5 Reasons Apple Music is a Bummer
- jhendry393
- Jul 10, 2015
- 4 min read
At the risk of jumping on the naysayer bandwagon, I can’t overstate how little I was impressed by the debut of Apple Music. Truth be told, the debut wasn’t even on my radar until the wall-to-wall coverage of Taylor Swift’s open letter and Apple’s immediate mea culpa.
Apple Music is a tattered hat thrown into the already full ring of music streaming services. The supposed innovation lies in its social media component—called Connect—and 24-hour online radio station. Yet rather than saving an otherwise lackluster service, these features only add to my list of reasons why Apple Music is (to put it bluntly) a big bummer.
1: Almost no one is talking about Apple Music if they don't have to.
I love Spotify. I use it daily. How did I come to use it? My roommate told me. Before Spotify, I loved Pandora. Still in high school at the time, I heard about it from a friend in college who used it while studying. In each case, it was word of mouth and not advertising that drove me to a service.
The same cannot be said for Apple Music. I have yet to hear it mentioned in a conversation I haven’t started out of curiosity. In fact, I wouldn’t have bothered signing up for the free trial myself if I hadn’t wanted to have some first-hand experience to put towards this blog post. The buzz that should accompany a good, new, innovative product just doesn’t exist for Apple Music the way I’ve come to expect from anything with an Apple connection.
This brings me to a second point: beyond advertisers, the only ones talking about Apple Music are tech journalists and critics whose job it is to investigate developing technology. As you can see, my thoughts don't deviate much from theirs.
2. The interface is less engaging and more enraging.
When I asked friends on Facebook what I was missing from the Apple Music experience, one said he found it more interactive and easier to use than Spotify. While technically true considering Connect’s opportunity to comment on artists’ posts, I personally had a surprising amount of difficulty navigating between pages and figuring out just what I was looking at. Not only that, but the few posts I’ve seen are nothing I couldn’t have seen or responded to on the artists’ Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter pages. Perhaps Connect will grow with time, but for now it adds nothing to my experience.
Beyond Connect, songs don’t play continuously when I expect them to, and I have yet to be particularly impressed by Apple’s personalized suggestions. For example, I bought Jim Croce’s greatest hits off of iTunes a couple months ago, and one of the first playlist suggestions for me was Intro to Jim Croce. I know I like the music I’ve purchased; suggest something new!
On the bright side, artist-based radio stations have been pretty good, though I can’t quite figure out how to tell Apple I want less of some results. The much-advertised 24 hour radio station, Beats 1, isn’t much to me however. Songs can’t be skipped, which certainly makes me wonder why I’m not listening to a local FM radio station in the first place.
3. Beyond T-Swift, the catalogue is nothing special.
Because it’s called Apple Music, and because it’s launched through the iTunes app, and because I’m a trifle naïve, I was sorely disappointed to discover that I could not stream The Beatles’ library through Apple Music. The one major benefit I’d imagined for the new service doesn’t exist.
Granted, access to musical juggernaut Taylor Swift is a massive win for Apple Music over Spotify. However, I’m not convinced that this high-profile win is enough to make it stand out to users long-term, especially considering the previously mentioned interface issues. T-Swift notwithstanding, Apple Music’s streaming library is typical of just about every other one out there.
4. Top competitors remain unmoved.
If Apple Music’s debut week serves as any indication, it doesn’t look to be as big of a challenger to Spotify as originally hoped. Embarrassingly, Spotify had its best week on the iTunes download charts the same week Apple Music opened for business.
There’s a good reason for that: beyond Apple Music’s uninspired social media integration, the two services are wildly similar. As C|Net’s side-by-side comparison shows, there’s not much of a reason for current Spotify users to jump ship.
5. The Free Trial is a Short Term Enticement, Not a Long-term Foundation.
The only other Facebook friend to disagree with my stance that Apple Music is nothing special claimed simply, “It’s better because I can get three months for free.”
He’s not wrong. I’ve pondered trying Spotify Premium for months now, and that trial costs a measly $0.99 for the same three months. So far, basic laziness has prevailed, and I have yet to hand over my payment information and give the extra services a shot. It’s possible this is where Apple Music gets just a few more feet in the door.
Yet considering my previous points, I find it hard to believe that Apple Music’s first wave of users will stick around when the three free months have passed. Its monthly rate is currently the same as Spotify Premium, and the differences are not outstanding enough to make Apple the dominant streaming service.
So, why didn’t Apple’s social media integration make the difference?
In my opinion, music based social media doesn’t have the same all-encompassing appeal as Facebook, Twitter and the like. It’s just as easy—if not, for the moment, easier—to Tweet a favorite artist or share the link to a song from YouTube than to navigate Connect. Lest we forget, MySpace devolved to a music-based networking site since it lost the popularity contest with Facebook. And while Last.FM predated today’s more popular streaming websites, it never quite took off in the same capacity. People may love to share music, but it’s far from the focus of most social media, and therein lies just one of Apple Music’s many problems.
Comments