fair Enough by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      The last part is the only one I would care about.

    14. Re:Fair Enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hulu's structure has more to with being a subsidiary of old media, whom think watching on TV screen cannibalizes TV viewers, than the value of the ad space.

    15. Re:Fair Enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They really are comparing apples to oranges there. First of all, they are assuming that it costs $1 to press a CD. Once you work in sleeves, printing album covers, etc it comes out to more like 3-4$/cd. And then there is distribution. Most self published artists can really only sell albums at shows. So, maybe two nights a week they will sell five to ten disks. This really depends on the band. But musics stores will absolutely not touch your self promoted disc... even an indie store.

      This isn't even including paying for studio time, etc to get the album recorded, mixed and mastered. This will likely run around 2-3 thousand dollars for a full length album of moderate production quality (I.E. of a quality that might get you on the local college radio station once or twice, but won't even get you into an indie record store unless you are friends with the owner.) The great majority of self published bands and performers never recoup their recording costs... it is considered the cost of doing something you love to do. Ticket sales are still a good proportion of income, with the chance of some coming through merch such as tshirts and whatnot. Most bands won't really even break even on this merch, either.

      If you disagree, name ten artists who have made a living largely on self published album sales for at least five consecutive years who weren't previously backed by a label and had no members who were in a band backed by a label.

      And before you get into talking about self recording: yes, it is powerful. I love recording with Audacity and working in ardour and rosegarden. And so do a million other people and that's why noone is going to make a living with it. The best I could hope to do is make a girl smile. And that girl would probably already be interested in me for other reasons. Or maybe impress a band enough for them to let me join.

    16. Re:Fair Enough by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Great point, for you and the one other guy that bought a zune. To this day I still have not seen one in real life.

      To this day, I have not seen a Slashdot user in real life. I suppose that must mean there are only one or two out there.

    17. Re:Fair Enough by blackest_k · · Score: 1

      For a product aimed at the general public, you would kind of expect all of us to have seen them on sale somewhere at some point.

      It's not like we don't have an interest in this type of thing, if it was commercial gear then it wouldn't be surprising but the zune is firmly aimed at consumers and it is not available for consumers to buy in Ireland and the UK at least.

      The Zune is a failed product, at least in this part of the world. Hopefully someone will know somewhere that sells them but i'm doubtful they have much presence anywhere outside of the usa.

      .

         

      --
      Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
    18. Re:Fair Enough by colin_young · · Score: 1

      Just to correct one point: Last.fm doesn't have advertising in the stream. The ads are on the website, which is still free. I wonder though, is it possible to listen via the web browser on your mobile device? Not an option for me since I deleted Flash from my Android and use my Squeezebox 95% of the time I listen to Last.fm, but it's an interesting possibility.

    19. Re:Fair Enough by colin_young · · Score: 1

      One thing to consider is that a track download or CD purchase is a one-time event, and then I can listen as much as I want (no matter how much the music industry might wish otherwise), while the streaming royalties represent an ongoing revenue stream for the artists. That said, comparing to Last.fm: low royalty CD = 400 plays high royalty CD = 1333 plays Amazon = 120 plays Self-pressed = 10,667 play Keep in mind those are per user.

    20. Re:Fair Enough by Methuseus · · Score: 1

      How can you possibly skip ads on iPad, PS3, etc? I can understand that for Pandora, or Last.FM, which are audio only streams (basically). But the ads before the video are still available for iPad, PS3, Wii, Xbox, etc. Like someone else said, it's all about the old media thinking that watching it through your computer is different than watching it on your other device. Even thought I can hook a computer to the TV to watch Hulu as well (which I already do).

      --
      Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, though I'm not yet sure about the universe. - A Einstein
    21. Re:Fair Enough by Methuseus · · Score: 1

      Well, I have seen them on sale lots of places, and lots of users bought them. Not your fault your corner of the world didn't have them. Go to Best Buy, CompUSA, Wal-Mart, and you find them right next to the iPods, at least near me.

      --
      Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, though I'm not yet sure about the universe. - A Einstein
  5. Ok, Next by bobjr94 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Shoutcast has thousands of streams, Pandora , Maestro.fm, if you have satellite radio you can listen for free online, there are hundreds of sites on Itunes radio, etc...Shouldnt be much of a problem to ditch them.

    1. Re:Ok, Next by Mike+Buddha · · Score: 2

      if you have satellite radio you can listen for free online

      Not on SiriusXM. $3 a month for internet or mobile access.

      --
      by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
    2. Re:Ok, Next by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can listen to local radio over the computer too. Where I live the government allowed too many fm stations (the band is super-crowded). Its closing in on 50 FM stations. I think many of them are owned by single companies (3-4 formats owned by company A, 3-4 formats owned by company B, etc). I'm not eating up bandwidth running software that's capturing data from my computer tuner card either. 50 stations to chose from... then like the parent posted, stream sources over the internet (shoutcast, etc), also streaming radio over satellite (about 200 stations there, again, with no bandwidth surcharge). LastFM is going away, OH No! I think I listened to them once. Imagine someone sitting on a beach on the ocean, charging for salt water. They own this section of beach, and if you want salt water there, then you either have to pay, or own a certain kind of "LAST FM" bucket... now replace salt water with songs, beach with internet, and this section of beach with their website. I think I might have a stroll down the beach.

    3. Re:Ok, Next by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      Shoutcast is hard to beat and when I'm driving I listen to XM nearly all the time. Between those two I get all the "radio" I need.

      If XM should raise their rates again, I may drop 'em.

    4. Re:Ok, Next by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Online streaming was free pre-merger, and until the first renewal after. Once any subscription was up for renewal it dropped the free online and allowed the separate $3/mo.

    5. Re:Ok, Next by Mike+Buddha · · Score: 1

      The low quality feed was free. The high quality feed always costed $3 a month. They got rid of the low quality feed altogether now. That was before the merger, though.

