22 ms·

Audiobooks on Spotify

191 points by JadoJodo 4y ago

JadoJodo 4y ago
Does anyone else take issue with Spotify branching out into other arenas (e.g., Podcasts, TV, Audiobooks, etc.)? I'm honestly kinda tired of all of these services trying to gobble up any slightly related industry. I subscribe to Spotify to listen to music, not podcasts. My podcasts arrive using a different app with the backing of the RSS standard, not Spotify's internal standard. I don't want to get a subscription cost bump because Spotify has not decided they want to offer podcasts when I'm only paying for the music.
- greggh 4y ago
  I subscribe to Spotify to listen to podcasts, and occasionally music.
- techsupporter 4y ago
  > I'm honestly kinda tired of all of these services trying to gobble up any slightly related industry. Vertical (acquiring as many steps in the supply chain to a business' core business as it can) and horizontal (acquiring as many related or semi-related functions as it can) integration has been the name of the game for as long as businesses were a thing. One example I like to use is Temple-Inland, that started as a company that made boxes, was acquired into a company that made paper, bought another company that did forestry management, which turned into "we should have a real estate investment arm", and resulted in the country's third-largest mortgage lender in the early 80s. We can be kinda tired of it all we want to but this is one of those competing interests between customers[0] and companies: the customer wants maximum flexibility for the lowest cost with the broadest range of features; the company wants the fewest costs for the most income with the highest amount of lock-in. Integration tilts the balance towards the companies so they will always pursue it. 0 - As an aside, I don't like calling people "consumers". We are customers; we "consume" service offerings, but (likely) we do so with intent.
  - jo6gwb 4y ago
    In many cases, the word consumer connotes a legal definition that is different than customer. For example, see the definition from Reg P: Consumer means an individual who obtains or has obtained a financial product or service from you that is to be used primarily for personal, family, or household purposes, or that individual's legal representative. A customer may be an individual or a business. Source: https://www.consumerfinance.gov/rules-policy/regulations/1016/3/#e https://www.consumerfinance.gov/rules-policy/regulations/101...
- djcannabiz 4y ago
  I personally find the podcasts kinda nice but there should really be a way to turn them off entirely. Soulseek + foobar is allways an option.
- Maxburn 4y ago
  Spotify is a horrible podcast player. The audio engine doesn't have nuanced speed control or remove silence like other dedicated podcast apps. I also find the podcast UI is terrible for managing shows and play list. And then there's the bugs that don't get fixed for a long time. Last year they had one where every time a podcast was interrupted by a notification or something it would start over from the start. Lastly spotify podcasts that are exclusive are not, by definition, a podcast because they don't have a valid rss feed. You might refer to them as shows but calling them podcasts ignores how podcasts are supposed to work in an open interoperable system. And of course there's zero chance they will embrace podcast 2.0 features; https://podnews.net/podcast/i4ji5 https://podnews.net/podcast/i4ji5 https://podcastindex.org/podcast/value4value https://podcastindex.org/podcast/value4value
  - andy_ppp 4y ago
    Spotify isn’t even a good music player…
  - tpxl 4y ago
    > are not, by definition, a podcast because they don't have a valid rss feed Does a podcast need to have a rss feed? All I see in definitions is that its an audio format made available over the internet. > And of course there's zero chance they will embrace podcast 2.0 features What is Podcasting 2.0? All I see is a bunch of people doing podcasting differently, namely adding ads and crypto.
    - LtWorf 4y ago
      Yes it needs an RSS feed. Otherwise it's just an mp3 file.
      - tpxl 4y ago
        So a podcast with an ATOM feed isn't a podcast? It needs a feed, sure, but not necessarily RSS.
        4y ago
- krono 4y ago
  Those podcast recommendations (i.e. advertisements) that appear as image tiles in their apps are annoying but avoidable. Recently they have started inserting random podcast episodes into my "Release Radar" playlists. Not happy with this development to put it lightly.
  - willhinsa 4y ago
    Ugh. How do these companies so thoroughly not understand their own raison d'être?
    - prepend 4y ago
      They understand that they make more money this way even if it pisses off customers. They’ve calculated that the customers who drop because of it is outweighed by the higher profits from playing podcasts.
      - counttheforks 4y ago
        I remember when they would prominently advertise Jordan Peterson right on the home page of their app. No other podcasts, just him over and over again while I've never used their app for anything other than music. I contacted their support to ask how to remove these advertisements from the product I paid for, and they told me that this was impossible. Impossible is a strong word, and installing https://github.com/spicetify https://github.com/spicetify proved that it was, in fact, possible to remove the ads for podcasts from their product.
    - conductr 4y ago
      > their own raison d'être It's growth, that's why they exist, searching for growth
      - willhinsa 4y ago
        Cancer has the same modus operandi.
- DavidVoid 4y ago
  I ended up switching to Qobuz for this exact reason. I have nothing against podcasts, but what I wanted from Spotify was a great music app, and it's clear that that's no longer what they want to be. (I also suspect that podcasts and audiobooks are more lucrative for Spotify than music is, since long-form content likely has a lower royalties/minute rate than music does)
- joshstrange 4y ago
  > Does anyone else take issue with Spotify branching out into other arenas (e.g., Podcasts, TV, Audiobooks, etc.)? > I subscribe to Spotify to listen to music, not podcasts. My podcasts arrive using a different app with the backing of the RSS standard, not Spotify's internal standard 100%. I will never touch Spotify Podcasts for that reason and that a number of the podcasts I listen to have specifically talked about Spotify's shitty/scummy practices around podcasts (like grabbing their audio and hosting it on Spotify's servers which cuts off the only traffic/demographics info that podcasts currently have access to). Anyone with half a brain would take one look at what Spotify is doing and run in the opposite direction. They don't care about the open nature of podcasts and they want to lure people in then put a wall up around them. If a podcast is only on Spotify it's immediately a podcast I don't care about because those podcast creators don't give a shit about the medium of podcasts, no self-respecting podcaster would walk into that lions den. With this new move into audiobooks I need to seriously reconsider using Spotify. I've enjoyed using it (and paying for it) since launch but I'm sick of their gross moves and whiny-baby attitude (also after getting access to APIs refusing to implement them, really shows how full of shit their claims are). Maybe I need to look into 3rd-party Apple Music players since the AM app is some of the worst UI/UX for a music app.
  - CharlesW 4y ago
    > They don't care about the open nature of podcasts and they want to lure people in then put a wall up around them. This is key. "Podcasts" and "podcasting" were created to refer to an open medium, but Spotify's intentional adoption and perversion of those words to refer to their proprietary platform has worked brilliantly. We're further down the embrace/extend/extinguish path than most people realize.
    - eduction 4y ago
      Do you think there should be podcast that are paywalled, or are you against that on principle? And if you support paywalled podcasts, what, in your mind, would be the correct way for Spotify to implement them? (I'm genuinely curious your answer, but to lay my cards and biases on the table: I prefer paid podcasts to the ad supported ones; I'm tired of hearing all the Casper and Squarespace ads woven into the content. And I have trouble imagining a typical Spotify listener (interested in, say, Joe Rogan podcast) properly moving a personalized premium RSS feed into another client without a ton of chaos and confusion.)
- KptMarchewa 4y ago
  ATM I use podcasts more time than music, and I like their implementation fairly.
- collegeburner 4y ago
  i mean there's not actually that much $ in a commodified streaming service. royalties eat most of it and artists still aren't paid that much. so branching out is spotify's only hope of finding a high-margin area of business.
- crazygringo 4y ago
  I have no issue with it business-wise -- if they don't, they'll eventually die because a podcast/audiobook app expands into music. I just have a major issue with it UX-wise. I wish podcasts and audiobooks were their own separate apps. I've totally given up even trying to understand Spotify's UX anymore. I always eventually manage to play what I want through some combo of scroll/filter/search/history but I just feel like I never know what's going to appear anywhere this time. And as long as I'm wishing... how about an app just for classical music too! Composer+performer just can't be satisfactorily shoehorned into a single "artist" field no matter how hard you try. Same as tracks aren't works -- a symphony might be anywhere from 3 to 40 tracks. (Keep classical music accessible in the main app for casual listeners, and because the line between classical and pop is blurry in some cases -- but just add a dedicated app designed for classical alone.)
  - techsupporter 4y ago
    > While I'm wishing, I've always wished they'd separate classical music into its own app too... For what it's worth, a lot of Spotify's customers agree with you and have made third-party apps that try to do this. (I only know they exist but not how good they are since classical music is not my thing. But I kind of understand where classical music fans are coming from since a lot of electronic music, especially earlier works, is "mangled" in the same way.) The two I know off the top of my head are Concertmaster and Tempso, if that helps.
    - ggrelet 4y ago
      Do you know anything similar for electronic music ?
  - elefantastisch 4y ago
    Idagio is a great alternative for classical.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - 4y ago
- iamacyborg 4y ago
  > I subscribe to Spotify to listen to music, not podcasts. Yep, and I really wish they'd stop promoting absolute turds like Joe Rogan and Jordan Peterson at me. I have no interest in listening to them.
  - prepend 4y ago
    Not yet, but if you see 20,000 more ads you might have interest. Spotify is willing to try.
    - counttheforks 4y ago
      The worst part is that they are showing these ads to paying customers.
    - iamacyborg 4y ago
      The only thing that’ll make me do is badger the folks at Tidal and other streaming co’s to create a proper alternative to Spotify Connect that works on my Yamaha hardware.
      - nsteel 4y ago
        What is wrong with Tidal Connect (https://tidal.com/Connect https://tidal.com/Connect) ? Honest question, have never used it. Don't you need to badger Yamaha to support it in your old hardware? But even if the old hardware was getting updates, Yamaha don't seem to be a partner (https://tidal.com/supported-devices?filter=tidal-connect https://tidal.com/supported-devices?filter=tidal-connect). You can cheaply add Tidal Connect support to an old amp with a LinkPlay-based product e.g. https://www.arylic.com/products/up2stream-pro-receiver-board https://www.arylic.com/products/up2stream-pro-receiver-board
        iamacyborg 4y ago
        Yeah it’s likely more of a Yamaha issue but it’s a feature I use daily so is unfortunately a complete deal breaker for me. I use Yamaha streamers so adding a separate dongle to those for those seems unnecessary.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- wollsmoth 4y ago
  I think they have to get some kind of exclusive content. Either they somehow start recording hits and start a war with other streaming services for popular tracks or they have podcasts which I guess are sort of supposed to be like the catalog that video streaming services are trying to build.
  - hardtke 4y ago
