Slashdot Mirror
Google Music Goes Live With Google+ Integration
angry tapir writes "Google Music, the company's cloud-based online music service, is now available to all users in the US and includes song and album sales, as well as an integration with the Google+ social networking site. Introduced in test form and by invitation only in May as a cloud-based song storage and playback service, Google Music will also let users buy albums and songs from all major music labels, except Warner."
Have you used it? iTunes requires a horribly bloated app installed on your computer and clunky syncing of music between said computer and your iOS device. Google music needs none of this (with the exception of a small app to upload your music you already have to the cloud). I have all 12,500 songs in my collection available to me wherever I am, no need to pick and choose what music to take with me. It was Google took us to the post PC world that Jobs kept pontificating about.
Spotify, Amazon mp3, Google music; all not available in Australia. iTunes charging so much that it's usually cheaper to buy the physical CD from America and have it shipped across the friggin' ocean. Well, at least there's Grooveshark ... until SOPA closes it down.
Your entire collection of music available, browser based (no installation needed), no ads, unlimited streaming, mobile access on android and iphone with offline listening, and it's FREE!
Umm, didn't you already have the ability to sync your music files to your phone? How many gigs of music do you really need to carry around? How much is just packrat/hoarding mentality? ("omg, what if I want to listen to my Englebert Humperdinck albums while taking a long walk alone on the beach, even though I live in Wyoming?") If you're a luddite and have an iPod instead of an Android phone, is there any benefit at all to letting Google scan your hard drive?
Google Music requires me to install a program that scans my hard drive looking for music, and it seems to keep a list online somewhere of the music I have. Is this not asking for trouble? Is this not asking for abuse by the RIAA's goon squads? Is this not going to open the door at least to the possibility of a major abuse of privacy with legal and financial implications? "Don't be Evil" isn't reassuring enough for that kind of risk, especially when the only benefit from the risk is the convenience of sharing music with an Android phone (which I don't have).
A lot of people have missed one of the most important things about this announcement. Indie musicians, without a label, can sign up, sell their music, and keep 70% of the sales revenue.
For years, we've bemoaned the RIAA and the giant labels for screwing artists out of their fair share. They're parasites controlling the distribution channels and deciding what pop-artist of the year they'll be pushing down our throats. Artists are lucky to get into the double digit percentage of sales revenue for their music, instead of pennies for a $20 disk.
If a talented indie artist or band can put their music on Google Music and get comparable exposure to the artists pushed and promoted by the large labels, it will drastically change the dynamics of the artist/label relationship. Evaluation of music by merit instead of marketing might. There will be a viable way to make a living without signing over one's soul and rights to a label.
This cuts out the traditional middle men in the music production process, and that's what terrifies the RIAA.
Google has the money to buy out the major labels, but instead of doing that, they made a very shrewd strategic decision to instead use the advances in technology to democratize music distribution. That's big, and that shouldn't be underestimated.