      --
      by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
    6. Re:Ok, Next by xtracto · · Score: 1

      THIS! Just some months ago I "rediscovered" shoutcast (I use to listen to several audio and video [ESS.tv] stations long ago). The web interface is quite good for inmediate listenting and the "Screamer Radio" client is great for listening and recording shoutcast audio.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    7. Re:Ok, Next by cwtrex · · Score: 1

      If you have a lifetime subscription, you have free internet radio streaming.

      They had, however, deactivated my account when they made the change to paid only for everyone else, but it only took a phone call and they reinstated it since otherwise it would be a violation of my contract.

  6. Bleh. by Aeternitas827 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Only reason I had the Last.fm app on my phone was because I could listen without either a) having to pay or b) getting stuck with a skip limit; though, to be honest, I haven't used it much as of late, being that I can get an actual decent radio station stream via TuneIn. Still sad to see it go this way though.

    --
    I don't post AC. I like my -1, Flamebaits. Trump/Sheen 2012 on the Batshit Insane ticket!
    1. Re:Bleh. by hammer_gaidin · · Score: 0

      I agree. But it looks like I'll continue to stick with my pandora.

    2. Re:Bleh. by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      if you're paying, might just as well go with spotify.
      it's a bummer though when services go this way, "free" in web browser, except if the browser is on devices z, y or x.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  7. So How Do They Know? by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 2

    So how do they know if you're on Android listing through your browser? Change the ID string to Internet Explorer (or Firefox if you can't stomach Microsoft anything) and keep on listening.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    1. Re:So How Do They Know? by tlhIngan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So how do they know if you're on Android listing through your browser? Change the ID string to Internet Explorer (or Firefox if you can't stomach Microsoft anything) and keep on listening.

      I'm guessing if you're doing it that way it's fine, but if you're using the Last.FM app itself, then you'll have to pay. If you leave it at default it'll just take you to the appropriate place to download the app. If you fake the browser ID you get the desktop page which can take forever to render and the flash thing can be as slow as anything (and thusly drain your battery faster).

    2. Re:So How Do They Know? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You need to access a page? Rhythmbox has last.fm support built-in and it doesn't render html at all.

    3. Re:So How Do They Know? by Timmmm · · Score: 1

      Flash reports what platform it is running on.

    4. Re:So How Do They Know? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shh! You're not supposed to tell them that...

    5. Re:So How Do They Know? by nschubach · · Score: 1

      I'm kind of curious if this will still work. What's to stop someone from creating an Android app that uses Rhythmbox's last.fm "method"?

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    6. Re:So How Do They Know? by bemymonkey · · Score: 1

      Problematic for mobile devices, where Flash players on web pages will stop as soon as you minimize them. :(

  8. Non-US alterantives by IDK · · Score: 2

    Last.FM died for me when Canadians needed to start paying while Americans didn't.

    That was also the case for europeans. Are there any alterantives to this for us non-us folks?

    1. Re:Non-US alterantives by bhcompy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Slacker radio is one of the best as far as I'm concerned.

      Personally, SomaFM is what I use for streaming, as it suits my needs for music that can play in the background while coding/gaming/whatevering. I only listen to actual music on the road, and I don't stream that.

    2. Re:Non-US alterantives by elsurexiste · · Score: 1

      Last.FM died for me when Canadians needed to start paying while Americans didn't.

      That was also the case for europeans. Are there any alterantives to this for us non-us folks?

      Grooveshark kicks *ss. The radio may not be so great, but I like it a lot.

      --
      I rarely respond to comments. Also, don't ask for clarifications: a brain and Google are faster, believe me!
    3. Re:Non-US alterantives by jemtallon · · Score: 1

      I use Grooveshark but they charge $3/mo for their mobile app as well. Pandora is still good and free, though

    4. Re:Non-US alterantives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      STOP LIVING IN LAME COUNTRIES.

      (I kid, I kid. But seriously. Stop.)

    5. Re:Non-US alterantives by I8TheWorm · · Score: 2

      Pandora moved to an hour cap per month right around the time I was at the Blackberry developer conference and met one of the Slacker devs. I checked it out and loved it.

      Since then I've tried other services but continue to use Slacker. They seem to get what people want.. .free service with commercials or paid service.

      The only downside is I can't find Trailer Park Troubadours or Sisters Morales (two bands I played with) on Slacker while I could on Pandora... but in due time I'm sure.

      --
      Saying Android is a family of phones is akin to saying Linux is a family of PCs.
    6. Re:Non-US alterantives by legoleg · · Score: 1

      Try http://jango.com/
      works in Russia :)

    7. Re:Non-US alterantives by Per+Wigren · · Score: 1

      Grooveshark costs money for the mobile version also...

      --
      My other account has a 3-digit UID.
    8. Re:Non-US alterantives by clang_jangle · · Score: 2

      I subscribe to both, last.fm and soma. At three dollars a month each, they're a fantastic bargain. With last you have to invest some time and energy into personalizing it, but in my experience it's well worth it. Just the other day I was thinking to myself, "never have I had access to so much good programming for so little money".

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    9. Re:Non-US alterantives by sortius_nod · · Score: 2

      But I don't live in the US...

    10. Re:Non-US alterantives by elsurexiste · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I thought he could meant the mobile version, but since Last.fm on my desktop only allows 30 useless seconds of music (at least on my country), he may have been talking about Last.fm in general. I would rather give redundant information than stay silent. :)

      --
      I rarely respond to comments. Also, don't ask for clarifications: a brain and Google are faster, believe me!
    11. Re:Non-US alterantives by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>Slacker radio is one of the best as far as I'm concerned.

      I just listen to standard AM or FM stations. Since HD multiplexing has arrived, most of them carry advertising-free channels which specialize in various formats (disco, club, alternative, album rock, etc).