    Exclusive content is the only way they (or any streaming service) can become profitable. With recorded music, they have to pay a revenue share to the artists and Spotify's percentage does not increase as they grow. With exclusive content, however, they pay once and as the audience grows the additional listeners are pure profit. So, the goal is to increase the percentage of owned content consumed on the platform and give less of the subscription fees to the record labels. The exclusive tracks model does not work for music artists because they want ubiquitous distribution. Music is unlike video in that people consume the same content over and over again, and also unlike video in that the artists make the big bucks off of live performances. This is why SiriusXM can pay Howard Stern $100M per year and still be wildly profitable. It reduces their dependence on royalty incurring content.
- fasouto 4y ago
  I am a paying customer and for some reason they show me an popup ad every time I open the app... It's extremely annoying.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - bavila 4y ago
    I wasn't seeing that popup ad "every time", but after the third one, I said screw it and canceled my paid subscription. Unforgivable.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- cush 4y ago
  > Does anyone else take issue with Spotify branching out into other arenas Branching into audio books is the obvious next move. It's not like Netflix attempting to make games. If you think that's bad, take a look at Disney
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- agentwiggles 4y ago
  Yes, as far as I concerned Spotify was basically perfect in like 2012, and most all of the features added (and _REMOVED_) since then have made the app experience worse. I want to listen to music. That's it. Anything that gets in the way of me doing this is a net bad afaic. I'm still particularly offended by their near deprecation of support for local files. When I first got into Spotify the seamless integration with my local music library was a huge selling point. At some point, the app tried to help me by "linking" my meticulously organized concert playlists with studio versions of the songs... I have not been inspired to give that feature more time since. I feel like I get closer to just getting an mp3 player again every day.
  - corobo 4y ago
    Silly as it is I really miss song previews. Used to be if you long pressed a song (iOS anyway) it would jump in a little and play for as long as you held it, going back to the music you were listening to when you let go. Great for checking you've found the song you were thinking of and impromptu remixes to make friends laugh. Annoyingly it was removed for "low engagement rate"[0]. I mean yeah, I found it by accident lmao. Maybe tell people about it? [0] https://community.spotify.com/t5/iOS-iPhone-iPad/Touch-Preview-on-iOS-removal/m-p/1857905 https://community.spotify.com/t5/iOS-iPhone-iPad/Touch-Previ...
    - Aachen 4y ago
      I never knew they had it, but now that you mention it... I miss it also. When you just want to get an impression of the song without listening to the whole thing front to back, yeah very often I'd make use of this.
  - kbenson 4y ago
    Honestly, I think the perfect music app that never existed is Pandora with the ability to play specific songs. I always found Pandora to a have a much better recommendation system and was actually happier and didn't play specific songs, just stations. The only thing that made me switch was the Spotify family plan and multiple children asking for it. I've been unhappy with it for years, but can't bring myself to pay for two separate music subscription services, and also can't bring myself to listen to adds.
- stronglikedan 4y ago
  It's fine if they branch out, but they abuse their users with popups, and by not being able to hide these extra features. I just want to listen to music without having to repeatedly tell them that's all I want to do.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- eduction 4y ago
  >My podcasts arrive using a different app with the backing of the RSS standard, not Spotify's internal standard. I know a lot of people will disagree, but I think Spotify did a good job of handling the problem of "premium" podcasts. There's no way to make a "premium" podcast (one you charge people to access) that is fully compatible with the original open vision of podcasting. You can either pervert the original RSS enclosures system by using obscure / personalized URLs for individual subscribers (a leaky abstraction that both discourages open sharing of feed URLs and fails to properly close off access) or you can pervert it by wrapping files in DRM (Apple's approach in the Apple Podcasters Program). Instead of perverting the RSS feeds, Spotify opted to pervert (slightly) the term "podcast" to not strictly mean "in an RSS feed and listenable on any client." I think this was inevitable and arguably had already happened and is far better than corrupting the open ecosystem. It also happens to be far easier from a UX perspective to tell someone to just use the Spotify app. For all the people upset at Spotify, consider the counterfactual: Why would they tell people to listen to their premium podcasts by copying a custom premium URL and pasting it into some random client (which 99% of the time on iPhones will be controlled by their bully Apple)? It is much clearer, easier for the user, and better for Spotify's premium creators (who don't want to lose listeners to a complex setup system) to just tell them "Listen to Spotify podcasts by downloading the Spotify app". Under Spotify's system, some podcasters rake in Spotify money they wouldn't otherwise get, growing the premium ecosystem, while the open ecosystem remains robust and not polluted with more DRM and URL hacks. Keeping closed systems clearly closed and separate is much better IMO than trying to awkwardly jam it into the open ecosystem, undermining what makes that ecosystem great.
  - ctoth 4y ago
    What's wrong with HTTP basic auth for this use case? https://subscriber-id:subscriber-token@podcast.host/feed.rss https://subscriber-id:subscriber-token@podcast.host/feed.rss In what way does this "pollute" or "pervert" the open standard? Apple and Spotify are companies, not people, this is not high school, Apple is not "bully"ing Spotify, they have a business relationship. In general your comment is loaded with emotional language that seems to muddle the issue rather than clarifying.
    - 4y ago
- kenjackson 4y ago
  Isn't it the case with almost every subscription service that there are aspects of it that you don't make use of? I feel like every subscription I have, from cellular to cable to Netflix, there's stuff I don't use that is part of the subscription. E.g., I don't watch horror movies, but apparently Netflix is still making them. Maybe I should take issue with it, but it just feels so mundane to me.
  - pwinnski 4y ago
    You're talking about genres, which is a different scenario. This is more like Netflix raising prices for streaming subscribers to fund a new video-game studio. The fact that some people might enjoy both doesn't make them anything like the same thing.
    - kenjackson 4y ago
      I think it's just levels of granularity. Podcasts and music are both audio entertainment. It's like Netflix adding TV shows to their lineup of movies. But the broader point is simply that in subscriptions to services you usually pay for some aspect of the service that you don't use and never have any intent to use -- and you can partition off that aspect of the service in a simple way (at least simple to you).
      - pwinnski 4y ago
        Car rentals and horseback rides are both transportation, but most people would say the difference is not trivial. Movies, tv, and video games are all visual entertainment, but video games are different enough that most people are generally not happy about the idea of raising the price of Netflix to finance a video game studio. Art museums are visual entertainment as well, but raising the price of Netflix to build art galleries in select locations wouldn't fly well, either. In this case, Spotify is doing anything but partitioning off podcasts. As many comments here reveal, most people are seeing podcasts pushed heavily in their music interface.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- pelasaco 4y ago
  i don't have a problem at all with that. I consume everything on spotify. However what bothers me is Spotify playing victim here, when we know that if Spotify was in Apple's position, they would probably do the same.
- Aachen 4y ago
  No, I don't at all mind them trying to break the monopoly on audio books that is Amazon. (You can get them from the original publisher (not author/narrator) for 35 bucks, or 10 from Amazon. I'm willing to pay a premium for avoiding Amazon but I love audio books and I'm not as rich as Bezos.) Podcasts was never a monopoly, but they're trying to make it one with the exclusive shows. That's what I hate. I have Spotify premium for music, so I could listen to those, but I unsubscribed from those podcasts immediately when they became exclusive. There's plenty more. TV, I didn't know Spotify was trying to do, but same logic applies there.
- solarkraft 4y ago
  Absolutely. But it's not really an expansion - they're trying to get people off of music and onto podcasts because those are cheaper for them to serve (so more like an attempt at not having to raise the subscription price). I guess the idea is that all types of audio content have some commonality and somebody who's considering listening to music could also listen to a podcast instead. I don't think this overlap happens for me very often, but maybe it's more often than I think and often enough for them to be worth it. I'll still boycott their podcasts because they're attempting to make proprietary what is currently free.
- NoPicklez 4y ago
  I don't think I have an issue with Spotify, a music streaming platform, moving into streaming other audio types. Afterall, Apple always had the Podcasts app and they make computers. So I don't think it's much of a stretch for Spotify. Perhaps if they branched into video I'd start to be concerned. I quite like the fact that my music library and podcasts are all from the same app and I do find that Podcasts are less "in your face" than music.
- batch12 4y ago
  I just use Spotify for podcasts, never music. Just providing a different perspective.
- res0nat0r 4y ago
  I want them to absorb the whole ecosystem. Podcast apps suck and I am absolutely never using itunes. I'm glad I can get podcasts I like in Spotify and it will track across my phone / pc my progress. I don't listen to audiobooks but would buy them from Spotify if I did so I don't have to download and figure out some kind of Amazon Audible app instead.
- wraptile 4y ago
  I wouldn't bother me at all if they didn't neglect the existing features. It used to be the most responsive music app to the point where they made a documentary about themselves now it it's everything but that - crashes, buffers, freezes, every sort of bug is present where it wasn't before.
galoisscobi 4y ago
Last time they complained about Apple not supporting Siri integration. Then when Apple added support for that, Spotify never added HomePod Siri support. The idea has ~5k votes and 137 pages of comments on their forum and yet no action from Spotify. https://community.spotify.com/t5/Live-Ideas/iOS-Implement-Native-HomePod-Support/idi-p/4985214/page/137#comments https://community.spotify.com/t5/Live-Ideas/iOS-Implement-Na...
- ribosometronome 4y ago
  These features would all help with putting money directly in their pocket. I imagine they would be prioritized.
- fergbrain 4y ago
  I dropped Spotify and went to Apple Music because of this.
  - prepend 4y ago
    I dropped Spotify and went to Apple Music because for $20 I get music, 200GB cloud, and tv vs $15 for Spotify.
- graydsl 4y ago
  Just came here to write that! Because of that and because I am not a fan of the convoluted UI, I switched to YT Music. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- bgentry 4y ago
  Spotify also still doesn't support AirPlay 2, nearly 4.5 years after it was launched: https://www.macrumors.com/2022/01/25/spotify-still-doesnt-support-airplay-2/ https://www.macrumors.com/2022/01/25/spotify-still-doesnt-su... I really don't want to switch to Apple Music (it's not a great app either) but I'm really tired of dealing with playback issues due to the lack of buffered AirPlay 2 playback. If you try out a proper AirPlay 2 supporting app like Overcast or Apple Music, it's a dramatically better experience. I also want nothing to do with Spotify's podcasts or audio books. And their macOS Chromium desktop app has also languished for years.
Arkanum 4y ago
I wonder if the decision in the US around Epic and external links[0] will benefit spotify in Europe or not (when it is eventually resolved). [0]:https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/8/22814147/epic-apple-app-store-injunction-paused https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/8/22814147/epic-apple-app-s...
firloop 4y ago
As a consumer, I’ve actually come to prefer in app purchases. I love when a subscription is available on IAP because for something like a newspaper, I know that I can cancel it with a couple of taps instead of having to fill out some long retention form or call someone.
