5 ms·

Here in Australia the streaming options for music/video are better than our previous options for CD's/cable. A three month subscription to Spotify costs less th

Here in Australia the streaming options for music/video are better than our previous options for CD's/cable. A three month subscription to Spotify costs less than a single album would cost me 20 years ago.... not even account for inflation. A monthly Netflix subscription is 20% of the price that cable would cost here 5 years ago.

echelon 6y ago
> Spotify You don't own the music. You can't share it, use your own software to analyze, shuffle, remix it, etc. > Netflix subscription But now there's Hulu, Disney+, Amazon Prime, HBO Go, Showtime Anytime, Peacock Premium, etc. Except now instead of one easy to use interface to access it all, it's spread out all over the place and inconsistent as hell. And more expensive!
- matlock 6y ago
  > You don't own the music. You can't share it, use your own software to analyze, shuffle, remix it, etc I'm a consumer of music, not a creator so I don't care that I don't own it. There are tons of ways creators can analyze, shuffle, remix or do whatever with it, but as a pure consumer Spotify is simply much better for me than CDs. I never cared about owning Music, CDs were always just a transport Medium so I can listen to the music. > But now there's Hulu, Disney+, Amazon Prime, HBO Go, Showtime Anytime, Peacock Premium, etc. Except now instead of one easy to use interface to access it all, it's spread out all over the place and inconsistent as hell. And more expensive! They aren't though because you can be selective and cancel anytime and resubscribe. And you can watch exactly what you want at any time compared to cable. As a consumer it is way better because there is way more choice and competition at the moment.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- kgwgk 6y ago
  > instead of one easy to use interface to access it all one easy to use interface to access whatever was on
- dkdbejwi383 6y ago
  > But now there's Hulu, Disney+, Amazon Prime, HBO Go, Showtime Anytime, Peacock Premium, etc. Outside of the USA there’s far less choice, so less subscription overflow
  - echelon 6y ago
    It's coming for you...
- rorykoehler 6y ago
  I just stopped watching things. Kind of a strange outcome but I'm also more happy with it than expected.
  - tubularhells 6y ago
    I haven't watched a lot of things the past 10 years. A couple movies with friends, but I can count those on one hand. I don't really miss it. Some friends find t weird and try to push recommendations still, and I thank them and tell them I'll put it on the list. Then I promptly forget what they talked about, but they seem to have been satisfied with this. No harm done, right? On the other hand, they seem to be all about audio books while I tell them they are not the same as sitting down with a real one. They tell me they don't have time for books, and listening to them while working our, jogging, cycling is how they 'read'. I don't think they are getting the same thing out of it that I do actually reading the physical book in a single tasking way, but then again, I shouldn't be bothered by other people's habits.
    - icebraining 6y ago
      Oral sharing has been the human way of transmitting stories for tens of thousands of years. Your newfangled "written books" are just a novelty :)
      - spdionis 6y ago
        I think "single-tasking" is key though :)
        tubularhells 6y ago
        Yeah.
    - rorykoehler 6y ago
      I do audio books too. Actually often if a book is good I'll download the text too to read and listen to interchangeably. It's nice going for a walk in the park while listening to the book once in a while.
- sbuk 6y ago