      Here's the one I listen to while at work (since everything else is blocked):
      http://radiotime.com/station/s_52398/Mix_2_1065.aspx
      Or Radio Jackie in London - www.radiojackie.com/listennowpage.asp

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    12. Re:Non-US alterantives by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      I think I'll do that too. I still don't understand why Europeans must pay and USians must not. Sounds a bit unfair if you ask me, but well, there are no international jurisdiction on these kind of things. I think it compensates for having crazy things like the DMCA and software patents...

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    13. Re:Non-US alterantives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but steals your personal infos last i heard,

    14. Re:Non-US alterantives by bemymonkey · · Score: 1

      "We're Sorry
      Slacker Personal Radio
      is not available in your area.
      Unfortunately, Slacker Personal Radio is currently only available in the United States. While we are working to extend our licenses to other parts of the world, at this time we can only play music to our listeners within the United States.

      If you are getting this message and are in the United States, please use the feedback form to tell us where you are located and the name of your ISP. "

      Are you sure that makes Slacker a viable alternative for non-US people? Who the hell modded this informative?

    15. Re:Non-US alterantives by lennier1 · · Score: 1

      I still don't understand why Europeans must pay and USians must not

      It's about the necessary distribution/broadcast agreements with the music rights holders in each country.
      Example: Germany has (had) a free reign while Austria was left out, even though they're neighboring countries with a common language and currency.
      It's just one example. Spotify is also only available in a few of European countries while the rest is left out (or has to become inventive).

    16. Re:Non-US alterantives by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 1

      This isn't actually last.fm's fault (or choice), i live in Belgium & have to pay too, and frankly, it's worth it.

      If you want to assert blame, assert it where it belongs, on the copyright holders & the labels.

    17. Re:Non-US alterantives by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 1

      last.fm doesn't get to stream this music for free, they have to pay the labels, and the labels set the cost on a 'per country' base as far as i know

    18. Re:Non-US alterantives by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 1

      It's also the labels that prohibit last.fm from streaming to mobiles in most of the world

    19. Re:Non-US alterantives by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 1

      US people did

    20. Re:Non-US alterantives by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 1

      We don't, that's the freaking problem!

  9. Interesting. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder how much Microsoft kicked them to keep access from their devices free.

    1. Re:Interesting. by artor3 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Probably the same price they're asking - $3 per month per user.

      So about $300.

  10. Enough! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every project not being able to resist the temptation to go with the devil will burn in hell in the eternity!

    1. Re:Enough! by c0d3g33k · · Score: 4, Insightful

      sheesh. Wanting compensation for your efforts does not imply the devil is involved. Get a grip.

  11. That clucking and flapping sound ... by c0d3g33k · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... that's the chickens coming home to roost.

    All you folks who ditched the eeeevil "traditional" services that wanted payment because stuff on the internet was free: this is your wake-up call. Now that you've had a taste of their wares, it's time to pay up if you want the good stuff.

    It wasn't going to be free forever, so you need to start thinking about which businesses you want to support, because the big media conglomerates are about to roll over the web like the juggernauts they are.

    1. Re:That clucking and flapping sound ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nay! nay! nay I say! naaaayyyyy!

      There, fixed that for ya Much love, AC

    2. Re:That clucking and flapping sound ... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I don't think so.

      As long as thees dumb companies make it so you can get it free one way, and have to pay using other ways, it'll be pretty simple to get it free the other ways, using technical hacks.

      For instance, if you're on your PC, using an open-source audio player, how can they keep you from getting it for free? All you have to do is make it look like the audio player is a web browser, which is trivial. Writers of these free audio players will have no problem writing plug-ins for these services which fool them into thinking you're using their website and looking at ads, even though you aren't.

      Now, if they make it so that EVERYONE has to pay, then that's not so trivial to get around. However, if they do that, it's likely that they're going to fold, because they're not going to get enough people interested off the bat to pay up. That's why they want to preserve the free-access methods, so that they can get people hooked, and then con them into paying for access with their mobile devices.

    3. Re:That clucking and flapping sound ... by BJ_Covert_Action · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Or we'll just wait for some other small startup company to come along and broadcast free radio over the net again. We'll switch to that until they get big and start charging, and then it's on to the next service. Welcome to the web. Things move fast here Sweetheart. ;)

      --
      Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!
    4. Re:That clucking and flapping sound ... by c0d3g33k · · Score: 1

      I've probably been on the web much longer than you, Sweetheart. I think the days when small startups offer things for free is coming to an end. The time to choose who you want to support with your payments is coming fast. Don't confuse the web of your youth with the web of the future. I have not, and I haven't been wrong so far.

    5. Re:That clucking and flapping sound ... by trollertron3000 · · Score: 1

      Wait, is demonoid down? Oh Jesus you scared me for a second. You joker you!

      --
      Tiger Blooded Bi-Winning Machine
    6. Re:That clucking and flapping sound ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You mean like Shoutcast? Which has 46,171 stations broadcasting as of right this second? And that's not even counting the ones not listed on that directory?

      Free will always find a way. If last.fm wants to cut off their nose to spite their face, they're welcome to. Nothing of value was lost.

    7. Re:That clucking and flapping sound ... by Black+Gold+Alchemist · · Score: 1

      It wasn't going to be free forever, so you need to start thinking about which businesses you want to support, because the big media conglomerates are about to roll over the web like the juggernauts they are.

      It wasn't ever free, that's a lie to attempt compare ad-based web radio to piracy. We already support the business by listening and looking at adds. Foolish business try to demand payment, and get replaced by better ones that don't. The music industry makes less in a year than what Sergey has in his personal bank account. I personally think that Google is going to steamroll the media corps soon. Look at youtube. We already get all that stuff for free. Oh, and corps can take over the Internet. It'll be gone the day after, and we'll be back to sqaure zero (over dialup and mesh networks).

      --
      Responsibility is an addiction
      Virtue is a temptation
      Community is a cartel
    8. Re:That clucking and flapping sound ... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I've been on the web as long as there has been a web to be on, sweetheart, and what I've noticed is that there is always another player coming along to try to make some money on a business plan guaranteed to fail, who can find some investors dumb enough to think that it could work.

