Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Beats Music To Shut Down November 30 (fortune.com)

Posted by timothy on from the as-the-apple-turns dept.

UnknowingFool writes: After November 30, Beats Music subscriptions will be cancelled and no longer work, according to Apple. Subscribers can use Apple Music, which has many of the same features. This shutdown was not unexpected when Apple purchased Beats last year for $3 billion, as Apple has a history of buying companies for various reasons other the products. Many former companies have been absorbed into Apple in one form or another in this manner: the technology of Fingerworks peripherals was the start of multi-touch for iPhones; PA Semi and Intrinsity personnel were the core of Apple's internal chip design teams; and AuthenTec made biometric technology that became the backbone of Touch ID.

61 comments

  1. Everyone gets to keep what they bought? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If yes, then no issues... otherwise the parent company (Apple) should make everyone whole.

    1. Re:Everyone gets to keep what they bought? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Beats Music is a streaming music service sort of like Spotify and Google Music. Like both those services, you could create playlists and I guess could "subscribe" to other people's playlists.

      Those are going away with no way to recover them.

      So, no, they don't get to keep what they bought. Like pretty much every cloud software, once the servers put down, whatever data you had stored in them is gone forever.

    2. Re:Everyone gets to keep what they bought? by retchdog · · Score: 1

      Yes, they do "get to keep what they bought". Some of these things are significantly less useful without the service they subscribed to, but it is hard to say what the actual damage of that is, especially since I'm sure it was in the fine print of the EULA that the service could be shut down at any time with no implied liability. iTunes will start supporting the devices eventually, at least for long and just well enough to stave off a class action suit.

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    3. Re:Everyone gets to keep what they bought? by TWX · · Score: 1

      If you can't beat 'em, join 'em?

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    4. Re: Everyone gets to keep what they bought? by Redbehrend · · Score: 2

      I can see the convo at apple.
      Beats is taking up our market what can we do?
      Why would anyone want to use anything but our service it's perfect.
      Let's just buy them and force customers to change, our service is better anyways...
      Great idea! let me get the checkbook

    5. Re:Everyone gets to keep what they bought? by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      Beats Music is a streaming music service sort of like Spotify and Google Music. Like both those services, you could create playlists and I guess could "subscribe" to other people's playlists.

      Those are going away with no way to recover them.

      So, no, they don't get to keep what they bought. Like pretty much every cloud software, once the servers put down, whatever data you had stored in them is gone forever.

      Errhm. https://www.apple.com/music/me...

      What happens to my Beats Music service?
      You can easily move your current Beats Music subscription over to Apple Music. Just open Beats Music on your iOS device and you’ll be prompted to join Apple Music. Once you’ve signed up, the playlists you’ve created or subscribed to and the albums you’ve saved in your Beats Music library will all be available to you in Apple Music.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    6. Re:Everyone gets to keep what they bought? by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

      Beats never sold music, only rented it. What people may lose are things such as playlists, unless there is some way to transfer them. And if there is music that is available on Beats but not on Apple Music, subscribers will lose the ability to listen to it.

    7. Re: Everyone gets to keep what they bought? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      From my viewpoint, every Apple purchase has had a strategic value for Apple whether we know it or not. For example, when Apple bought PA Semi, people assumed Apple would go back to PowerPC chips as PA Semi specialized in the POWER architecture. Later Apple purchased Intrinsity and Jobs himself said that the purchases were for the expertise and personnel not the products; Apple was not going into the POWER chip market. Instead Apple was focusing on mobile CPU design for their devices.

      With the Beats Music I can see more the conversation going this way:
      "Well maybe we should start a streaming service?"
      "The problem is the music companies. They want to charge us a really high rate."
      "Can we negotiate?"
      "They know we have record profits. Plus, they are a little sore about how we have had the upper hand on them."
      "Can we purchase someone that already have the licenses?"
      "Hmmm there is Beats. They are asking for a lot though."
      "Is it less than what the music companies want?"
      "Yes, definitely"
      "Look into it."