- sweetheart 4y ago
  I think I feel similarly, to be honest. While I don't think I'd be less likely to buy something I wanted if an in-app purchase wasn't available, I've always been thankful when I realized I bought something or set up a subscription via Apple because I feel their incentive isn't to make managing that purchase difficult, so their UX for control over subscriptions has been great. Though, at face value, I do see the argument for giving folks the option to make the purchase how they want, which may mean doing it in the app but not using Apple's APIs. I dunno, I don't have strong feelings about any of this, so it always surprises me when companies try to make such a big deal of it. Sure, it affects their bottom line, but let's not pretend like I should care about that.
- amykhar 4y ago
  Exactly. It's not that Spotify can't do in app purchases. They just don't want to pay for the privilege.
  - Gigachad 4y ago
    Because they exist in a highly competitive market where Apple Music can provide in app purchases without paying the extra tax.
- wobbly_bush 4y ago
  Are you also willing to pay the extra Apple tax for this convenience instead of expecting the subscription provider to eat those costs?
  - hombre_fatal 4y ago
    Depends on the product and the tax. Looks like I'm paying more via IAP for Youtube ($16 vs $12/mo) and Audible ($16 vs $8/mo ???) according to the prices listed on their website. Half of the services out there probably charge you extra just because you don't have to go through their scummy "cancel subscription" website pipeline. They probably lose millions on that along with the fact that I get an iOS notification when my IAP subscriptions renew. One crappy autorenewing service charging my credit card directly has cost me more than IAP taxes ever will. As far as I'm concerned, IAP saves me money and the status quo for rebilling in the USA only benefits the bad actors.
AlbertCory 4y ago
Hey. I want my audiobooks on Spotify. This is purely a disinterested position, of course. In order to serve you better. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Audible-The-Big-Bucks/dp/B0BDBG5VNP/ref=sr_1_1 https://www.amazon.com/Audible-The-Big-Bucks/dp/B0BDBG5VNP/r... [2] https://www.amazon.com/Inventing-the-Future-A-Novel/dp/B09NZG1DXX/ref=sr_1_2 https://www.amazon.com/Inventing-the-Future-A-Novel/dp/B09NZ...
pwinnski 4y ago
Oh, look, a huge company that pays artists a pittance[0] is pretending to be on the side of the artists (writers in this case) in their fight against mean old Apple. Is this like when they complained about Apple not letting them do Siri, but then never implemented Siri support? Or maybe it's like when they complained about Apple not letting them make a watch app, when the APIs were already available? Nah, it's about Spotify wanting more money, and trying to pretend it's David vs Goliath it's not. 0. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3k9-UIg52xg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3k9-UIg52xg
mostlysimilar 4y ago
No other company do I hate and love so much. I love their discovery algorithms and find new music through them so often. I look forward to my new Discover Weekly every Monday. But in every other way they drive me crazy. The UI is terrible and basic but I've learned to live with it. What I absolutely can't stand is inserting podcasts and audio books into the app with no option to opt-out. I get that they want to put these things in front of as many people as possible, but it's a shame that happens at the expense of those of us who don't want that cluttering up their libraries. Let me turn it off. Why can't I turn it off?
- Gigachad 4y ago
  The Spotify UI is bad but it’s not even close to as bad as Apple and YouTube music. I tried my best to like Yt music since it comes with YouTube premium but the service is simply unusable.
- Jorchime 4y ago
  I used to love the Discovery Weekly list as well. But since a couple of years, my account recommendations went into some strange niche solution and they recommend the same rubbish over and over again. I even get annoyed at certain genres that I used to mildly enjoy before. If you try to look for a solution, apparently the only way is to cancel the subscription, delete the account, resubscribe and start over ... I wish there was a way to reset the "intelligent" recommendations for an existing account. The only workaround I found: put a couple of similar and interesting songs into a playlist and let Spotify continue with recommendations.
  - jackson1442 4y ago
    Agreed. I actually switched to Apple Music because the recommendations had gotten so consistently bad/weird. I wonder if it's related to money somehow, if some artists are accepting a lower cut in exchange for being placed on these playlists more frequently.
  - unsupp0rted 4y ago
    Literally: they keep recommending variations of the same song over and over. And if I'm not mistaken, not even variations, but the same song over and over. Each time I mark it as "remove". I visit my Discover Weekly about once a month because there's almost never anything of value in there. I'd find more gems with a random list of 30 songs.
prepend 4y ago
Do you know what I hate? Spotify having my credit card. There’s a very low chance I ever buy an audiobook if they integrate with apple’s purchase flow. There’s a zero chance if they had their own flow that pops up and asks me for a credit card. And a separate system to update numbers, cancel stuff, etc etc I get that Spotify wants more money. I’m sure publishers hated selling audiobooks to Barnes & Noble and them taking 50% of the retail price.
- counttheforks 4y ago
  Thanks to 3-D Secure it doesn't really matter who has your credit card details. Relying on the secrecy of a few numbers is silly anyway.
  - prepend 4y ago
    I’m not concerned about the security of my cars. I’m concerned about entering it again and Spotify charging me for stuff.
yawnr 4y ago
Good grief, that URL. These companies are ridiculous. Leave us out of your corporate drama.
- daveidol 4y ago
  I disagree. This "corporate drama" really does impact users, as well as developers (most of the HN crowd).
  - photoGrant 4y ago
    To be fair the corporate drama is usually dressed up as contorted consumer opinion drivel. The true reasons for most of these moves behind the scenes aren't as altruistic as these folks like to let on!
    - throwaway46829 4y ago
      All of business is a sort of charade, Amazon might be "sorry that your product was disappointing and want to offer you a refund" by which they mean "if we give you a refund we think you'll feel confident enough to buy more from us". You still get what you wanted though.
jjice 4y ago
As someone who uses Spotify every day, I hate it. I hate their expanding markets while constantly making the app more bloated, slow, and less intuitive. Really, you're going to fill my recommended page with podcasts you've paid a ton of money for exclusivity instead of showing me recommended music that's relevant to me, like they used to? Audiobooks aren't going to make my music experience any better either. Can't wait for a new, slower UI update in 3 months and for them to take away lyrics _again_. I'm a bit salty here and that's a bit of a rant, but I just want to stream music and they make it progressively harder.
- w0m 4y ago
  spotify podcasts are kind of garbage imo; player just doesn't handle it well moving between or around episodes and music depending on what I'm doing.
- jnsaff2 4y ago
- dmitriid 4y ago
  > for them to take away lyrics _again_ Disclaimer: I work at Spotify, but I can't speak directly for the teams handling this. So. Lyrics, and any text that accompanies audio in general (for example, if you try to show audiobook text while it's playing, or audio transcript of a podcast, or...) is a legal minefield. So, if some text that accompanies audio disappears... it's likely for legal/licensing reasons, not because devs are incompetent. That said, as an incompetent dev myself, features may disappear due to incompetence, too :)
  - jjice 4y ago
    Oh I bet it gets tricky on the legal front. I was more referring to the entire feature being removed like 5 or 6 years ago I think, but I imagine there was an issue with the partnership with Genius or whoever the original lyric supplier was.
    - dmitriid 4y ago
damontal 4y ago
Why would i buy a full price audiobook through Spotify when I can just use Audible?
- tremarley 4y ago
  I've tried to us Spotify for music. And Audible for audiobooks. But it's not enjoyable using seperate apps I tend to only finish my audiobooks when they're on Spotify.
plorg 4y ago
I think Apple is being abusively extractive here. I also believe that Spotify's audiobook play will be bad for consumers and worse for artists.
- nomel 4y ago
  > I also believe that Spotify's audiobook play will be bad for consumers and worse for artists. Could you expand on this?
  - plorg 4y ago
    Spotify buying Findaway (a company that previously licensed audiobooks to many different distributors with varied business models), for example, centralizes the market in a way that at best, will result in both an oligopoly for consumers and an oligopsony for creaters. It is certainly good that Amazon/Audible has competitors, but if the only competitors it has have basically the same vertically integrated structure there will be less incentive and opportunity for authors and voice actors to create genuinely interesting works, and listeners will in turn have increasingly commoditized options, with creators making less money for their work and consumers paying more.
    - plorg 4y ago
      And that doesn't even include the more specific concerns about the way Spotify uses contract labor to squeeze artists.
- threeseed 4y ago
  Apple has been crystal clear since day one that they want a percentage of payments being facilitated through their platform. For them they are a channel and channels have costs.
- tremarley 4y ago
  I've been using Spotify for audiobooks for a few years. It's a lot easier to use than the alternatives in my opinion.
- 4y ago
scblock 4y ago
Corporate propaganda. Hardly “the full story”.
Bombthecat 4y ago
Does it save position now on an audiobook? For example if you listen to music inbetween? Cause if not, it's still useless
- nomel 4y ago
  It does for podcasts.
dangrie158 4y ago
Don‘t know about the US market but in Germany there were many audio books available in Spotify already that you could access via the normal premium subscription. Few days after I read about the launch of purchasable audio books in the US all of those vanished so I canceled my subscription and got Apple Music via Apple one which was a little cheaper for the whole family when adding the extra iCloud storage I needed anyway. Happy with the decision so far. I just had to move all my playlists to Apple Music which was easy due to a random online tool I found
JimA 4y ago
Regardless of the passionate feelings against Spotify, it's hard to dispute their basic premise that Apple is deliberately creating a bad user experience just to preserve their walled content garden. The same thing applies to not being able to buy a book using the Amazon app. It's ridiculous and there is no valid argument against it other than greed. Not a fan of overregulation, but in this area I can't wait for Apple to be reined in.
- amelius 4y ago
  Yes, there should be a law that hardware that the user paid for cannot be tethered by the manufacturer. Otherwise it is a service, not a product.
- threeseed 4y ago
  Spotify could just implement IAP. It's simple and has a great user experience. Seems like this is more about Spotify wanting to benefit from the channel without paying for it.
  - AntonyGarand 4y ago
    IAP take a 30% cut, which is unreasonable on things like audiobook
- boxed 4y ago
  The problem isn't that Apple forces IAP. The problem is that they have the outrageous cut of 30% (or even 15%). Apples IAP is awesome. Their greed is not.
xamdam 4y ago
I love apple products but I hate this stuff. They're cynically kneecapping competition and hurting consumer choice, like they're not rich enough already. Would class action be a to do thing here?
- daveidol 4y ago
  Agreed. It's too difficult to move off of iPhone/Apple products, but I really want to do something to force them to stop with the anticompetative BS.
freedomben 4y ago
Spotify: I want so badly to love you, and (FWIW) I'm very much on your side battling the giants like Apple. But, I'm so bothered by your approach to podcasts (the lock-in and proprietary of a previously open standard) that I can't muster much enthusiasm to defend you. It makes me think that since you're on the "bad" side of the podcasts issue when it's in your business interests, that you're only fighting on the "good" side of OP issue because it's in your business interests, and that destroys trust. Do you really think your approach to podcasts is better for anyone other than Spotify?
