Microsoft Is Killing Xbox Music’s Free Music Streaming

They were probably pressured into doing this by the mafia to do this. I'm sorry, I meant to say the RIAA.
 
Ashbringer said:
So nobody will notice then?

http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0
Click to expand...

Still there's more of these nobodys than OSX and Linux nobodys combined.

The XBox Music Pass, formerly Zune Pass, is a pretty good music subscription service, and was well ahead of more notable subscription services like Spotify but it only recently became cross platform which was a mistake. And while the last Zune desktop client was quite good and one of the most attractive Windows desktop apps out there, the mobile clients are just barely adequate.

I guess the economics of the free streaming aren't viable or attractive to Microsoft anymore.
 
Maybe somebody finally explained to MS that the internet is not and never has been for streaming media.
 
JeffDC said:
Maybe somebody finally explained to MS that the internet is not and never has been for streaming media.
Click to expand...

You really hate Microsoft, don't you. Any and every post about MSFT that is posted, you have to write something negative. But, this? Come on. Welcome to the 21st century, man. Most traffic on the internet is streamed media - Netflix, Hulu, Vudu, Spotify, Pandora, Slacker, iTunes, Amazon, Microsoft, Beats and on and on and on.

I get the Microsoft hate. When it's a real issue. Hating Microsoft isn't cool anymore. This isn't 1999.
 
Ur_Mom said:
You really hate Microsoft, don't you. Any and every post about MSFT that is posted, you have to write something negative. But, this? Come on. Welcome to the 21st century, man. Most traffic on the internet is streamed media - Netflix, Hulu, Vudu, Spotify, Pandora, Slacker, iTunes, Amazon, Microsoft, Beats and on and on and on.

I get the Microsoft hate. When it's a real issue. Hating Microsoft isn't cool anymore. This isn't 1999.
Click to expand...
Wrong on just about all counts. As I've said in other posts I'd never blame any business for doing business, or doing anything that negatively impacts their profits. The internet is so much larger than any single company (MS, Google, Comcast etc), these companies are just the fortunate recipients of monopoly positions over an essential national utility in our country and many others. Intentional inaction on the part of our federal government is my complaint, it has zilch to do with the private business sector. Although I will continue to point out the 10,000 different symptoms caused by this failure to protect internet traffic with Title II and other protections.

It's a separate issue from that of valid uses for the internet. I stand by my claim that the internet is not and has never been meant for streaming media. This doesn't mean it can't be or isn't used for this purpose, only that it's inappropriate. Do you stream music on your telephone? I've asked this question in other threads: what if AT&T decided to implement forced commercials before you could dial a telephone? How about FedEx forcing you to watch 19 Geico commercials before they'll accept your package for shipping. Etc.
 
JeffDC said:
Wrong on just about all counts. As I've said in other posts I'd never blame any business for doing business, or doing anything that negatively impacts their profits.
Click to expand...

You're constantly complaining about the amount on money that Microsoft makes and bringing up thing like non-transferable Windows OEM licenses, WPA and even the personal wealth of Gates and Ballmer.
 
JeffDC said:
Wrong on just about all counts. As I've said in other posts I'd never blame any business for doing business, or doing anything that negatively impacts their profits. The internet is so much larger than any single company (MS, Google, Comcast etc), these companies are just the fortunate recipients of monopoly positions over an essential national utility in our country and many others. Intentional inaction on the part of our federal government is my complaint, it has zilch to do with the private business sector. Although I will continue to point out the 10,000 different symptoms caused by this failure to protect internet traffic with Title II and other protections.

It's a separate issue from that of valid uses for the internet. I stand by my claim that the internet is not and has never been meant for streaming media. This doesn't mean it can't be or isn't used for this purpose, only that it's inappropriate. Do you stream music on your telephone? I've asked this question in other threads: what if AT&T decided to implement forced commercials before you could dial a telephone? How about FedEx forcing you to watch 19 Geico commercials before they'll accept your package for shipping. Etc.
Click to expand...

Who the fuck are you to decide what a 'valid' use for the is? It's perfectly suitable to stream media, who cares if that wasn't the original intention. How exactly is streaming not "appropriate" use of the internet? I'm sure the internet wasn't originally mean't to enable you to spew ridiculous bullshit either, yet here you are.
 
It wasn't originally intended to have a commercial use, either.

The Internet is a network of devices. It is meant to move packets to and from other devices. All other stuff is just data. Movies, music, pictures, text, hypertext, anything.
 