      Seriously, with some of the stuff that was invested in during the dot-com bubble, we had it proven to us beyond any doubt that many investors are total fucking idiots who clearly did NOT earn their fortunes.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:That clucking and flapping sound ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the days when small startups offer things for free is coming to an end.

      I could have sworn I heard that back in... 2000?

    10. Re:That clucking and flapping sound ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personally I stayed old school, and still download MP3s.

      I really don't care what happens in or to the music industry now, I'll just grab what I want and enjoy it, if it goes I wont be too heartbroken as most music I listen to is stuff from the 70s, 80s, and 90s anyway.

      There's just no point even trying with the music industry, they're a lost cause, and whilst things like Pandora and Last.fm seemed great at first, it was obvious they were never going to be allowed to flourish in the long run.

      It's best to just stick to screwing the industry, it's all they're worth, and it's all they deserve.

  12. Quality is the issue for me by Lyrata · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've used Last.fm for a long time, but on my Android phone (Droid 1) the quality is mediocre at best and cuts out on occasion. I won't be paying for this.

    --
    50,000 characters used to live here.
    1. Re:Quality is the issue for me by Qlither · · Score: 1

      I have to agree, it also seems to make the media player open and being playing a song after closing it some times. I have yet to see a pattern, other than with 10 minutes of closing the Last.fm app it may play a random song, perhaps scrobbling issues?

      Either way, i mainly use Last.fm to store all the data on songs i have played since 2008. To save/backup that data you can use *Last.fm Scrobble Mapper. Which after pulling the data can then save it to either windows media player or itunes. I tend to find it a horrible waste not to do something with that data.

      So you can also make cool background images of all the bands you have listened too using **Music Quilt Screensaver or get even more stats using ***Last.fm Extra Stats.

      I plan to carry on using last.fm, it is a good service (crappy app aside). Though i will mainly only scrobble to it. I will think about paying just to support them.

      *http://build.last.fm/item/498
      **http://build.last.fm/item/455
      ***http://www.last.fm/user/C26000/journal/2006/07/30/383m_last.fm_extra_stats

      --
      -1 is for flame bait and trolls, not because you disagree with someone.
  13. Not relevant because of grooveshark by uigrad_2000 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Last.fm is hardly relevant today, because of grooveshark.

    Grooveshark is like last.fm, except that you can play any list of songs you want in any order that you want, and you can rewind/fast forward as you wish. Oh, and it lets you play music all day long (there is no limit to number of minutes you can be connected).

    I'm surprised that the RIAA hasn't come down like a ton of bricks on Grooveshark yet. It is different from limewire and napster-classic in just two ways:

    • The music you stream cannot easily be downloaded for storage for offline play.
    • Anything that looks like Pink Floyd is removed. That's the only band that Grooveshark admins fear.
    --
    Free unix account: freeshell.org
    1. Re:Not relevant because of grooveshark by fotbr · · Score: 1

      The music you stream cannot easily be downloaded for storage for offline play.

      A quick glance at the search engine of your choice shows that doing exactly that is trivial.

    2. Re:Not relevant because of grooveshark by Rennt · · Score: 3, Informative

      I thought I'd check out your recommendation. Unfortunately, according to the android market at least, grooveshark requires $9 month for a "Groovshark Anywhere" subscription if you want to use it from your mobile, although it does have a free trial of unspecified length.

    3. Re:Not relevant because of grooveshark by BJ_Covert_Action · · Score: 1

      I don't know if it's just a buggy implementation of flash on Linux or what, but I've been having issues with the Grooveshark website for about two months now. Quite specifically, the login feature seems to fail to register button clicks at all for me. I hope I can get it figured out soon, I really did love that site (and just before it bugged out, I has spent a good 5 hours perfecting a nerd-rock playlist).

      --
      Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!
    4. Re:Not relevant because of grooveshark by HazE_nMe · · Score: 2

      If you want to use Grooveshark from your Android device without paying for a Grooveshark Anywhere account just get TinyShark from the market. It looks like it just streams through HTTP and Grooveshark doesn't know you are listening on a mobile device.

    5. Re:Not relevant because of grooveshark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No Beatles either, but I like Grooveshark.
      You can record stuff as it streams of course.
      I like the playlist functions.

    6. Re:Not relevant because of grooveshark by zeroeth · · Score: 1

      Grooveshark and Last.fm have a large area of non overlap.

      * Last.fm provides a great social aspect to your favorite music, as well as to the band/song bio pages.
      * Last.fm's tag/artist/genre stations are great for honing in on what you want to listen to.
      * Last.fm has great coverage of indie artists (Especially 8-bit chiptunes)
      * Last.fm lets artist songs to be aired in full during streaming, but only sampled for 30 second previews (if they want to sell them for instance)

      Grooveshark and Pandora are great for things more mainstream. Soundcloud and Last.fm are hands down the best, for the rest.

    7. Re:Not relevant because of grooveshark by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      Anything that looks like Pink Floyd is removed. That's the only band that Grooveshark admins fear.

      That's because Pink Floyd have their own air force. They bought RAF Mildenhall in the 1980s. Although it's techically a US Air Force base, it's privately funded by a shadowy organisation headed up by Dave Gilmour.

    8. Re:Not relevant because of grooveshark by Sri+Ramkrishna · · Score: 1

      Really? I'm always fucking getting pink floyd. Especially wehn the radio is called 'Rush'. I mean I like Pink Floyd, but I always get some 10 minute song on there and it drives me nuts.

    9. Re:Not relevant because of grooveshark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If groove made deals that will ever lead to a viable company, while spotify can't, my mind is blown. Mobile streaming is taking over because people mostly want music while they're on the move. Monetizing mobile is an entirely new game.

    10. Re:Not relevant because of grooveshark by MR+LOLALOT · · Score: 1

      Except for the fact that you search for the Chemical Brothers, track Star Guitar, click play, and somehow you're listening to Lynyrd Skynyrd's Sweet Home Alabama.