sdfhbdf 4y ago
Quoting from the page: > TLDR: Apple rules mandate a cumbersome Audiobooks purchasing process This is very much a lie. Apple’s way is the easy way - use IAP. And it seems that like with facebook [1] they’re trying to apply the rules evenly to everybody. Spotify religiously denies using Apple’s In App Payments. The attempt to send emails on how to purchase audiobooks is their sneaky way of bypassing the rules. They now to try to blame the process they came up with themselves on Apple. But Spotify is to blame, for not following rules of App Store which demand IAP for “digital goods and services”. However you feel about IAP if spotify has the courage it should challenge in court (like Epic) instead of a website that makes a very bad biased take on the situation. And we know Apple is not going to respond publicly. [1] Story about Facebook boosts being forced to IAP a few days ago
- fleddr 4y ago
  Your argument is "they are the rules". I think the point is that the rules are anti-competitive, user-hostile, extractive.
  - pwinnski 4y ago
    Not GP, but I think the argument was: "IAP is easy and simple and secure and well-known, and should be used." Spotify is acting as if Apple is blocking them in many different ways, but all would be solved if Spotify would use IAP, which is super-simple for users, but doesn't make Spotify as much money.
    - fleddr 4y ago
      You're saying the exact same thing: follow the rules. Completely ignoring that those rules are insane.
      - pwinnski 4y ago
        "IAP is easy and simple and secure and well-known, and should be used." Is that better? I will never use a purchase method on iOS that isn't IAP. Never, and I'm not alone.
r2222 4y ago
Yeah the App Store rules suck and that’s all on Apple, but I find it a bit silly for Spotify to repeatedly act surprised about them. It’s the same cycle: Spotify wants go around App Store rules → Apple says no → Spotify fires up the timetoplayfair dot com with slightly tweaked text to fit whatever issue they have this time.
- waboremo 4y ago
  How else are they going to challenge the status quo? I'm confused by people acting shocked and appalled every time any other company brings up issues with the status quo. Spotify wants to get into Audiobooks, Apple won't let them, Spotify wants to make a social ruckus so people are aware of who to blame and to demand change. Before you consider the idea they should just quietly try to push regulation, consider without insane amounts of capital to go against the likes of Apple who will always have more, you need the public on your side. It does have an impact on regulation.
  - pwinnski 4y ago
    > Apple won't let them Not true at all. Apple's rules haven't changed in ages, they've defended them against Epic in court, and Spotify knew what they were when they started down this road, just like they knew the last couple of times they've tried to argue with Apple publicly (they're 0-for-2 so far, last time I checked). Spotify can get into Audiobooks in multiple ways, they just don't like any of them. Apple isn't stopping them, they're just requiring their usual cut on IAP, and enforcing the usual rules. As usual.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - threeseed 4y ago
    Maybe Spotify should take the lead. Allow third party payment services and music stores in their app. With 0% cut of course.
    - 4y ago
vkhetan_iit 4y ago
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
SighMagi 4y ago
Time for Spotify to “Play Fair” with musicians.
artdigital 4y ago
Could you, say, hike the price of all audiobooks by the Apple tax when buying through iAP? While offering a cheaper price outside?
- benhurmarcel 4y ago
  You can but you're not allowed to inform the consumer about it. So it makes your product look overpriced and pisses off your customers. There are already apps doing this, like Youtube Premium ($16 IAP, $12 on their website) and Dropbox ($12 IAP, $10 on their website).
unnamed76ri 4y ago
As a musician who earns less than half a penny per stream from Spotify, it is really hard to for me to take this sob story seriously.
endofreach 4y ago
A friend of mine has the issue that spotify still charges him, even though he has no account anymore (and no access to the email address used for the non-existing account). There is no more information in the charge other than it is charged by spotify. They do not offer phone support and respond with useless questions. The only way he seems he has left is to let a lawyer handle it… Next time he should just let it be handled by apple, with a click, for free.
- jagaerglad 4y ago
  Cheaper and quicker than a lawyer would be to cancel his bank card and order a new one
tremarley 4y ago
I use Spotify to listen to Music, Podcasts and Audiobooks already. I've longed for a audiobook library on there for ages. Hopefully this works out, and apple doesn't screw them over too bad.
wintermutestwin 4y ago
My reaction when I read: "Audiobooks on Spotify" - Finally! Why has it taken so long to have subscription access to all audiobooks??? And then I read that you actually have to buy individual audiobooks - WTF???!!! I can stream ,000,000s of music, movies and series with a subscription - why not audiobooks??? (and don't mention Audible - for $23/month I can stream two books = BFD)
- slipperlobster 4y ago
  Your local library system _may_ offer eBooks through an app login. That'd be worth a check.
- ohbleek 4y ago
  This is why I use Scribd. I can’t access every single book I want but there are enough available that I’ve only run into that problem a handful of times, and I just found something else because it’s really a great selection.
mavu 4y ago
The spotify UI is the worst for listening to audiobooks i have ever encountered. So, I would consider it a favour that Apple is preventing you from suffering this miserable experience.
- hybridtupel 4y ago
  Exactly this! They litteraly treat audiobooks like a music album. Randomize tracks? Check! Not storing where the audiobook was stopped? Check! Featuring actual personal mixtapes of chapters taken from multiple books? Check! With that experience I'd never buy a single book there.
smcleod 4y ago
I mean.... if it was a small company or whatever sure - but this is Spotify, a giant corporate enterprise, I don't really feel sorry for them.
SLWW 4y ago
I bought a book from them, one I've been meaning to listen to for a long time. for $25 it wasn't a bad deal for hours of really good content, read by the author. Best version i've seen. I appreciate not having a subscription model attached to a few books I might listen to
roody15 4y ago
Wait you have to “buy” the audio book in addition to the monthly fee? hmmm no thanks. Just my take but I don’t want click to purchase stuff coming to Spotify. In my opinion this a fail. I already purchase a family plan for 15$ a month .. last thing I need is tap and click add on purchases.
- yawnxyz 4y ago
  soon we'll probably need to "buy" popular new albums on Spotify (e.g. T. Swift...)
- AlwaysRock 4y ago
  Digital Audiobooks are becoming more and more of a racket. Amazon recently removed the ability to buy an audio book for a $ amount. You can only buy a credit and exchange that for a book. This means that you might be buying a new $30 book for 1 credit or a $3.25 book for 1 credit. It's incredibly frustrating and only exists to trick readers into overspending on books.
  - pezdeath 4y ago
    I just checked in the android audible app, I actually now have the ability to buy with dollars via the app itself. Usually they'd redirect you to audible.com to avoid any google fees but apparently they stopped that? I do not have the premium audible subscription though, only plus. Maybe that's why?
  - crackedbassoon 4y ago
    I don’t understand this comment, do you mean Audible? I buy audiobooks with cash there all the time. I just checked and you can still do that.
  - Liquid_Fire 4y ago
    This is only the case on the mobile apps, to avoid paying fees to Google/Apple. If you go to the website, you can still buy the books for regular money in addition to credits. (In addition, the majority of books cost more than 1 credit anyway, so in most cases you are much better off buying via a credit)
Barrin92 4y ago
Bizarre responses in this thread to the plainly anti-competitive behavior of Apple. There have to be dozens of posts here along the lines of "I don't like xyz about spotify[...]". Whether anyone of us likes Spotify has zero relevance when it comes to the fact if they should be subject to extractive rents, literally none. The EU or any other regulator finally needs to draw a line in the sand and make clear that manufacturing hardware doesn't entitle you to dictate people how they conduct financial transactions. How Spotify, its users and producers interact with each other is their business, and the idea that Apple has any right to insert themselves into the business transactions of third parties is absurd. Imagine every time you made any payment on a Windows machine, you had to pay Microsoft a 10% tax. Every game, every piece of audio, every paypal transcaction, for no reason at all merely because you happen to be on a windows computer you pay them a fee. We'd be rioting in the streets probably. We brought the hammer down on Microsoft for shipping a browser by default, how is Apple getting away with literally acting like a landlord on its devices?
esnowrackley 4y ago
I just wish I could buy and download copies of audiobooks, that's still how I listen. It's a trope on here to talk about walled gardens, but I was surprised by how difficult it's been to find audiobooks outside of Audible.
- bitexploder 4y ago
  I have found private torrent groups that have amazing collections. Beyond that, yeah, pretty much just Audible.
antartica 4y ago
Yeah, I mean... Maybe Spotify is right, but the fact that Daniel Ek puts it like Apple is the big bad company against a small and poor one... I can't stand the fact that they're playing the victim while they are also being greedy and not sharing enough of the revenues with artists.
akshaybhalotia 4y ago
I have a slightly larger issue with the lock-in mechanisms of such "purchases". Whether I pay through Apple IAP or directly to Spotify, I can access the audiobook only on Spotify. No where else. I can't import that audiobook to another player. I can't lend it to a friend. I can't trim the parts I like and share them or listen to them independently. Moreover, when contracts between such platforms/marketplaces and publishers go south, I'm usually left holding an empty bag cos all of the content is removed from the platform without any refunds. (Happens frequently with game stores.) Last I checked, that's not how a "purchase" is supposed to work. Take an example of, say, an actual book. So am I ... "subscribing" to a book now? Doesn't seem like it cos I can't cancel it and get a refund. So what exactly is this model? What am I paying for?
- BLKNSLVR 4y ago
  The only 'purchase' model that works for me is where I have control of a physical or electronic copy. I got bitten by 'purchasing' music on Google Play Music - yes, there was / is the 'take-out' option, but that was such a clunky process and I'm pretty sure there were albums I paid for but didn't appear in the download (I didn't keep track of all my purchases, they were there on Google, they'll be forever, right?). My self-imposed restrictions: 1. Subscription: no lock-in monthly payment 2. Purchase: get physical / electronic copy that's outside the reach of remote deletion or any kind of alteration (I did say, when GPM shut down, that I'd never go back to subscription music and committed to spending the $10 / month on music from Bandcamp instead. I've since subscribed to Spotify - the catalogue at your fingertips is too good to do without - but also maintain my $10 / month Bandcamp spend on my flavour of the month - and I keep track of it!)
- concinds 4y ago
  Know any way to buy audiobooks without DRM? AFAIK, both Apple Books and Audible have it, not just Spotify.
paulcarroty 4y ago
> Unfortunately, Apple sees things differently—because fair competition is the last thing Apple wants. Hahah, so funny to hear this from a company well known for enforcing DRM & paywalls with ads everywhere.
skinnydennys 4y ago
bennysonething 4y ago
What is that site about?! Is it Spotify's?! Can they not just announce whatever the feature is. I pay for Spotify and left that page within about ten seconds.
rumori 4y ago
It’s worth noting Spotify handles it’s developer community just as bad. They took away the old SDK where you could play songs from Spotify without bouncing off to the Spotify app and replaced it a way worse user experience. Any question related to this change goes unanswered. Same with rate limit extension requests for apps. It’s really hard to feel sorry for them getting treated bad by Apple while they do the exact same thing to their community.