Grahamkracka said:
Who the fuck are you to decide what a 'valid' use for the is? It's perfectly suitable to stream media, who cares if that wasn't the original intention.
Click to expand...
I care, as should anyone who doesn't wish to see the internet converted into just an alternate delivery method for basic cable TV service. It's Comcast's end goal you know.
 
heatlesssun said:
You're constantly complaining about the amount on money that Microsoft makes and bringing up thing like non-transferable Windows OEM licenses, WPA and even the personal wealth of Gates and Ballmer.
Click to expand...
Yes, because it amounts to extortion money in light of the government inaction I keep referring to, and explained earlier in this thread.
 
JeffDC said:
Yes, because it amounts to extortion money in light of the government inaction I keep referring to, and explained earlier in this thread.
Click to expand...

So you don't have a problem with a company "doing anything that negatively impacts their profits" but do when it comes to Microsoft. Got it.
 
JeffDC said:
Yes, because it amounts to extortion money in light of the government inaction I keep referring to, and explained earlier in this thread.
Click to expand...
The government doesn't own everything and doesn't have a right to insert itself into every situation. Regulating content on the internet is one of those places.

I know that doesn't stop the government of late from doing as it pleases. But we solved that problem 200+ years ago and we can solve it again. And if I have anything to do with it the solution will be final.

So keep pushing.
 
jpm100 said:
The government doesn't own everything and doesn't have a right to insert itself into every situation. Regulating content on the internet is one of those places.
Click to expand...
Never claimed the government "owned" the internet. I'm saying it's the sole protector of our free speech, privacy and other constitutional rights. These rights do not simply disappear the instant we go online.

I know that doesn't stop the government of late from doing as it pleases. But we solved that problem 200+ years ago and we can solve it again. And if I have anything to do with it the solution will be final.

jpm100 said:
So keep pushing.
Click to expand...
If we wish to save the internet as a two-way free and open medium, Title II protection and regulation is the only eventuality. So the pushing is a mere courtesy, and to hasten the process of getting people to think of the internet as what is has become: the world's most essential communications utility.
 
JeffDC said:
Or any monopoly. Yes.
Click to expand...

By today's standards Microsoft has no monopoly in client operating systems. Of course what you're talking about is desktops, however there have been totally free desktop OSes for many years that OEMs have had the option to offer even under anti-trust protection during Microsoft anti-trust battles. And they have utterly failed which for many reasons that have nothing to do with Microsoft's "monopoly" on the desktop. For instance, people complain about all of the different client versions of Windows. There's how many Linux distros?
 
Canceling ad supported music streaming because it's not profitable? Good riddance. Only a $10/month option? No thanks.
 
This sucks. I use the online version at work and never get any ads. Good selection too.
 
timta2 said:
Canceling ad supported music streaming because it's not profitable? Good riddance. Only a $10/month option? No thanks.
Click to expand...

I think every month you get three or two songs paid for which if you want to own some songs I'd a pretty awesome service.
 
Then it will go away completley, because Microsoft kills off services that people use. Though, apparently no one used this.

The Surface will be killed off next. You saw it here first, folks.
 
OEM said:
The Surface will be killed off next. You saw it here first, folks.
Click to expand...

I also have it on good authority that the Xbox One will be Microsoft's last console. An internal decision was already made at the top levels.
 
OEM said:
The Surface will be killed off next. You saw it here first, folks.
Click to expand...

The Surface Pro line isn't going anywhere, they seem to be a good track there in terms of updating the series and becoming profitable. Surface Windows RT based devices have a cloudy future. If Windows 10 does truly turn the Windows RT and Windows Phone OSes into one and the same and assuming that a modern version of Office will finally be available when 10 launches, Windows ARM devices would be much more viable in that they'd have around 500,000 apps with the combination of what's available in the Windows Phone and Windows Stores, discounting overlap and desktop apps.

The trick is the price point. $400+ is simply too much especially when there x86 devices that can run all of the Windows RT apps plus desktop apps for much less. The thing Microsoft should do create a lower end Surface Atom device. But it looks like Microsoft is steering clear of the Atom space and leaving that to its OEMs.

But we'll need to see exactly how Windows 10 works on all of the various platforms and form factors. Maybe there's something there that would make Windows ARM non-phone devices make more sense.
 
DPI said:
I also have it on good authority that the Xbox One will be Microsoft's last console. An internal decision was already made at the top levels.
Click to expand...

Consoles are not making any sense anymore... They are not 'consoles' you don't even buy games, you buy basically access licenses.
I can't believe Google, MS, Netflix, Amazon or any other giant has not made a move for Steam.
Steam= license service for BYOD. Xbone, PS4, WII2= failed attempt at an all in one living-room computer, with a messy license patchwork that gives you little of the advantages of the 'traditional' console (buy the game, pop it in, it works no matter what, works 10,20 years after.. can sell the media no problem, you can collect it, play it with your son/daughter ect years down the road ) now its first day patches, incomplete disks and what seems like shenanigans to me (I could be wrong, I don't own xbone, ps4, wii2, I am done with consoles)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top