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    8. Re:Everyone gets to keep what they bought? by clarkcox3 · · Score: 1

      Yes; you can transfer your Beats playlists to Apple Music; just open the Beats Music app and it will prompt you to do so.

      --
      There are no tiger attacks in my area and it's all because this rock I'm holding keeps the tigers away.
  2. Beats Appliance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about all the ppl. that shelled out US $599.00 for the beats appliance? We're just fucked I guess?

    "Internet of Things" for the win.

    1. Re:Beats Appliance? by penguinoid · · Score: 4, Funny

      What about all the ppl. that shelled out US $599.00 for the beats appliance?

      Beats me.

      --
      Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    2. Re:Beats Appliance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What appliance? Why would you have an appliance that's specific to any particular music store? Especially at more than twice the cost of Amazon's Echo appliance.

      Was it better than a Harman Kardon Aura?

      If you bought a device for a single music store at $599.00, you're fucking stupid. And maybe the cost doesn't matter.

    3. Re:Beats Appliance? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      If you bought a device for a single music store at $599.00, you're fucking stupid. And maybe the cost doesn't matter.

      I agree. Anybody who would buy an appliance that you can only load music into with something like iTunes is fucking stupid.

    4. Re: Beats Appliance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... but when you bought that $599 Beats "appliance," you already knew you were fucked, right? ...right?!

    5. Re:Beats Appliance? by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      You can buy mp3s from anywhere and load them onto an iPod or iPhone.

    6. Re:Beats Appliance? by rtb61 · · Score: 2

      More accurately they got exactly what they paid for advertising and an ego trip. Ohh, look I'm a victim of marketing with a massive ego and I can believe I can pose about by strapping a 'Beats' logo to my head. What happens to them, people point their fingers at them and laugh, well, that might not really happen but a lot of people are thinking it.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    7. Re:Beats Appliance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like a MacBook?

  3. horizontal integration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Glory and Honor to Standard Oil Company!

  4. Apple "beats" you up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This would never happen if you were using GNU/hurd to have your music "hurd".

  5. Confusion ensues... by x_t0ken_407 · · Score: 1

    "...as Apple has a history of buying companies for various reasons other the products."

    wat

    1. Re:Confusion ensues... by retchdog · · Score: 1

      it's true. usually Apple buys them to poach a user base, gain credibility, and/or acquire engineers and patents, rather than to just rebadge the product.

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    2. Re:Confusion ensues... by BradMajors · · Score: 1

      Eliminate a competitor.

    3. Re:Confusion ensues... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Except in some of these cases Apple was not making products beforehand but merely did not continue them afterwards. Apple didn't make chips before PA Semi; they only wanted the personnel. In the cases where there was some competition like Fingerworks (peripherals), Apple incorporated their technology in their own products. Apple didn't have music streaming before Beats Music but created Apple Music.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    4. Re:Confusion ensues... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      /. has a history of badly written summaries

    5. Re:Confusion ensues... by phayes · · Score: 1

      Above all on weekends when Timothy is at the helm.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    6. Re:Confusion ensues... by toadlife · · Score: 2

      Embrace, Extend, Extiguish

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    7. Re:Confusion ensues... by wkcole · · Score: 2

      Apple didn't make chips before PA Semi;

      Except for chips like this: http://www.applelogic.org/file.... Late Apple ][ models, Lisa, Newton, every Apple printer since the Imagewriter,, every Mac, every iPhone, and most if not all iPods have included one or more chips designed by Apple, carrying the Apple logo, unavailable to anyone else, and usually very poorly documented (if at all.) One could also argue that the 680x0 and PPC versions that Apple commissioned for exclusive use in Macs amounted to them acting like a fabless CPU maker (e.g. like PA Semi) so if you meant "CPU" instead of "chip"

    8. Re:Confusion ensues... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      I should have clarified that to be ARM chips. By the time Jobs came back, Apple had long moved out of making chips. Most of the computer manufacturers had started to use more and more commodity parts. By the time IBM sold off their PC business, an IBM motherboard might be custom made for IBM but most if not all components could be bought separately. In the early 90s that motherboard might have had some IBM custom chips (ie, microchannel).