191 points by JadoJodo 4y ago

Does anyone else take issue with Spotify branching out into other arenas (e.g., Podcasts, TV, Audiobooks, etc.)? I'm honestly kinda tired of all of these services trying to gobble up any slightly related industry. I subscribe to Spotify to listen to music, not podcasts. My podcasts arrive using a different app with the backing of the RSS standard, not Spotify's internal standard. I don't want to get a subscription cost bump because Spotify has not decided they want to offer podcasts when I'm only paying for the music.

greggh 4y ago
I subscribe to Spotify to listen to podcasts, and occasionally music.
techsupporter 4y ago
> I'm honestly kinda tired of all of these services trying to gobble up any slightly related industry. Vertical (acquiring as many steps in the supply chain to a business' core business as it can) and horizontal (acquiring as many related or semi-related functions as it can) integration has been the name of the game for as long as businesses were a thing. One example I like to use is Temple-Inland, that started as a company that made boxes, was acquired into a company that made paper, bought another company that did forestry management, which turned into "we should have a real estate investment arm", and resulted in the country's third-largest mortgage lender in the early 80s. We can be kinda tired of it all we want to but this is one of those competing interests between customers[0] and companies: the customer wants maximum flexibility for the lowest cost with the broadest range of features; the company wants the fewest costs for the most income with the highest amount of lock-in. Integration tilts the balance towards the companies so they will always pursue it. 0 - As an aside, I don't like calling people "consumers". We are customers; we "consume" service offerings, but (likely) we do so with intent.
- jo6gwb 4y ago
  In many cases, the word consumer connotes a legal definition that is different than customer. For example, see the definition from Reg P: Consumer means an individual who obtains or has obtained a financial product or service from you that is to be used primarily for personal, family, or household purposes, or that individual's legal representative. A customer may be an individual or a business. Source: https://www.consumerfinance.gov/rules-policy/regulations/1016/3/#e https://www.consumerfinance.gov/rules-policy/regulations/101...
djcannabiz 4y ago
I personally find the podcasts kinda nice but there should really be a way to turn them off entirely. Soulseek + foobar is allways an option.
Maxburn 4y ago
Spotify is a horrible podcast player. The audio engine doesn't have nuanced speed control or remove silence like other dedicated podcast apps. I also find the podcast UI is terrible for managing shows and play list. And then there's the bugs that don't get fixed for a long time. Last year they had one where every time a podcast was interrupted by a notification or something it would start over from the start. Lastly spotify podcasts that are exclusive are not, by definition, a podcast because they don't have a valid rss feed. You might refer to them as shows but calling them podcasts ignores how podcasts are supposed to work in an open interoperable system. And of course there's zero chance they will embrace podcast 2.0 features; https://podnews.net/podcast/i4ji5 https://podnews.net/podcast/i4ji5 https://podcastindex.org/podcast/value4value https://podcastindex.org/podcast/value4value
- andy_ppp 4y ago
  Spotify isn’t even a good music player…
- tpxl 4y ago
  > are not, by definition, a podcast because they don't have a valid rss feed Does a podcast need to have a rss feed? All I see in definitions is that its an audio format made available over the internet. > And of course there's zero chance they will embrace podcast 2.0 features What is Podcasting 2.0? All I see is a bunch of people doing podcasting differently, namely adding ads and crypto.
  - LtWorf 4y ago
    Yes it needs an RSS feed. Otherwise it's just an mp3 file.
    - tpxl 4y ago
      So a podcast with an ATOM feed isn't a podcast? It needs a feed, sure, but not necessarily RSS.
      - 4y ago
krono 4y ago
Those podcast recommendations (i.e. advertisements) that appear as image tiles in their apps are annoying but avoidable. Recently they have started inserting random podcast episodes into my "Release Radar" playlists. Not happy with this development to put it lightly.
- willhinsa 4y ago
  Ugh. How do these companies so thoroughly not understand their own raison d'être?
  - prepend 4y ago
    They understand that they make more money this way even if it pisses off customers. They’ve calculated that the customers who drop because of it is outweighed by the higher profits from playing podcasts.
    - counttheforks 4y ago
      I remember when they would prominently advertise Jordan Peterson right on the home page of their app. No other podcasts, just him over and over again while I've never used their app for anything other than music. I contacted their support to ask how to remove these advertisements from the product I paid for, and they told me that this was impossible. Impossible is a strong word, and installing https://github.com/spicetify https://github.com/spicetify proved that it was, in fact, possible to remove the ads for podcasts from their product.
  - conductr 4y ago
    > their own raison d'être It's growth, that's why they exist, searching for growth
    - willhinsa 4y ago
      Cancer has the same modus operandi.
DavidVoid 4y ago
I ended up switching to Qobuz for this exact reason. I have nothing against podcasts, but what I wanted from Spotify was a great music app, and it's clear that that's no longer what they want to be. (I also suspect that podcasts and audiobooks are more lucrative for Spotify than music is, since long-form content likely has a lower royalties/minute rate than music does)
joshstrange 4y ago
> Does anyone else take issue with Spotify branching out into other arenas (e.g., Podcasts, TV, Audiobooks, etc.)? > I subscribe to Spotify to listen to music, not podcasts. My podcasts arrive using a different app with the backing of the RSS standard, not Spotify's internal standard 100%. I will never touch Spotify Podcasts for that reason and that a number of the podcasts I listen to have specifically talked about Spotify's shitty/scummy practices around podcasts (like grabbing their audio and hosting it on Spotify's servers which cuts off the only traffic/demographics info that podcasts currently have access to). Anyone with half a brain would take one look at what Spotify is doing and run in the opposite direction. They don't care about the open nature of podcasts and they want to lure people in then put a wall up around them. If a podcast is only on Spotify it's immediately a podcast I don't care about because those podcast creators don't give a shit about the medium of podcasts, no self-respecting podcaster would walk into that lions den. With this new move into audiobooks I need to seriously reconsider using Spotify. I've enjoyed using it (and paying for it) since launch but I'm sick of their gross moves and whiny-baby attitude (also after getting access to APIs refusing to implement them, really shows how full of shit their claims are). Maybe I need to look into 3rd-party Apple Music players since the AM app is some of the worst UI/UX for a music app.
- CharlesW 4y ago
  > They don't care about the open nature of podcasts and they want to lure people in then put a wall up around them. This is key. "Podcasts" and "podcasting" were created to refer to an open medium, but Spotify's intentional adoption and perversion of those words to refer to their proprietary platform has worked brilliantly. We're further down the embrace/extend/extinguish path than most people realize.
  - eduction 4y ago
    Do you think there should be podcast that are paywalled, or are you against that on principle? And if you support paywalled podcasts, what, in your mind, would be the correct way for Spotify to implement them? (I'm genuinely curious your answer, but to lay my cards and biases on the table: I prefer paid podcasts to the ad supported ones; I'm tired of hearing all the Casper and Squarespace ads woven into the content. And I have trouble imagining a typical Spotify listener (interested in, say, Joe Rogan podcast) properly moving a personalized premium RSS feed into another client without a ton of chaos and confusion.)
KptMarchewa 4y ago
ATM I use podcasts more time than music, and I like their implementation fairly.
collegeburner 4y ago
i mean there's not actually that much $ in a commodified streaming service. royalties eat most of it and artists still aren't paid that much. so branching out is spotify's only hope of finding a high-margin area of business.
crazygringo 4y ago
I have no issue with it business-wise -- if they don't, they'll eventually die because a podcast/audiobook app expands into music. I just have a major issue with it UX-wise. I wish podcasts and audiobooks were their own separate apps. I've totally given up even trying to understand Spotify's UX anymore. I always eventually manage to play what I want through some combo of scroll/filter/search/history but I just feel like I never know what's going to appear anywhere this time. And as long as I'm wishing... how about an app just for classical music too! Composer+performer just can't be satisfactorily shoehorned into a single "artist" field no matter how hard you try. Same as tracks aren't works -- a symphony might be anywhere from 3 to 40 tracks. (Keep classical music accessible in the main app for casual listeners, and because the line between classical and pop is blurry in some cases -- but just add a dedicated app designed for classical alone.)
- techsupporter 4y ago
  > While I'm wishing, I've always wished they'd separate classical music into its own app too... For what it's worth, a lot of Spotify's customers agree with you and have made third-party apps that try to do this. (I only know they exist but not how good they are since classical music is not my thing. But I kind of understand where classical music fans are coming from since a lot of electronic music, especially earlier works, is "mangled" in the same way.) The two I know off the top of my head are Concertmaster and Tempso, if that helps.
  - ggrelet 4y ago
    Do you know anything similar for electronic music ?
- elefantastisch 4y ago
  Idagio is a great alternative for classical.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- 4y ago
iamacyborg 4y ago
> I subscribe to Spotify to listen to music, not podcasts. Yep, and I really wish they'd stop promoting absolute turds like Joe Rogan and Jordan Peterson at me. I have no interest in listening to them.
- prepend 4y ago
  Not yet, but if you see 20,000 more ads you might have interest. Spotify is willing to try.
  - counttheforks 4y ago
    The worst part is that they are showing these ads to paying customers.
  - iamacyborg 4y ago
    The only thing that’ll make me do is badger the folks at Tidal and other streaming co’s to create a proper alternative to Spotify Connect that works on my Yamaha hardware.
    - nsteel 4y ago
      What is wrong with Tidal Connect (https://tidal.com/Connect https://tidal.com/Connect) ? Honest question, have never used it. Don't you need to badger Yamaha to support it in your old hardware? But even if the old hardware was getting updates, Yamaha don't seem to be a partner (https://tidal.com/supported-devices?filter=tidal-connect https://tidal.com/supported-devices?filter=tidal-connect). You can cheaply add Tidal Connect support to an old amp with a LinkPlay-based product e.g. https://www.arylic.com/products/up2stream-pro-receiver-board https://www.arylic.com/products/up2stream-pro-receiver-board
      - iamacyborg 4y ago
        Yeah it’s likely more of a Yamaha issue but it’s a feature I use daily so is unfortunately a complete deal breaker for me. I use Yamaha streamers so adding a separate dongle to those for those seems unnecessary.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
wollsmoth 4y ago
I think they have to get some kind of exclusive content. Either they somehow start recording hits and start a war with other streaming services for popular tracks or they have podcasts which I guess are sort of supposed to be like the catalog that video streaming services are trying to build.
- hardtke 4y ago
  Exclusive content is the only way they (or any streaming service) can become profitable. With recorded music, they have to pay a revenue share to the artists and Spotify's percentage does not increase as they grow. With exclusive content, however, they pay once and as the audience grows the additional listeners are pure profit. So, the goal is to increase the percentage of owned content consumed on the platform and give less of the subscription fees to the record labels. The exclusive tracks model does not work for music artists because they want ubiquitous distribution. Music is unlike video in that people consume the same content over and over again, and also unlike video in that the artists make the big bucks off of live performances. This is why SiriusXM can pay Howard Stern $100M per year and still be wildly profitable. It reduces their dependence on royalty incurring content.
fasouto 4y ago
I am a paying customer and for some reason they show me an popup ad every time I open the app... It's extremely annoying.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- bavila 4y ago
  I wasn't seeing that popup ad "every time", but after the third one, I said screw it and canceled my paid subscription. Unforgivable.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
cush 4y ago
> Does anyone else take issue with Spotify branching out into other arenas Branching into audio books is the obvious next move. It's not like Netflix attempting to make games. If you think that's bad, take a look at Disney
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
agentwiggles 4y ago
Yes, as far as I concerned Spotify was basically perfect in like 2012, and most all of the features added (and _REMOVED_) since then have made the app experience worse. I want to listen to music. That's it. Anything that gets in the way of me doing this is a net bad afaic. I'm still particularly offended by their near deprecation of support for local files. When I first got into Spotify the seamless integration with my local music library was a huge selling point. At some point, the app tried to help me by "linking" my meticulously organized concert playlists with studio versions of the songs... I have not been inspired to give that feature more time since. I feel like I get closer to just getting an mp3 player again every day.
- corobo 4y ago
  Silly as it is I really miss song previews. Used to be if you long pressed a song (iOS anyway) it would jump in a little and play for as long as you held it, going back to the music you were listening to when you let go. Great for checking you've found the song you were thinking of and impromptu remixes to make friends laugh. Annoyingly it was removed for "low engagement rate"[0]. I mean yeah, I found it by accident lmao. Maybe tell people about it? [0] https://community.spotify.com/t5/iOS-iPhone-iPad/Touch-Preview-on-iOS-removal/m-p/1857905 https://community.spotify.com/t5/iOS-iPhone-iPad/Touch-Previ...
  - Aachen 4y ago
    I never knew they had it, but now that you mention it... I miss it also. When you just want to get an impression of the song without listening to the whole thing front to back, yeah very often I'd make use of this.
- kbenson 4y ago
  Honestly, I think the perfect music app that never existed is Pandora with the ability to play specific songs. I always found Pandora to a have a much better recommendation system and was actually happier and didn't play specific songs, just stations. The only thing that made me switch was the Spotify family plan and multiple children asking for it. I've been unhappy with it for years, but can't bring myself to pay for two separate music subscription services, and also can't bring myself to listen to adds.
stronglikedan 4y ago
It's fine if they branch out, but they abuse their users with popups, and by not being able to hide these extra features. I just want to listen to music without having to repeatedly tell them that's all I want to do.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
eduction 4y ago
>My podcasts arrive using a different app with the backing of the RSS standard, not Spotify's internal standard. I know a lot of people will disagree, but I think Spotify did a good job of handling the problem of "premium" podcasts. There's no way to make a "premium" podcast (one you charge people to access) that is fully compatible with the original open vision of podcasting. You can either pervert the original RSS enclosures system by using obscure / personalized URLs for individual subscribers (a leaky abstraction that both discourages open sharing of feed URLs and fails to properly close off access) or you can pervert it by wrapping files in DRM (Apple's approach in the Apple Podcasters Program). Instead of perverting the RSS feeds, Spotify opted to pervert (slightly) the term "podcast" to not strictly mean "in an RSS feed and listenable on any client." I think this was inevitable and arguably had already happened and is far better than corrupting the open ecosystem. It also happens to be far easier from a UX perspective to tell someone to just use the Spotify app. For all the people upset at Spotify, consider the counterfactual: Why would they tell people to listen to their premium podcasts by copying a custom premium URL and pasting it into some random client (which 99% of the time on iPhones will be controlled by their bully Apple)? It is much clearer, easier for the user, and better for Spotify's premium creators (who don't want to lose listeners to a complex setup system) to just tell them "Listen to Spotify podcasts by downloading the Spotify app". Under Spotify's system, some podcasters rake in Spotify money they wouldn't otherwise get, growing the premium ecosystem, while the open ecosystem remains robust and not polluted with more DRM and URL hacks. Keeping closed systems clearly closed and separate is much better IMO than trying to awkwardly jam it into the open ecosystem, undermining what makes that ecosystem great.
- ctoth 4y ago
  What's wrong with HTTP basic auth for this use case? https://subscriber-id:subscriber-token@podcast.host/feed.rss https://subscriber-id:subscriber-token@podcast.host/feed.rss In what way does this "pollute" or "pervert" the open standard? Apple and Spotify are companies, not people, this is not high school, Apple is not "bully"ing Spotify, they have a business relationship. In general your comment is loaded with emotional language that seems to muddle the issue rather than clarifying.
  - 4y ago
kenjackson 4y ago
Isn't it the case with almost every subscription service that there are aspects of it that you don't make use of? I feel like every subscription I have, from cellular to cable to Netflix, there's stuff I don't use that is part of the subscription. E.g., I don't watch horror movies, but apparently Netflix is still making them. Maybe I should take issue with it, but it just feels so mundane to me.
- pwinnski 4y ago
  You're talking about genres, which is a different scenario. This is more like Netflix raising prices for streaming subscribers to fund a new video-game studio. The fact that some people might enjoy both doesn't make them anything like the same thing.
  - kenjackson 4y ago
    I think it's just levels of granularity. Podcasts and music are both audio entertainment. It's like Netflix adding TV shows to their lineup of movies. But the broader point is simply that in subscriptions to services you usually pay for some aspect of the service that you don't use and never have any intent to use -- and you can partition off that aspect of the service in a simple way (at least simple to you).
    - pwinnski 4y ago
      Car rentals and horseback rides are both transportation, but most people would say the difference is not trivial. Movies, tv, and video games are all visual entertainment, but video games are different enough that most people are generally not happy about the idea of raising the price of Netflix to finance a video game studio. Art museums are visual entertainment as well, but raising the price of Netflix to build art galleries in select locations wouldn't fly well, either. In this case, Spotify is doing anything but partitioning off podcasts. As many comments here reveal, most people are seeing podcasts pushed heavily in their music interface.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
pelasaco 4y ago
i don't have a problem at all with that. I consume everything on spotify. However what bothers me is Spotify playing victim here, when we know that if Spotify was in Apple's position, they would probably do the same.
Aachen 4y ago
No, I don't at all mind them trying to break the monopoly on audio books that is Amazon. (You can get them from the original publisher (not author/narrator) for 35 bucks, or 10 from Amazon. I'm willing to pay a premium for avoiding Amazon but I love audio books and I'm not as rich as Bezos.) Podcasts was never a monopoly, but they're trying to make it one with the exclusive shows. That's what I hate. I have Spotify premium for music, so I could listen to those, but I unsubscribed from those podcasts immediately when they became exclusive. There's plenty more. TV, I didn't know Spotify was trying to do, but same logic applies there.
solarkraft 4y ago
Absolutely. But it's not really an expansion - they're trying to get people off of music and onto podcasts because those are cheaper for them to serve (so more like an attempt at not having to raise the subscription price). I guess the idea is that all types of audio content have some commonality and somebody who's considering listening to music could also listen to a podcast instead. I don't think this overlap happens for me very often, but maybe it's more often than I think and often enough for them to be worth it. I'll still boycott their podcasts because they're attempting to make proprietary what is currently free.
NoPicklez 4y ago
I don't think I have an issue with Spotify, a music streaming platform, moving into streaming other audio types. Afterall, Apple always had the Podcasts app and they make computers. So I don't think it's much of a stretch for Spotify. Perhaps if they branched into video I'd start to be concerned. I quite like the fact that my music library and podcasts are all from the same app and I do find that Podcasts are less "in your face" than music.
batch12 4y ago
I just use Spotify for podcasts, never music. Just providing a different perspective.
res0nat0r 4y ago
I want them to absorb the whole ecosystem. Podcast apps suck and I am absolutely never using itunes. I'm glad I can get podcasts I like in Spotify and it will track across my phone / pc my progress. I don't listen to audiobooks but would buy them from Spotify if I did so I don't have to download and figure out some kind of Amazon Audible app instead.
wraptile 4y ago
I wouldn't bother me at all if they didn't neglect the existing features. It used to be the most responsive music app to the point where they made a documentary about themselves now it it's everything but that - crashes, buffers, freezes, every sort of bug is present where it wasn't before.

