5 ms·
> That is just serving customers worse music. There is no music monopoly and customers have a choice in which music they listen to and what service they use (S
by s6af7ygt 2y ago
> That is just serving customers worse music.
There is no music monopoly and customers have a choice in which music they listen to and what service they use (Spotify, Apple, Google/Youtube, Amazon, Bandcamp, buying CDs).
Surely if users get served worse music, they will dislike it, and move to another service or another way to listen to music.
- rocqua 2y agoHow big (and noticeable) does the reduction in quality need to be. Especially because spotify is such an easy platform. Changing to another streaming service requires learning a new app, moving over all playlists, and likely means still a pretty bad music suggestion service. Because spotify has a pretty good recommendation engine.
- pas 2y ago> spotify is such an easy platform. it's not for me. YT was. SoundCloud too. (Now SoundCloud also wants folks to sign in aggressively. I think you can't fast-forward otherwise, but at least listening works without signing in.) Also ... you can upload to YT and SoundCloud, but not to Spotify. So their catalog is just meh. (So even if their recommendations are great in some genres, in general they are not for everyone.)
- johnnyanmac 2y ago> There is no music monopoly for now. Spotify is a market leader with 32%, though. >if users get served worse music, they will dislike it how many more twitters, facebooks, and youtubes do we need to show that this is not historically the case?