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    9. Re:Confusion ensues... by wkcole · · Score: 1

      I should have clarified that to be ARM chips. By the time Jobs came back, Apple had long moved out of making chips.

      Still not really right, except for the narrow issue of Apple not visibly doing any custom ARM CPU work between the ARM610 and buying PA Semi. A lot depends on what you mean by "making chips" because they have never owned their own fabrication plants, but there has always been some Apple-labeled, Apple-only, and at least partially Apple-designed silicon shipping in Apple devices since 1983. In the sense of running a fab, PA Semi also never "made chips." However:

      Every Mac (even every one of the 90's PPC Mac clones) has included one or more custom Apple logic chips. Apple also used some PPC CPUs that were not available to anyone else, although their input into the "AIM" consortium that did PPC design was never entirely clear.

      Every iPhone and iPad and most (maybe all, I'm not sure of some Shuffle and Nano models) iPods have included one or more custom Apple logic chips.

      Most of the computer manufacturers had started to use more and more commodity parts. By the time IBM sold off their PC business, an IBM motherboard might be custom made for IBM but most if not all components could be bought separately. In the early 90s that motherboard might have had some IBM custom chips (ie, micro channel).

      Sure, but not relevant to Apple. IBM's choice from the start with the PC design avoided custom logic to hold down development cost (and initially to avoid internal roadblocks to getting the PC made at all.) Once the BIOS was cloned, anyone could build a PC. In a sense, Apple went the other way: integrating functions performed by multiple commodity chips and their own code in early machines into custom ASICs in later machines and model iterations, trading development costs for production costs and thwarting cloners in the process. In the 90's they never fully enabled the Mac clone market (a dubious endeavor that Jobs killed) because they never weaned MacOS from their custom logic. It wasn't until the switch to Intel CPUs (2006) that the Apple custom logic was reduced to a small enough and deep enough set of roles (e.g. SMC/PM) that it was feasible to run MacOS on machines lacking Apple's custom chips. It's true that for a year or two before the PA Semi acquisition they had effectively outsourced all of their chip design to fab partners, but that was a short-term anomaly in a long history.

    10. Re:Confusion ensues... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Still not really right, except for the narrow issue of Apple not visibly doing any custom ARM CPU work between the ARM610 and buying PA Semi.

      Since acquiring PA Semi (and later Intrinsity) Apple has done more and more design work for ARM CPUs for their devices. With each Ax generation of chip they are customizing it further. The A4 used a Cortex A8 core. The latest design A9 is a custom ARM core designed by Apple.

      My point however was that Apple didn't buy PA Semi for the Power products. They really wanted the personnel and expertise for chip design specifically to be used in their mobile devices.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  6. I am so confused! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am so confused. I keep being told that I am not the customer, but rather that I am the product! So which is it: am I the customer, or am I the product?!

    1. Re:I am so confused! by Chris+Johnson · · Score: 1

      You are an idiot :D

    2. Re:I am so confused! by Feral+Nerd · · Score: 0

      I am so confused. I keep being told that I am not the customer, but rather that I am the product! So which is it: am I the customer, or am I the product?!

      All your data are belong to us...
      -- Google.

    3. Re:I am so confused! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're being a troll. BeatsMusic was a service you were a customer of, you are no longer a customer of it. At no point did you become a product. We're not talking about someone mining your email here, this is literally just an online music service going away. That happens all the time.

  7. Just a branding change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple figured they'd rather have an Apple-branded music service to pre-load onto their phones as bloatware and all profits from said bloatware.