galoisscobi 4y ago

Last time they complained about Apple not supporting Siri integration. Then when Apple added support for that, Spotify never added HomePod Siri support. The idea has ~5k votes and 137 pages of comments on their forum and yet no action from Spotify. https://community.spotify.com/t5/Live-Ideas/iOS-Implement-Native-HomePod-Support/idi-p/4985214/page/137#comments https://community.spotify.com/t5/Live-Ideas/iOS-Implement-Na...

ribosometronome 4y ago
These features would all help with putting money directly in their pocket. I imagine they would be prioritized.
fergbrain 4y ago
I dropped Spotify and went to Apple Music because of this.
- prepend 4y ago
  I dropped Spotify and went to Apple Music because for $20 I get music, 200GB cloud, and tv vs $15 for Spotify.
graydsl 4y ago
Just came here to write that! Because of that and because I am not a fan of the convoluted UI, I switched to YT Music. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
bgentry 4y ago
Spotify also still doesn't support AirPlay 2, nearly 4.5 years after it was launched: https://www.macrumors.com/2022/01/25/spotify-still-doesnt-support-airplay-2/ https://www.macrumors.com/2022/01/25/spotify-still-doesnt-su... I really don't want to switch to Apple Music (it's not a great app either) but I'm really tired of dealing with playback issues due to the lack of buffered AirPlay 2 playback. If you try out a proper AirPlay 2 supporting app like Overcast or Apple Music, it's a dramatically better experience. I also want nothing to do with Spotify's podcasts or audio books. And their macOS Chromium desktop app has also languished for years.