      (tracks may not me those but the musical difference is equivalent)

    11. Re:Not relevant because of grooveshark by lennier1 · · Score: 1

      That's the main downside I'm seeing with Grooveshark.
      With Last.fm there was at least Vagamule (modified version of Vagalume) as a "fire and forget" solution to search, listen and record at the same time (and end up with nicely catalogued MP3 files).

    12. Re:Not relevant because of grooveshark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? Can I start from an artist and play music like them? Play my friends radio station, based on what they listen to? Listen to my neighbours radio, these are what I use lastfm for.

    13. Re:Not relevant because of grooveshark by pha95mlb · · Score: 1

      NB: TinyShark requires Flash.

    14. Re:Not relevant because of grooveshark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >The music you stream cannot easily be downloaded for storage for offline play.

      one word: freemusiczilla

  14. Wonder who's sponsoring this... by lowlymarine · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Free on the desktop, XBox Live, and Windows Phone 7, eh? Gee, how inconspicuous. But seriously, with all the stuttering the Android app was worthless unless you were ONLY listening to Last.FM and not trying to actually use your multitasking anyways; if I had to guess, they didn't give the audio stream the right level of priority. Since no other media player had those kind of problems, I wasn't sure whether it was merely incompetence or an attempt to drive people away from using the radio on their phones. I guess now we know?

    1. Re:Wonder who's sponsoring this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Free on the desktop, XBox Live, and Windows Phone 7, eh? Gee, how inconspicuous. But seriously, with all the stuttering the Android app was worthless unless you were ONLY listening to Last.FM and not trying to actually use your multitasking anyways; if I had to guess, they didn't give the audio stream the right level of priority.

      Yeah microsoft probably got in and sabotaged the Android app too.

  15. Google Listen? by iONiUM · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There's always Google Listen. It's not live streaming, but it has a large library of "casts" (should I really use the word "pod" for non-iOS centric speech?) available for your to peruse. Just sayin'..

    1. Re:Google Listen? by Mike+Buddha · · Score: 1

      Good call! Mod parent up.

      Fun fact: the term "broadcast" is a farming term referring to throwing seeds over a tilled field.

      --
      by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
    2. Re:Google Listen? by adolf · · Score: 1

      Fun fact: the term "broadcast" is a farming term referring to throwing seeds over a tilled field.

      Are you suggesting that "podcast" be deprecated and replaced with "broadcast"?

      If so I, for one, am all for it.

      --
      Kid-proof tablet..
    3. Re:Google Listen? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod up for not using "pod"

  16. I keep wondering what keeps Grooveshark going. by techvet · · Score: 1

    The kids listen to Grooveshark, which has no commercials and no limits (of which I am aware). When is the hammer falling on it?

    1. Re:I keep wondering what keeps Grooveshark going. by mdm-adph · · Score: 1

      Don't know if it will -- they actually made a deal with EMI a while back: http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/10/emi-drops-suit-against-grooveshark-music-service-licenses-it-instead/ Somehow, it's staying around.

      --
      It is by my will alone my thoughts acquire motion; it is by the juice of the coffee bean that the thoughts acquire speed
  17. Inevitability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I wonder if this will lead to more features in the last.fm Android client.

    I used to use last.fm's radio a lot, but since I discovered subsonic, I just stream from my desktop. $13 bucks for lifetime usage (at least as long as they're still around) vs $3/month is a no brainer. Of course I realize the differences between a streaming 'predictive' radio and streaming from my own music, but I'm more of a whole album kinda guy anyway.

    1. Re:Inevitability by mariasama16 · · Score: 1

      *psst* Check out audiogalaxy, free to stream from your own collection. I've stopped listening to the streaming radio apps anyways, mostly because my own tastes are rather eccentric. Plus, listening to music I know I'll like rather than having to skip or downrank a song when in the middle of a task is a bonus.

    2. Re:Inevitability by adolf · · Score: 1

      Does audiogalaxy have clients for multiple platforms, a multi-platform server, an awesome web interface, and a GPL behind it?

      I can't tell. All I see on audiogalaxy.com is a thing that says "Sign up! It's FREE!"

      With subsonic, I don't have to sign up anywhere; I don't have to use subsonic's "services." I just toss the author a few bucks*, install the software, forward the requisite port on my router, and call it a day. Subsonic has its roots in an open-source web-based media player, dating to well before the day of the smartphone, whereas Audiogalaxy has its heritage rooted in a heavily-litigated P2P clusterfuck.

      (*Note: Just because it's free software, doesn't mean that it's afraid of money.)

      --
      Kid-proof tablet..
    3. Re:Inevitability by bemymonkey · · Score: 1

      How're you liking Subsonic? I tried setting it up (the trial) a while ago, but never got it working correctly... is it worth the trouble and the cash?

      Will it handle MP3, FLAC, AAC and WMA as input? Embedded album art? Rating (writing to the POPM tag) from the Android app? How about ReplayGain? Audioscrobbler (Last.FM scrobbling) support? How well does it handle music on network drives?

      Currently I'm using Audiogalaxy, which more or less works, but it's buggy and quite clunky, and there's no support for ratings.

  18. Error in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It remains free to listen on the Last.FM website, Xbox Live, Windows Mobile 7 phones and the desktop app,

    FTFA:

    Last.fm Radio will remain free on the Last.fm website in the US, UK and Germany and for the US and UK users of Xbox Live and Windows Mobile 7 phones. We’ll also continue to offer radio for free via the Last.fm desktop app.

    The summary did not guess correctly where I live.

  19. Licensing by JBMcB · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Because of draconian content distribution licensing schemes. Buying a license to stream over the internet is probably per-device, so computers require once license to distribute, handhelds/phones need another license fee, set-top boxes need another fee...

    I used to work for a radio company and we ran into the same problems. Some content we paid for could be put over the airwaves and over the streaming internet station, some of it could only be put over the air, depending on the licensing. The company even got into trouble for having a pause button on the player, as that constituted downloading internet content which fell under a separate license than internet "streaming."