    We know from Apple Maps that Apple is hit-and-miss with application software. Their greatness is hardware.

    1. Re:Just a branding change by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 1

      Apple figured they'd rather have an Apple-branded music service to pre-load onto their phones as bloatware and all profits from said bloatware.

      We know from Apple Maps that Apple is hit-and-miss with application software. Their greatness is hardware.

      But yet they buy the company with with horrible--yet trendy--hardware, and a service with an ephemeral subscriber base. I don't understand this acquisition at all. I'd stab my eardrums out with a pencil if I was forced to listen to Beats for any length of time, and having a music service a la Pandora doesn't differentiate and sell their hardware--where Apple makes their money. Not sure where they're going with this one....

    2. Re:Just a branding change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google has Google Play Music and I'd bet they bought Beats not for the technology but the licensing deals they had that let them stream music at all.

      Keep in mind that Apple isn't supposed to be in the music business. They signed a deal with Apple Music saying that they would never make music devices. Presumably they're hoping that by buying Beats they can do a run around that contract they signed.

      So my guess is that they decided they had to compete with Google Play Music and then had to find some "legal" way to accomplish that given that they really aren't supposed to be doing anything in the music industry at all.

    3. Re:Just a branding change by UnknowingFool · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I see the main reason for acquisition was licensing. Beats had existing licenses with the big music companies that would survive the purchase. Apple didn't have these licenses yet. My opinion is that the music companies wanted a much higher rate from Apple as they know how much money Apple has.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  8. Better than what FingerWorks customers got. by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 4, Informative

    When Apple bought FingerWorks back in 2005, all we FingerWorks customers saw was a terse announcement that the company had ceased operations effective immediately, and that no further products would be released or shipped. It was quite some time before we could even be sure it was Apple that bought them, because the deal was wrapped in non-disclosure terms.

    The FingerWorks user community was very, very small -- so small that the company probably couldn't have kept going as an independent entity. I suppose having Apple rescue some of their technology was better than losing it all. But the gestures that Apple has implemented are a tiny, tiny fraction of the rich, well-designed vocabulary present on the FingerWorks TouchStream keyboards. I still wish they'd release the rest of it, but that's never going to happen.

    1. Re:Better than what FingerWorks customers got. by retchdog · · Score: 1

      fingerworks sold keyboards, not subscriptions. your keyboard still worked.

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    2. Re:Better than what FingerWorks customers got. by Solandri · · Score: 1

      Same thing happened with Authentec (the fingerprint scanner company) when Apple acquired them. As the new owners I don't have a problem with them withdrawing the product from the market for use exclusively on Apple devices. But they also took down the website where all the drivers and software for previously-sold devices were distributed. Yeah you could still get drivers from your laptop manufacturer. But because of how Firefox's and Chrome's version numbering worked, the browser extension software needed to be updated every new browser release. When Apple took the website down, all those fingerprint scanners because unusable with a modern browser.

    3. Re:Better than what FingerWorks customers got. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously. This really only sucks when its a cloud service. But TBH cloud services are buyer beware. Half of them run out of VC money and go away, the other half Google culls internally ;)

    4. Re:Better than what FingerWorks customers got. by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      The problem is support. With Fingerworks keyboards some of the features require drivers which disappeared. As a normal keyboard they still worked; the multi-touch gestures were iffy.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    5. Re:Better than what FingerWorks customers got. by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 4, Interesting

      For a while. Mine doesn't any more, and support services were shut down shortly after the acquisition.

      You might think a keyboard with no moving parts would work basically forever, but there was apparently a problem with certain driver chips in the keyboard's circuitry. Some members of the FingerWorks Forum isolated the problem, and had posted a how-to for people to replace the chips (easy as pie if you're comfortable with surface-mount rework) -- but Apple eventually took down the forum, and with it, that information. I hope it's still available elsewhere on the Web; for various reasons, I haven't looked.