Arkanum 4y ago

I wonder if the decision in the US around Epic and external links[0] will benefit spotify in Europe or not (when it is eventually resolved). [0]:https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/8/22814147/epic-apple-app-store-injunction-paused https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/8/22814147/epic-apple-app-s...

firloop 4y ago

As a consumer, I’ve actually come to prefer in app purchases. I love when a subscription is available on IAP because for something like a newspaper, I know that I can cancel it with a couple of taps instead of having to fill out some long retention form or call someone.

sweetheart 4y ago
I think I feel similarly, to be honest. While I don't think I'd be less likely to buy something I wanted if an in-app purchase wasn't available, I've always been thankful when I realized I bought something or set up a subscription via Apple because I feel their incentive isn't to make managing that purchase difficult, so their UX for control over subscriptions has been great. Though, at face value, I do see the argument for giving folks the option to make the purchase how they want, which may mean doing it in the app but not using Apple's APIs. I dunno, I don't have strong feelings about any of this, so it always surprises me when companies try to make such a big deal of it. Sure, it affects their bottom line, but let's not pretend like I should care about that.
amykhar 4y ago
Exactly. It's not that Spotify can't do in app purchases. They just don't want to pay for the privilege.
- Gigachad 4y ago
  Because they exist in a highly competitive market where Apple Music can provide in app purchases without paying the extra tax.
wobbly_bush 4y ago
Are you also willing to pay the extra Apple tax for this convenience instead of expecting the subscription provider to eat those costs?
- hombre_fatal 4y ago
  Depends on the product and the tax. Looks like I'm paying more via IAP for Youtube ($16 vs $12/mo) and Audible ($16 vs $8/mo ???) according to the prices listed on their website. Half of the services out there probably charge you extra just because you don't have to go through their scummy "cancel subscription" website pipeline. They probably lose millions on that along with the fact that I get an iOS notification when my IAP subscriptions renew. One crappy autorenewing service charging my credit card directly has cost me more than IAP taxes ever will. As far as I'm concerned, IAP saves me money and the status quo for rebilling in the USA only benefits the bad actors.

AlbertCory 4y ago

Hey. I want my audiobooks on Spotify. This is purely a disinterested position, of course. In order to serve you better. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Audible-The-Big-Bucks/dp/B0BDBG5VNP/ref=sr_1_1 https://www.amazon.com/Audible-The-Big-Bucks/dp/B0BDBG5VNP/r... [2] https://www.amazon.com/Inventing-the-Future-A-Novel/dp/B09NZG1DXX/ref=sr_1_2 https://www.amazon.com/Inventing-the-Future-A-Novel/dp/B09NZ...

pwinnski 4y ago

Oh, look, a huge company that pays artists a pittance[0] is pretending to be on the side of the artists (writers in this case) in their fight against mean old Apple. Is this like when they complained about Apple not letting them do Siri, but then never implemented Siri support? Or maybe it's like when they complained about Apple not letting them make a watch app, when the APIs were already available? Nah, it's about Spotify wanting more money, and trying to pretend it's David vs Goliath it's not. 0. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3k9-UIg52xg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3k9-UIg52xg

mostlysimilar 4y ago

No other company do I hate and love so much. I love their discovery algorithms and find new music through them so often. I look forward to my new Discover Weekly every Monday. But in every other way they drive me crazy. The UI is terrible and basic but I've learned to live with it. What I absolutely can't stand is inserting podcasts and audio books into the app with no option to opt-out. I get that they want to put these things in front of as many people as possible, but it's a shame that happens at the expense of those of us who don't want that cluttering up their libraries. Let me turn it off. Why can't I turn it off?

Gigachad 4y ago
The Spotify UI is bad but it’s not even close to as bad as Apple and YouTube music. I tried my best to like Yt music since it comes with YouTube premium but the service is simply unusable.
Jorchime 4y ago
I used to love the Discovery Weekly list as well. But since a couple of years, my account recommendations went into some strange niche solution and they recommend the same rubbish over and over again. I even get annoyed at certain genres that I used to mildly enjoy before. If you try to look for a solution, apparently the only way is to cancel the subscription, delete the account, resubscribe and start over ... I wish there was a way to reset the "intelligent" recommendations for an existing account. The only workaround I found: put a couple of similar and interesting songs into a playlist and let Spotify continue with recommendations.
- jackson1442 4y ago
  Agreed. I actually switched to Apple Music because the recommendations had gotten so consistently bad/weird. I wonder if it's related to money somehow, if some artists are accepting a lower cut in exchange for being placed on these playlists more frequently.
- unsupp0rted 4y ago
  Literally: they keep recommending variations of the same song over and over. And if I'm not mistaken, not even variations, but the same song over and over. Each time I mark it as "remove". I visit my Discover Weekly about once a month because there's almost never anything of value in there. I'd find more gems with a random list of 30 songs.

prepend 4y ago

Do you know what I hate? Spotify having my credit card. There’s a very low chance I ever buy an audiobook if they integrate with apple’s purchase flow. There’s a zero chance if they had their own flow that pops up and asks me for a credit card. And a separate system to update numbers, cancel stuff, etc etc I get that Spotify wants more money. I’m sure publishers hated selling audiobooks to Barnes & Noble and them taking 50% of the retail price.

counttheforks 4y ago
Thanks to 3-D Secure it doesn't really matter who has your credit card details. Relying on the secrecy of a few numbers is silly anyway.
- prepend 4y ago
  I’m not concerned about the security of my cars. I’m concerned about entering it again and Spotify charging me for stuff.

yawnr 4y ago

Good grief, that URL. These companies are ridiculous. Leave us out of your corporate drama.

daveidol 4y ago
I disagree. This "corporate drama" really does impact users, as well as developers (most of the HN crowd).
- photoGrant 4y ago
  To be fair the corporate drama is usually dressed up as contorted consumer opinion drivel. The true reasons for most of these moves behind the scenes aren't as altruistic as these folks like to let on!
  - throwaway46829 4y ago
    All of business is a sort of charade, Amazon might be "sorry that your product was disappointing and want to offer you a refund" by which they mean "if we give you a refund we think you'll feel confident enough to buy more from us". You still get what you wanted though.

jjice 4y ago

As someone who uses Spotify every day, I hate it. I hate their expanding markets while constantly making the app more bloated, slow, and less intuitive. Really, you're going to fill my recommended page with podcasts you've paid a ton of money for exclusivity instead of showing me recommended music that's relevant to me, like they used to? Audiobooks aren't going to make my music experience any better either. Can't wait for a new, slower UI update in 3 months and for them to take away lyrics _again_. I'm a bit salty here and that's a bit of a rant, but I just want to stream music and they make it progressively harder.

w0m 4y ago
spotify podcasts are kind of garbage imo; player just doesn't handle it well moving between or around episodes and music depending on what I'm doing.
jnsaff2 4y ago
dmitriid 4y ago
> for them to take away lyrics _again_ Disclaimer: I work at Spotify, but I can't speak directly for the teams handling this. So. Lyrics, and any text that accompanies audio in general (for example, if you try to show audiobook text while it's playing, or audio transcript of a podcast, or...) is a legal minefield. So, if some text that accompanies audio disappears... it's likely for legal/licensing reasons, not because devs are incompetent. That said, as an incompetent dev myself, features may disappear due to incompetence, too :)
- jjice 4y ago
  Oh I bet it gets tricky on the legal front. I was more referring to the entire feature being removed like 5 or 6 years ago I think, but I imagine there was an issue with the partnership with Genius or whoever the original lyric supplier was.
  - dmitriid 4y ago

damontal 4y ago

Why would i buy a full price audiobook through Spotify when I can just use Audible?

tremarley 4y ago
I've tried to us Spotify for music. And Audible for audiobooks. But it's not enjoyable using seperate apps I tend to only finish my audiobooks when they're on Spotify.

plorg 4y ago

I think Apple is being abusively extractive here. I also believe that Spotify's audiobook play will be bad for consumers and worse for artists.

nomel 4y ago
> I also believe that Spotify's audiobook play will be bad for consumers and worse for artists. Could you expand on this?
- plorg 4y ago
  Spotify buying Findaway (a company that previously licensed audiobooks to many different distributors with varied business models), for example, centralizes the market in a way that at best, will result in both an oligopoly for consumers and an oligopsony for creaters. It is certainly good that Amazon/Audible has competitors, but if the only competitors it has have basically the same vertically integrated structure there will be less incentive and opportunity for authors and voice actors to create genuinely interesting works, and listeners will in turn have increasingly commoditized options, with creators making less money for their work and consumers paying more.
  - plorg 4y ago
    And that doesn't even include the more specific concerns about the way Spotify uses contract labor to squeeze artists.
threeseed 4y ago
Apple has been crystal clear since day one that they want a percentage of payments being facilitated through their platform. For them they are a channel and channels have costs.
tremarley 4y ago
I've been using Spotify for audiobooks for a few years. It's a lot easier to use than the alternatives in my opinion.
4y ago

scblock 4y ago

Corporate propaganda. Hardly “the full story”.

Bombthecat 4y ago

Does it save position now on an audiobook? For example if you listen to music inbetween? Cause if not, it's still useless

nomel 4y ago
It does for podcasts.

dangrie158 4y ago

Don‘t know about the US market but in Germany there were many audio books available in Spotify already that you could access via the normal premium subscription. Few days after I read about the launch of purchasable audio books in the US all of those vanished so I canceled my subscription and got Apple Music via Apple one which was a little cheaper for the whole family when adding the extra iCloud storage I needed anyway. Happy with the decision so far. I just had to move all my playlists to Apple Music which was easy due to a random online tool I found

JimA 4y ago

Regardless of the passionate feelings against Spotify, it's hard to dispute their basic premise that Apple is deliberately creating a bad user experience just to preserve their walled content garden. The same thing applies to not being able to buy a book using the Amazon app. It's ridiculous and there is no valid argument against it other than greed. Not a fan of overregulation, but in this area I can't wait for Apple to be reined in.

amelius 4y ago
Yes, there should be a law that hardware that the user paid for cannot be tethered by the manufacturer. Otherwise it is a service, not a product.
threeseed 4y ago
Spotify could just implement IAP. It's simple and has a great user experience. Seems like this is more about Spotify wanting to benefit from the channel without paying for it.
- AntonyGarand 4y ago
  IAP take a 30% cut, which is unreasonable on things like audiobook
boxed 4y ago
The problem isn't that Apple forces IAP. The problem is that they have the outrageous cut of 30% (or even 15%). Apples IAP is awesome. Their greed is not.

xamdam 4y ago

I love apple products but I hate this stuff. They're cynically kneecapping competition and hurting consumer choice, like they're not rich enough already. Would class action be a to do thing here?

daveidol 4y ago
Agreed. It's too difficult to move off of iPhone/Apple products, but I really want to do something to force them to stop with the anticompetative BS.

freedomben 4y ago

Spotify: I want so badly to love you, and (FWIW) I'm very much on your side battling the giants like Apple. But, I'm so bothered by your approach to podcasts (the lock-in and proprietary of a previously open standard) that I can't muster much enthusiasm to defend you. It makes me think that since you're on the "bad" side of the podcasts issue when it's in your business interests, that you're only fighting on the "good" side of OP issue because it's in your business interests, and that destroys trust. Do you really think your approach to podcasts is better for anyone other than Spotify?