  You never did “own” it on a CD, or for that matter a on vinyl or cassette. You owned a license to privately listen to your copy of the music, that lasts as long as the medium is playable. Recording from the radio is technically unlawful, as is playing the music at large gatherings or broadcasting the music. Same goes for video cassettes, DVDs and other mediums. What you do own is a physical copy of the music/film. You cannot do what you want with it, which is what you are implying. I’m not suggesting that this is fair or just either. Also, if you’re arguing against 30% fees, Spotify takes about 30% as a margin on every fee they receive, more for ads.
  - pitay 6y ago
    At least you had the right to resell CDs. Something lost even in DRM free online services. Cannot even give (transfer) a copy of the digital thing they bought to someone on the same service (ie they have it on their account, you now don't). The change to digital distribution has destroyed customer rights.
  - lixtra 6y ago
    > Recording from the radio is technically unlawful I thought this was settled the other way in https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Universal_City_Studios,_Inc https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Uni....
    - sbuk 6y ago
      My frame of reference there is the UK. Should've been more explicit stating that. Sorry :)
      - musicale 6y ago
        In the US the Audio Home Recording Act explicitly legalized noncommercial recording (and also created a tape/CD-r tax to compensate copyright holders.) In an alternate reality this could have legalized file sharing onto (taxed) MP3 players. (Though the subsequent NET act added criminal penalties.) How did Apple's Rip. Mix. Burn. campaign play out in the UK?
- a10c 6y ago
  > But now there's Hulu, Disney+, Amazon Prime, HBO Go, Showtime Anytime, Peacock Premium, etc. Except now instead of one easy to use interface to access it all, it's spread out all over the place and inconsistent as hell. And more expensive! Back in my younger days in Australia I remember we had to get the "Entertainment Plus" pack in order to get the sports channels on Cable. That included 65 other non-sport channels for a minimum of $110 a month. Now I pay $15 a month for a sports-only subscription service.
- tubularhells 6y ago
  My single access frontend is the transmission-qt client. I can recommend it wholeheartedly.
snemvalts 6y ago
That's coming out of the musicians' pockets...
neltnerb 6y ago
You might honestly be right, for anyone who expects to buy five albums a year. The downside being that all the music you've "bought" might just disappear if the service goes down. It might be worth it, but the best of both worlds would be nice. I'm not sure what that should be, but unlimited local copies of everything for a small amount of money doesn't sound fair -- but Spotify hardly deserves a big cut of it either. A pickle indeed, if only there were a service that was more of a co-op of artists. Happy to hear recommendations, I'm using soundcloud still.
- fabianhjr 6y ago
  It already exists on both fronts: stream2own and a cooperative. https://resonate.is/ https://resonate.is/
  - neltnerb 6y ago
    Oh, I remember this. Gosh, I really wish it was good, and I mean that sincerely. It's just got such a limited selection and set of genres, and if what I want is a radio station to listen to in the background half the time... Don't get me wrong, the music is lovely. I like the idea a lot. It's just really not comparable =/
    - fabianhjr 6y ago
      It surely lacks RIAA-adjecent content; hopefully it gets better over time and improves the musicians' living conditions.
- richrichardsson 6y ago
  > might just disappear if the service goes down The service doesn't even need to go down, the licenses with Spotify can be revoked/expire/etc. I love the convenience of having an almost unlimited library of music to listen to, I absolutely detest the fact that one day I might think, "Oh I'd like to listen to <X> from my playlist." and suddenly it's no longer available, because <reasons>.