    --
    My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
    1. Re:Licensing by westlake · · Score: 2

      Because of draconian content distribution licensing schemes. Buying a license to stream over the internet is probably per-device, so computers require once license to distribute, handhelds/phones need another license fee, set-top boxes need another fee...

      That doesn't seem to be correct.

      The rates seem to be based on the kind of service you provide and the amount of content you stream.

      You'll pay more if you honor specific requests - streaming tiles from a catalog like Rhapsody's. Less if you look more like a radio station - building playlists around user-defined artists or themes. Licensing 101

      There does seem to be an "enterprise cap."

      The license will be a more or less a fixed and managable expense for something the size of Last.fm or Pandora.

      But distribution costs and the general user experience will differ. The Berlin Philharmonic streams its concerts as a commercial free HD video subscription service with audio quality as high as 320 AAC.

      You get what you are willing pay for.

  20. Flash Player by alostpacket · · Score: 1

    The Flash Player can report your system info.

    --
    PocketPermissions Android Permission Guide
    1. Re:Flash Player by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not if you're using a hacked version of the Flash Player. People are watching Hulu on Android devices in this way.

  21. Say what? by Rennt · · Score: 1

    This news surprises me. Last.fm has always been $3/month, with a very short free trial. I'm guessing it must have only been free in North America or something.

    Earlier this year they also cut a number of "channels", including the option to listen to "my collection". They offered no discount for the reduced services so I gave up my subscription. I got the distinct impression that this was under pressure from the usual RIAA types.

    1. Re:Say what? by zrq · · Score: 1

      I did the same. I used to listen Last.fm a lot, and I discovered several artists that I hadn't heard of before, and bought quite a few albums as a result.

      I had a monthly subscription, and I thought it was well worth the money. I wasn't that interested in the big name bands, what was interesting were the less well known artists from their huge database of music from around the world. But like you, I cancelled my subscription when they cut the "my loved tracks".

      It was nice while it lasted, but .. the world moves on.

  22. Re:Ok, Next .... or not cause your stuck. by tecker · · Score: 1

    if you have satellite radio you can listen for free online

    You can listen online for free? News to me. My Sirius package doesn't have internet access last I checked. Maybe I need to try logging in.


    Oh, and just how do you get any of those services on your XBOX360 or other device that ONLY has Last.FM?

    --
    Procrastinating life a way at a rapid rate of speed.
  23. Subsonic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's really easy really! Just download and install Subsonic to your online server, and stream your own music files from wherever, www, Android, iPhone or Windows 7...

    http://www.subsonic.com

    (I'm not affiliated with Subsonic, only a massive fan and heavy user)

    1. Re:Subsonic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oops, I meant subsonic.org =)

    2. Re:Subsonic by rsborg · · Score: 1

      It's really easy really! Just download and install Subsonic to your online server, and stream your own music files from wherever, www, Android, iPhone or Windows 7...

      http://www.subsonic.com

      (I'm not affiliated with Subsonic, only a massive fan and heavy user)

      I think the majority of folks don't want to listen to their "own" music via streaming (that's what flash-memory is for), but want services like Last.fm for streaming from a much larger library with recommendation services (and the occasional purchase option for the best songs).

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    3. Re:Subsonic by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      Hmm....all I saw on this website were gaming controls and related stuff for xbox, ps3, wii.....nothing I saw about streaming music...?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    4. Re:Subsonic by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      I think the majority of folks don't want to listen to their "own" music via streaming (that's what flash-memory is for)

      I disagree, being able to stream your own collection means you can save that precious flash for something else. What is in your phone isn't unlimited, but what you have at home, is.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    5. Re:Subsonic by cynyr · · Score: 1

      mine might as well be, takes a microSD card, hot swappable.

      --
      All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
  24. What, people use it to stream lo-quality music? by TheoGB · · Score: 2

    I've only ever really used it as it was intended, as a scrobbling device for massive muso-geeks. Basically it's all about showing how fucking cool your music taste is.

    http://last.fm/user/TheoGB

    Read it and weep, crap music fans.

    1. Re:What, people use it to stream lo-quality music? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck yeah, scrobbling is where it's at! (I'm coming up to the big 200k soon!)

      You're taste is very low to me, but the sentiment in your message is all that matters.

      (I would like to add that the occasional listen to your recommend music station is worth it!)

    2. Re:What, people use it to stream lo-quality music? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your musical compatibility with TheoGB is Very High

      Music you have in common includes The Go-Betweens, Wire, Sonic Youth, Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds and Neil Young.

    3. Re:What, people use it to stream lo-quality music? by Tink2000 · · Score: 1

      I came to say this, too. I love the scrobbling end of things.
      Discovery has been so-so, but definite big winners when it got it dead on.

      My stuff

      --
      Why do I M2 everything negatively?
    4. Re:What, people use it to stream lo-quality music? by nobodie · · Score: 1

      ditto, the sig 2

      --
      Subversion of spatial scale luxury decoration ideas.
    5. Re:What, people use it to stream lo-quality music? by Paul1969 · · Score: 1

      Wire and the Gang of Four, good stuff.
      I am old but classy - I have both of those bands, and many others, on CD.

    6. Re:What, people use it to stream lo-quality music? by TheoGB · · Score: 1

      Both their new albums are really hitting big for me this month or so, particularly the Gang of Four one.

    7. Re:What, people use it to stream lo-quality music? by TheoGB · · Score: 1

      Replies to ACs don't mean much but I was being somewhat tongue-in-cheek with my point about how good my taste is. Everyone's taste is good to them but I think it takes a certain sort of willy-waving belief in your own taste to make you want to gather vast statistics on it. Clearly I have that belief.