      There was one other issue -- the software FingerWorks provided to configure and customize the keyboard turned out to be incompatible with newer versions of Windows and OS X. We found workarounds, but again, they were documented on the Forum, which went away.

      Of course, none of this would have been any better if FingerWorks had simply gone bankrupt and shut down.

    6. Re:Better than what FingerWorks customers got. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When Apple bought FingerWorks back in 2005, all we FingerWorks customers saw was a terse announcement that the company had ceased operations effective immediately, and that no further products would be released or shipped.

      What does Apple(2005) have to do with Apple(2015)?

      Makes about as much sense as comparing the White House(2005) with the White House(2015).

      Completely different people running the show.

      No idea what point you are trying to make.

    7. Re:Better than what FingerWorks customers got. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, none of this would have been any better if FingerWorks had simply gone bankrupt and shut down.

      Apple wouldn't have taken down the forum

    8. Re:Better than what FingerWorks customers got. by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      Of course, none of this would have been any better if FingerWorks had simply gone bankrupt and shut down.

      Apple wouldn't have taken down the forum

      Google would never shut anything down.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  9. Editorsneeded, apply within by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 2

    "Apple has a history of buying companies for various reasons other the products"

    1) No editing or proofreading needed here. God forbid we have coherent, readable sentences in the summary.

    2) Sometimes Apple buys things simply to shut them down or eliminate them, similar to the way that Amazon recently stopped carrying competitors to its streaming video service. Can't compete? Worried about eroding market share? No problem- just buy your enemy and dismantle the business.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    1. Re:Editorsneeded, apply within by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think theres really any proof of #2 from Apple. They're shutting down BeatsMusic because it literally became AppleMusic. Why should they be curating both services? Sure it became iOS exclusive, but TBH it was never a good enough service to really worry about ;)

    2. Re:Editorsneeded, apply within by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Sometimes Apple buys things simply to shut them down or eliminate them, similar to the way that Amazon recently stopped carrying competitors to its streaming video service. Can't compete? Worried about eroding market share? No problem- just buy your enemy and dismantle the business. Flag as Inappropriate

      While some companies have seemingly disappeared I don't know if there is any glaring examples of Apple's intention to do this. Sometimes it's just a bad acquisition. In this way it's not similar to Amazon no longer carrying competitor's products as they still exist.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    3. Re:Editorsneeded, apply within by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 0

      for god's sake fuck off.

    4. Re:Editorsneeded, apply within by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes but this is Apple we're talking about. The supposed-geek manchildren must explain how they're literally hitler and Google is the second coming of jesus.

    5. Re:Editorsneeded, apply within by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Soviet Russia coherent, readable sentences in the summary has YOU?

    6. Re:Editorsneeded, apply within by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      for god's sake fuck off.

      Why would god need you to tell me to fuck off? Couldn't He tell me Himself, or failing that couldn't He just make me fuck off?

      Are you God's official mouthpiece on Earth, or is the pope out sick today and you're just covering for him?

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    7. Re: Editorsneeded, apply within by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's actually not an iOS exclusive. You can download Apple Music from the google play store.

    8. Re:Editorsneeded, apply within by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mods, put parent under -1 flaimbait please, for fuck's sake.

  10. Good riddance by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

    Gee, so glad I had to lose MOG with its very nice interface to Beats with its horrid interface.

    I knew Beats was going to be a disaster as soon as I tried it out (and dumped it).

    1. Re:Good riddance by Nemyst · · Score: 1

      Anything that touches the Beats brand is terrible. I still find myself depressed whenever I see someone walking around with their crappy shiny plastic headphones.

    2. Re:Good riddance by pinzvidz · · Score: 1

      I'm still trying to get my head around Trent Reznor involving himself in it...

  11. And Siri by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and the independent Siri voice assistant service was shut down in October 2011, after the Apple acquisition closed in April 2010.

  12. Obligatory: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks Obama!