echelon 6y ago

> Spotify You don't own the music. You can't share it, use your own software to analyze, shuffle, remix it, etc. > Netflix subscription But now there's Hulu, Disney+, Amazon Prime, HBO Go, Showtime Anytime, Peacock Premium, etc. Except now instead of one easy to use interface to access it all, it's spread out all over the place and inconsistent as hell. And more expensive!

matlock 6y ago
> You don't own the music. You can't share it, use your own software to analyze, shuffle, remix it, etc I'm a consumer of music, not a creator so I don't care that I don't own it. There are tons of ways creators can analyze, shuffle, remix or do whatever with it, but as a pure consumer Spotify is simply much better for me than CDs. I never cared about owning Music, CDs were always just a transport Medium so I can listen to the music. > But now there's Hulu, Disney+, Amazon Prime, HBO Go, Showtime Anytime, Peacock Premium, etc. Except now instead of one easy to use interface to access it all, it's spread out all over the place and inconsistent as hell. And more expensive! They aren't though because you can be selective and cancel anytime and resubscribe. And you can watch exactly what you want at any time compared to cable. As a consumer it is way better because there is way more choice and competition at the moment.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
kgwgk 6y ago
> instead of one easy to use interface to access it all one easy to use interface to access whatever was on
dkdbejwi383 6y ago
> But now there's Hulu, Disney+, Amazon Prime, HBO Go, Showtime Anytime, Peacock Premium, etc. Outside of the USA there’s far less choice, so less subscription overflow
- echelon 6y ago
  It's coming for you...
rorykoehler 6y ago
I just stopped watching things. Kind of a strange outcome but I'm also more happy with it than expected.
- tubularhells 6y ago
  I haven't watched a lot of things the past 10 years. A couple movies with friends, but I can count those on one hand. I don't really miss it. Some friends find t weird and try to push recommendations still, and I thank them and tell them I'll put it on the list. Then I promptly forget what they talked about, but they seem to have been satisfied with this. No harm done, right? On the other hand, they seem to be all about audio books while I tell them they are not the same as sitting down with a real one. They tell me they don't have time for books, and listening to them while working our, jogging, cycling is how they 'read'. I don't think they are getting the same thing out of it that I do actually reading the physical book in a single tasking way, but then again, I shouldn't be bothered by other people's habits.
  - icebraining 6y ago
    Oral sharing has been the human way of transmitting stories for tens of thousands of years. Your newfangled "written books" are just a novelty :)
    - spdionis 6y ago
      I think "single-tasking" is key though :)
      - tubularhells 6y ago
        Yeah.
  - rorykoehler 6y ago
    I do audio books too. Actually often if a book is good I'll download the text too to read and listen to interchangeably. It's nice going for a walk in the park while listening to the book once in a while.
sbuk 6y ago
You never did “own” it on a CD, or for that matter a on vinyl or cassette. You owned a license to privately listen to your copy of the music, that lasts as long as the medium is playable. Recording from the radio is technically unlawful, as is playing the music at large gatherings or broadcasting the music. Same goes for video cassettes, DVDs and other mediums. What you do own is a physical copy of the music/film. You cannot do what you want with it, which is what you are implying. I’m not suggesting that this is fair or just either. Also, if you’re arguing against 30% fees, Spotify takes about 30% as a margin on every fee they receive, more for ads.
- pitay 6y ago
  At least you had the right to resell CDs. Something lost even in DRM free online services. Cannot even give (transfer) a copy of the digital thing they bought to someone on the same service (ie they have it on their account, you now don't). The change to digital distribution has destroyed customer rights.
- lixtra 6y ago
  > Recording from the radio is technically unlawful I thought this was settled the other way in https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Universal_City_Studios,_Inc https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Uni....
  - sbuk 6y ago
    My frame of reference there is the UK. Should've been more explicit stating that. Sorry :)
    - musicale 6y ago
      In the US the Audio Home Recording Act explicitly legalized noncommercial recording (and also created a tape/CD-r tax to compensate copyright holders.) In an alternate reality this could have legalized file sharing onto (taxed) MP3 players. (Though the subsequent NET act added criminal penalties.) How did Apple's Rip. Mix. Burn. campaign play out in the UK?
a10c 6y ago
> But now there's Hulu, Disney+, Amazon Prime, HBO Go, Showtime Anytime, Peacock Premium, etc. Except now instead of one easy to use interface to access it all, it's spread out all over the place and inconsistent as hell. And more expensive! Back in my younger days in Australia I remember we had to get the "Entertainment Plus" pack in order to get the sports channels on Cable. That included 65 other non-sport channels for a minimum of $110 a month. Now I pay $15 a month for a sports-only subscription service.
tubularhells 6y ago
My single access frontend is the transmission-qt client. I can recommend it wholeheartedly.

snemvalts 6y ago

That's coming out of the musicians' pockets...

neltnerb 6y ago

You might honestly be right, for anyone who expects to buy five albums a year. The downside being that all the music you've "bought" might just disappear if the service goes down. It might be worth it, but the best of both worlds would be nice. I'm not sure what that should be, but unlimited local copies of everything for a small amount of money doesn't sound fair -- but Spotify hardly deserves a big cut of it either. A pickle indeed, if only there were a service that was more of a co-op of artists. Happy to hear recommendations, I'm using soundcloud still.

fabianhjr 6y ago
It already exists on both fronts: stream2own and a cooperative. https://resonate.is/ https://resonate.is/
- neltnerb 6y ago
  Oh, I remember this. Gosh, I really wish it was good, and I mean that sincerely. It's just got such a limited selection and set of genres, and if what I want is a radio station to listen to in the background half the time... Don't get me wrong, the music is lovely. I like the idea a lot. It's just really not comparable =/
  - fabianhjr 6y ago
    It surely lacks RIAA-adjecent content; hopefully it gets better over time and improves the musicians' living conditions.
richrichardsson 6y ago
> might just disappear if the service goes down The service doesn't even need to go down, the licenses with Spotify can be revoked/expire/etc. I love the convenience of having an almost unlimited library of music to listen to, I absolutely detest the fact that one day I might think, "Oh I'd like to listen to <X> from my playlist." and suddenly it's no longer available, because <reasons>.