    8. Re:What, people use it to stream lo-quality music? by Randle_Revar · · Score: 1

      I listen to it occasionally, but I agree that the main point is the scrobbling.

      http://www.last.fm/user/The_Barbarian

      --
      Climate Progress - Hell and High Water
    9. Re:What, people use it to stream lo-quality music? by _Shad0w_ · · Score: 1

      Likewise. I don't think I've every used it for streaming music, I have Spotify for that (which I do pay a subscription for because I like it and use it a lot).

      --

      Yeah, I had a sig once; I got bored of it.

    10. Re:What, people use it to stream lo-quality music? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Your musical compatibility with TheoGB is Very High"

      I guess your tastes ain't bad ;-)

      (http://www.last.fm/user/hellfroze)

    11. Re:What, people use it to stream lo-quality music? by h3 · · Score: 1

      wtf new slashdot, I can't log in to entertainment.slashdot.org???

      That was me.

  25. I decided that free was too high a price for it by bigsexyjoe · · Score: 1

    It is not very good at all. It uses my juice and processing power "Scrobbling" whenever I play my own mp3s, it takes forever to load even though I have a high-end phone, it spends more time not playing than actually playing, and it keeps playing Breaking Benjamin and similar bands no matter how many times I tell it not to. Pandora isn't perfect, but it's a lot better than last.fm and my own library is best.

    --
    Democracy Now! - your daily, uncensored, corporate-free
  26. Slacker by martin_b1sh0p · · Score: 1

    Guess there's a reason why I listen to Slacker (and every blue moon, Pandora) on my cell instead of Last.Fm.

  27. Grooveshark also plays non-US music by rsborg · · Score: 1

    This is a godsend for those of us with foreign music tastes (at least I could find many French artists). Too bad that Apple is still shackled by the music industry into not allowing cross-border music sharing... then grooveshark it is.

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  28. WAAAAAAA by rabtech · · Score: 0

    Waaaaaaa! Give me something for free! I hate commercials and advertising but I refuse to pay! Waaaaaaa!

    In all seriousness there are definitely things to complain about (paying for cable TV but still having to put up with commercials; I'd be happy to pay for fewer channels and ditch the commercials). Or artificial restrictions... I'd be happy to pay the $150/yr license fee to get access to BBC here in the states but due to artificial geographic restrictions I cannot (and thus the incentive to pirate).

    But complaining about paying for a service that delivers commercial-free music? One that you can *still get for free* on your computer? That's just being an ass.

    --
    Natural != (nontoxic || beneficial)
    1. Re:WAAAAAAA by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      I hate commercials and advertising but I refuse to pay! Waaaaaaa!

      You say that as if they actually tried advertising and their users complained. But they didn't, they went straight from "free" to "subscription required".

      The problem might be that they can't figure out how to put ads in their mobile apps. If their programmers are really that talentless, that could also explain why there are so many complaints about the Android app being unstable.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
  29. Yeah, no thanks. by No+Grand+Plan · · Score: 1

    Last.fm isn't good enough to warrant paying for it. I guess I'll make do with my own music.

  30. ATTN: Any Last.fm engineers reading slashdot by Paolomania · · Score: 1

    Please add some form of adaptive (or configurable) quality to your streaming service. I currently find it unusable (and therefore not worth paying for) due to occasional audio gaps. I would FAR prefer lower quality without interruptions to a high quality stream that cuts out once or twice per song.

    1. Re:ATTN: Any Last.fm engineers reading slashdot by Shadyman · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a router issue on your end. I have no problems whatsoever on a semi-lousy (Canadian) 4-5Mbit aDSL connection with 3 users.

  31. Alternative by bcmm · · Score: 1

    Are there any alternatives that feature a tag system, and the ability to search the intersection between two tags (as Last.fm did, briefly, before inexplicably removing the feature)?

    (i.e. return everything tagged with both "foo" and "bar")

    --
    # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama
    Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
  32. Grooveshark Retro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They still have their old interface up and running: http://retro.grooveshark.com/

    Thank me later :)

  33. Re:Ok, Next .... or not cause your stuck. by flimflammer · · Score: 1

    Xbox Live still gets it for free, so those individuals don't need to move anyway.

  34. Not news by Shadyman · · Score: 1

    Last.fm has been requiring a subscription in other "less-civilized" countries (for all devices, computers included) like Canada for a while now. $3/month isn't bad for premium services. Additionally, Pandora won't even show us Canadians their home page, let alone stream music to us.

    I'd rather pay $3 to have music than try to search around for stuff I want.

  35. Creative Commons radio by tepples · · Score: 1

    Or we'll just wait for some other small startup company to come along and broadcast free radio over the net again.

    It would get a negligible number of listeners because in order to be lawful, it would have to play only Creative Commons or similarly licensed music, not major label music. The supermajority of the general public demands major label music.

  36. Completely Different by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought Last.fm was basically only used by people to track your musical trends and patterns. I really didnt think anyone listened to those stations they have. I tried it once and thought it was clunky and slow on the site, never knew there was a phone version for use as well. I still love music streaming sites that combine last.fm scrobbling with the streams you listen to. Its about the only thing I use it for. And what good use can you get from all the info you give last.fm? For me the only reason is that it provides me with an amazing list of all the bands I love based upon my taste that are playing shows in my area. I havent had to search for shows or even miss one I didnt know was coming in years.

    Also found that AudioGalaxy is an amazing app for your phone that lets you listen to your entire music library and scrobble songs as you play them. I will continue to use that phone app over last.fm's. I didnt realize so many people still listen to streams either.

    1. Re:Completely Different by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      I thought Last.fm was basically only used by people to track your musical trends and patterns. I really didnt think anyone listened to those stations they have.

      And I thought the opposite. Why would you give Last.fm all that information about your listening habits if they weren't going to give you recommendations in return?

      After I saw this announcement, I turned off scrobbling. If they're done giving me free streams, I'm done giving them free data.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
  37. maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.grooveshark.com

  38. 3 years ex pay user... by bubulubugoth · · Score: 1

    I'm a big, big last.fm lover...
    I met so many interesting people...
          Until they made very hard to know your neighbours...
    I used to pay
          Until they stopped being able to play my playlist....
    I no longer pay...
          cuz they don't support neither wii or ps3...