sdfhbdf 4y ago

Quoting from the page: > TLDR: Apple rules mandate a cumbersome Audiobooks purchasing process This is very much a lie. Apple’s way is the easy way - use IAP. And it seems that like with facebook [1] they’re trying to apply the rules evenly to everybody. Spotify religiously denies using Apple’s In App Payments. The attempt to send emails on how to purchase audiobooks is their sneaky way of bypassing the rules. They now to try to blame the process they came up with themselves on Apple. But Spotify is to blame, for not following rules of App Store which demand IAP for “digital goods and services”. However you feel about IAP if spotify has the courage it should challenge in court (like Epic) instead of a website that makes a very bad biased take on the situation. And we know Apple is not going to respond publicly. [1] Story about Facebook boosts being forced to IAP a few days ago

fleddr 4y ago
Your argument is "they are the rules". I think the point is that the rules are anti-competitive, user-hostile, extractive.
- pwinnski 4y ago
  Not GP, but I think the argument was: "IAP is easy and simple and secure and well-known, and should be used." Spotify is acting as if Apple is blocking them in many different ways, but all would be solved if Spotify would use IAP, which is super-simple for users, but doesn't make Spotify as much money.
  - fleddr 4y ago
    You're saying the exact same thing: follow the rules. Completely ignoring that those rules are insane.
    - pwinnski 4y ago
      "IAP is easy and simple and secure and well-known, and should be used." Is that better? I will never use a purchase method on iOS that isn't IAP. Never, and I'm not alone.

r2222 4y ago

Yeah the App Store rules suck and that’s all on Apple, but I find it a bit silly for Spotify to repeatedly act surprised about them. It’s the same cycle: Spotify wants go around App Store rules → Apple says no → Spotify fires up the timetoplayfair dot com with slightly tweaked text to fit whatever issue they have this time.

waboremo 4y ago
How else are they going to challenge the status quo? I'm confused by people acting shocked and appalled every time any other company brings up issues with the status quo. Spotify wants to get into Audiobooks, Apple won't let them, Spotify wants to make a social ruckus so people are aware of who to blame and to demand change. Before you consider the idea they should just quietly try to push regulation, consider without insane amounts of capital to go against the likes of Apple who will always have more, you need the public on your side. It does have an impact on regulation.
- pwinnski 4y ago
  > Apple won't let them Not true at all. Apple's rules haven't changed in ages, they've defended them against Epic in court, and Spotify knew what they were when they started down this road, just like they knew the last couple of times they've tried to argue with Apple publicly (they're 0-for-2 so far, last time I checked). Spotify can get into Audiobooks in multiple ways, they just don't like any of them. Apple isn't stopping them, they're just requiring their usual cut on IAP, and enforcing the usual rules. As usual.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- threeseed 4y ago
  Maybe Spotify should take the lead. Allow third party payment services and music stores in their app. With 0% cut of course.
  - 4y ago

vkhetan_iit 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

SighMagi 4y ago

Time for Spotify to “Play Fair” with musicians.

artdigital 4y ago

Could you, say, hike the price of all audiobooks by the Apple tax when buying through iAP? While offering a cheaper price outside?

benhurmarcel 4y ago
You can but you're not allowed to inform the consumer about it. So it makes your product look overpriced and pisses off your customers. There are already apps doing this, like Youtube Premium ($16 IAP, $12 on their website) and Dropbox ($12 IAP, $10 on their website).

unnamed76ri 4y ago

As a musician who earns less than half a penny per stream from Spotify, it is really hard to for me to take this sob story seriously.

endofreach 4y ago

A friend of mine has the issue that spotify still charges him, even though he has no account anymore (and no access to the email address used for the non-existing account). There is no more information in the charge other than it is charged by spotify. They do not offer phone support and respond with useless questions. The only way he seems he has left is to let a lawyer handle it… Next time he should just let it be handled by apple, with a click, for free.

jagaerglad 4y ago
Cheaper and quicker than a lawyer would be to cancel his bank card and order a new one

tremarley 4y ago

I use Spotify to listen to Music, Podcasts and Audiobooks already. I've longed for a audiobook library on there for ages. Hopefully this works out, and apple doesn't screw them over too bad.

wintermutestwin 4y ago

My reaction when I read: "Audiobooks on Spotify" - Finally! Why has it taken so long to have subscription access to all audiobooks??? And then I read that you actually have to buy individual audiobooks - WTF???!!! I can stream ,000,000s of music, movies and series with a subscription - why not audiobooks??? (and don't mention Audible - for $23/month I can stream two books = BFD)

slipperlobster 4y ago
Your local library system _may_ offer eBooks through an app login. That'd be worth a check.
ohbleek 4y ago
This is why I use Scribd. I can’t access every single book I want but there are enough available that I’ve only run into that problem a handful of times, and I just found something else because it’s really a great selection.

mavu 4y ago

The spotify UI is the worst for listening to audiobooks i have ever encountered. So, I would consider it a favour that Apple is preventing you from suffering this miserable experience.

hybridtupel 4y ago
Exactly this! They litteraly treat audiobooks like a music album. Randomize tracks? Check! Not storing where the audiobook was stopped? Check! Featuring actual personal mixtapes of chapters taken from multiple books? Check! With that experience I'd never buy a single book there.

smcleod 4y ago

I mean.... if it was a small company or whatever sure - but this is Spotify, a giant corporate enterprise, I don't really feel sorry for them.

SLWW 4y ago

I bought a book from them, one I've been meaning to listen to for a long time. for $25 it wasn't a bad deal for hours of really good content, read by the author. Best version i've seen. I appreciate not having a subscription model attached to a few books I might listen to

roody15 4y ago

Wait you have to “buy” the audio book in addition to the monthly fee? hmmm no thanks. Just my take but I don’t want click to purchase stuff coming to Spotify. In my opinion this a fail. I already purchase a family plan for 15$ a month .. last thing I need is tap and click add on purchases.

yawnxyz 4y ago
soon we'll probably need to "buy" popular new albums on Spotify (e.g. T. Swift...)
AlwaysRock 4y ago
Digital Audiobooks are becoming more and more of a racket. Amazon recently removed the ability to buy an audio book for a $ amount. You can only buy a credit and exchange that for a book. This means that you might be buying a new $30 book for 1 credit or a $3.25 book for 1 credit. It's incredibly frustrating and only exists to trick readers into overspending on books.
- pezdeath 4y ago
  I just checked in the android audible app, I actually now have the ability to buy with dollars via the app itself. Usually they'd redirect you to audible.com to avoid any google fees but apparently they stopped that? I do not have the premium audible subscription though, only plus. Maybe that's why?
- crackedbassoon 4y ago
  I don’t understand this comment, do you mean Audible? I buy audiobooks with cash there all the time. I just checked and you can still do that.
- Liquid_Fire 4y ago
  This is only the case on the mobile apps, to avoid paying fees to Google/Apple. If you go to the website, you can still buy the books for regular money in addition to credits. (In addition, the majority of books cost more than 1 credit anyway, so in most cases you are much better off buying via a credit)

Barrin92 4y ago

Bizarre responses in this thread to the plainly anti-competitive behavior of Apple. There have to be dozens of posts here along the lines of "I don't like xyz about spotify[...]". Whether anyone of us likes Spotify has zero relevance when it comes to the fact if they should be subject to extractive rents, literally none. The EU or any other regulator finally needs to draw a line in the sand and make clear that manufacturing hardware doesn't entitle you to dictate people how they conduct financial transactions. How Spotify, its users and producers interact with each other is their business, and the idea that Apple has any right to insert themselves into the business transactions of third parties is absurd. Imagine every time you made any payment on a Windows machine, you had to pay Microsoft a 10% tax. Every game, every piece of audio, every paypal transcaction, for no reason at all merely because you happen to be on a windows computer you pay them a fee. We'd be rioting in the streets probably. We brought the hammer down on Microsoft for shipping a browser by default, how is Apple getting away with literally acting like a landlord on its devices?

esnowrackley 4y ago

I just wish I could buy and download copies of audiobooks, that's still how I listen. It's a trope on here to talk about walled gardens, but I was surprised by how difficult it's been to find audiobooks outside of Audible.

bitexploder 4y ago
I have found private torrent groups that have amazing collections. Beyond that, yeah, pretty much just Audible.

antartica 4y ago

Yeah, I mean... Maybe Spotify is right, but the fact that Daniel Ek puts it like Apple is the big bad company against a small and poor one... I can't stand the fact that they're playing the victim while they are also being greedy and not sharing enough of the revenues with artists.

akshaybhalotia 4y ago

I have a slightly larger issue with the lock-in mechanisms of such "purchases". Whether I pay through Apple IAP or directly to Spotify, I can access the audiobook only on Spotify. No where else. I can't import that audiobook to another player. I can't lend it to a friend. I can't trim the parts I like and share them or listen to them independently. Moreover, when contracts between such platforms/marketplaces and publishers go south, I'm usually left holding an empty bag cos all of the content is removed from the platform without any refunds. (Happens frequently with game stores.) Last I checked, that's not how a "purchase" is supposed to work. Take an example of, say, an actual book. So am I ... "subscribing" to a book now? Doesn't seem like it cos I can't cancel it and get a refund. So what exactly is this model? What am I paying for?

BLKNSLVR 4y ago
The only 'purchase' model that works for me is where I have control of a physical or electronic copy. I got bitten by 'purchasing' music on Google Play Music - yes, there was / is the 'take-out' option, but that was such a clunky process and I'm pretty sure there were albums I paid for but didn't appear in the download (I didn't keep track of all my purchases, they were there on Google, they'll be forever, right?). My self-imposed restrictions: 1. Subscription: no lock-in monthly payment 2. Purchase: get physical / electronic copy that's outside the reach of remote deletion or any kind of alteration (I did say, when GPM shut down, that I'd never go back to subscription music and committed to spending the $10 / month on music from Bandcamp instead. I've since subscribed to Spotify - the catalogue at your fingertips is too good to do without - but also maintain my $10 / month Bandcamp spend on my flavour of the month - and I keep track of it!)
concinds 4y ago
Know any way to buy audiobooks without DRM? AFAIK, both Apple Books and Audible have it, not just Spotify.

paulcarroty 4y ago

> Unfortunately, Apple sees things differently—because fair competition is the last thing Apple wants. Hahah, so funny to hear this from a company well known for enforcing DRM & paywalls with ads everywhere.

skinnydennys 4y ago

bennysonething 4y ago

What is that site about?! Is it Spotify's?! Can they not just announce whatever the feature is. I pay for Spotify and left that page within about ten seconds.

rumori 4y ago

It’s worth noting Spotify handles it’s developer community just as bad. They took away the old SDK where you could play songs from Spotify without bouncing off to the Spotify app and replaced it a way worse user experience. Any question related to this change goes unanswered. Same with rate limit extension requests for apps. It’s really hard to feel sorry for them getting treated bad by Apple while they do the exact same thing to their community.