    So, they lost me as client this year...

    --
    Â_Â
  39. RIP Last.FM by upuv · · Score: 1

    Well I guess that service is history.

    Subscription / Paywall models have been tried for 10 years now. They pretty much fail.

    It was nice knowing you Last.FM

  40. Meh. by Vyse+of+Arcadia · · Score: 1

    First, some disclosure: I've happily subscribed to Last.fm for over a year. With that out of the way, streaming isn't the point of Last.fm. It's all about the scrobbling. Last.fm knows about my music tastes and provides just plain better recommendations than any other service I've tried.

    Or, let me put it this way. I'll start using other music services when they start giving me video game remix recommendation like Last.fm. (To be fair, Grooveshark at least does have a handful of game remixes.)

    1. Re:Meh. by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      With that out of the way, streaming isn't the point of Last.fm. It's all about the scrobbling.

      The way I see it, the only value of scrobbling is to get better personalized streams. I don't see the point of uploading all that data just so you can review it later on a web page.

      Last.fm knows about my music tastes and provides just plain better recommendations than any other service I've tried.

      Agreed, but a list of recommendations isn't very useful on its own. I've been using Last.fm for years specifically because it uses my music tastes to introduce me to new music by playing it. If I just want a web page that says "since you like Band X, you should try Band Y", I can post on a forum and get answers from actual humans.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    2. Re:Meh. by Vyse+of+Arcadia · · Score: 1

      The way I see it, the only value of scrobbling is to get better personalized streams. I don't see the point of uploading all that data just so you can review it later on a web page.

      I have to disagree.scrobbling also makes for a good community.

      Agreed, but a list of recommendations isn't very useful on its own. I've been using Last.fm for years specifically because it uses my music tastes to introduce me to new music by playing it.

      That's largely what I meant by "recommendations." A service that just gives text recommendations is useless to me. (My point was to emphasize that I find Last.fm to be worth paying for.)

  41. plug by Mana+Mana · · Score: 1

    keyword: useragentswitcher

    1. Re:plug by mininab · · Score: 1

      well yes of course. I don't see the trouble here (apart on jailkept iphones obviously) Did I miss something ?

  42. specialized/indie music services by sandGorgons · · Score: 1

    I have noticed that rather than using last.fm, I get better quality in using niche music services. A good example is di.fm for electronic/dance/trance music. It's premium streams are a bit more expensive than last.fm (4.99$ p.m.) but I get about 70 channels and multi-format (which includes an android app)

  43. Windows Mobile 7? No such thing! by Tacvek · · Score: 1

    Windows Mobile 7 phones

    There is no Windows Mobile 7 platform. There is a platform named "Windows Phone 7", but one could reasonably argue that the quotes are nessisary around that title, since it is not a Mobile Windows platform. Windows Mobile development did not differ much from developing directly for Windows CE, which is a full fledged member of the Windows OS Family. "WP7" is built on top of the Windows CE platform, but unlike the actual Windows Mobile series no version of the Windows API is exposed to programmers. Instead, all programs must be targeted at one of two .NET Framework-based APIs, namely: an incomplete implementation of the XNA framework, or an incomplete implementation of the Silverlight Framework.

    X-Box Phone would have been slightly more appropriate a name than "Windows Phone", since developing for it is much more like developing for the X-Box than developing for any version of Windows. Oddly though the advertising for "WP7" is indirectly downplaying games for the platform by focusing on the "get in, get out quick". While for casual games that ability is quite desirable, it is presented as "spend as few seconds looking at the phone as possible", which is very anti-game.

    --
    Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
  44. There's a reason why... by Zancarius · · Score: 1

    Last.fm has been requiring a subscription in other "less-civilized" countries (for all devices, computers included) like Canada for a while now. $3/month isn't bad for premium services. Additionally, Pandora won't even show us Canadians their home page, let alone stream music to us.

    Probably because, while it's bad enough here in the US, it's far worse with regards to the record labels in Canada and streaming music services. It also looks like this year it stands to get worse:

    Starting next year [the article date was Sept. 2010, so that means this year], [Re:Sound] wants to charge web-based music sites that stream to mobile devices the greater of two figures: 45 per cent of the site's gross revenues in Canada or 7.5-tenths of a cent for every song streamed.

    45%...

    --
    He who has no .plan has small finger. ~ Confucius on UNIX
  45. Squeezeboxes by coofercat · · Score: 1

    I've got a handful of squeezeboxes, and occasionally listen to last.fm streams on them. Since I'm only an occasional listener, I won't be subscribing. Conversely, the likes of somafm are far more suited to occasional use - you just pay them a few bucks whenever you feel like it.

    For all of last.fm's blustering about helping me find new music, I've 'loved' hundreds of tracks, but haven't actually bought much of it - they're actually not that great at actually pushing you towards albums or artists that you might want to buy. So in that respect, last.fm is no better than someone like somafm.

    So my point is that whilst this doesn't preclude listening on my werk PC, it polarises mobile/squeezebox customers into "properly engaged (or too rich)" and "not too bothered". I fall into the latter category, and who knows... maybe I'll drift off entirely eventually.

  46. Choose how much you pay? by jackhererUK · · Score: 1

    On the subscription page http://www.last.fm/subscribe it seems you can choose to pay 3 USD, EUR or GBP for your subscription. Well that'll be $3.00 please as that is the cheapest !!

  47. So that settles it by caution+live+frogs · · Score: 1

    Not coincidentally, upon reading this article I took two actions: First, I deleted the Last.fm app from my phone. Second, I decided that if I'm going to have to pay for music, I'll pay for something I want to hear - so I am about to renew my membership with my local NPR music station, which plays some killer stuff and incidentally has an iPhone app for free live streaming of their broadcasts.

    Last.fm needs to know that if they are going to charge for it, they are going to have to be better than the other paid services. They aren't, from my experience.