

Spotify hit the 10 million users milestone - bond
http://eu.techcrunch.com/2010/09/15/spotify-10-million/

======
DrJokepu
I recently unsubscribed from Spotify after being a premium subscriber for more
than a year, and here's why:

* First, their library is not big enough. Many albums (especially from independent labels) are only added months after release, if at all. Some titles are removed after a while for apparently no reason (I'm still pissed off that Psychic Chasms from Neon Indian was removed as it is one of the best albums of 2009).

* The iPhone app simply sucks. Sure it looks nice, but dear lord it eats a lot of battery. On my iPhone 4, listening to Spotify during my morning commute consumes about 20% of the battery as opposed to <1% of the iPod app. This is simply unacceptable. I guess this must have something to do with Spotify not being able to use hardware decoding as it uses Ogg Vorbis, not MP3 or AAC.

* The 3 devices limit for offline tracks is not enough. I've got a work desktop, a home desktop, a notebook, an iPhone and an iPad. That's 5. Meaning that I cannot use the offline tracks feature on the desktops (as those ones have the most stable Internet connection).

I might subscribe again in the future if they solve these issues, but at the
moment, in my opinion, it doesn't worth it.

------
ThomPete
And with good reason.

The service just do everything right (and apparently have no problem with
agreeing on a model with FB)

I think it is very likely spotify will be huge if they can get their rights
issues managed (yes that's perhaps a big if)

~~~
michael_dorfman
Why is that "a big if"?

They seem to have good contracts with all of the major record labels.

And, the artists like it too. Some musicians here in Norway are reporting that
they are now receiving more money from Spotify than they are from iTunes.

I don't have any doubt that they've got things under control on the rights
side.

~~~
bond
I think he means regarding the US...

~~~
michael_dorfman
But if Spotify has successfully negotiated rights with the labels in the UK,
the Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, France and Spain, is there any reason to
suspect that they won't be able to reach an agreement with _those same labels_
in the US?

~~~
mzl
Since Spotify hasn't launched in the US yet, I would guess that the
negotiations are not really going forward. Daniel Ek said in an interview that
they hoped to launch in the US soon, and that was more than a year ago.

------
Tycho
I don't have much money to throw around these months, but I subscribed to
Premium yesterday. In my opinion, the service ia probably worth £100 per month
or more. It just seems like such an obscene luxury, being able to plug a small
device into your hifi then listen to virtually anything you want at a high bit
rate, for as long as you want. I was reading a radio stations Top 1000 tunes
and decided to get a month's subscription because there was a Spotify playlist
for it. I mean of all the things I might spend £10 on, that is _easily_ worth
it. Then there's the other types of listening it makes possible, like
listening to dozens of different versions of the same jazz standard, or
compilation box sets you'd never find (I recommend the John Lennon covers one,
it's from a series of charity releases I think). Just add a few more features
like more metadata for the tracks and it will be perfect.

That said, at the same time I think it is insane and surely unsustainable. If
someone records a great record, why should the whole world get to listen to it
completely free (well, there is advertising money but doesn't anoint to much
from what I'm lead to believe), makes no sense. And on the other hand, if they
don't release their record to Spotify, they are still facing economic
competition from the service. Faced with a choice between Spotify's enormous
database and some particular new single, I'll take the former and forego the
latter.

Perhaps they will change it though, like force a certain number of purchases
per month to maintain the service, or limit the number of plays a track can
get before it becomese unavailable.

------
spuz
I now subscribe to the £5/month unlimited service and I'm so glad that I
signed up. I listen to new music pretty much all day at work thanks to Spotify
and now I don't have to turn the volume down on my headphones whenever an
advert comes on. It really is a small price to pay considering the vast amount
of music that you get access to.

Having said that most people I know don't pay the subscription but I believe
adding a small extra incentive such as 2-3 free songs per month might well
convert them to becoming subscribers.

~~~
nailer
I'd pay GBP 5/month for premium - ie, phone access - but GBP 10 is too much.
An ad-hoc survey of my friends show most of them are in the same boat.

------
robgough
Any app that makes you go "Whoa" when you first use it, and then only
impresses you more and more as you use it has to be on to a good thing.

It's a simple app, does exactly what it says on the tin - and is fast as hell.
Brilliant. The fact that the free model plays adverts every once in a blue
moon (significantly less than commercial radio) is a massive boon.

Well done Spotify, and good luck!

edit: typo

~~~
pederb72
I couldn't agree more. I've been a Spotify premium user from day one (I loathe
commercials), and it's absolutely worth the monthly fee. As a premium user you
also get the iOS/Android app, which lets you cache up to 3333 tracks on your
mobile device for offline playing.

------
patd
I can't use Spotify in Belgium. How does it compare with Grooveshark ? It
looks to be the same concept, one is a desktop app, the other a webapp.

Grooveshark doesn't have audio ads, no limit (that I know of) but does not
seem to have a mobile app. What makes people pay for Spotify's service
compared to what Grooveshark has to offer ?

~~~
mzl
One really big selling point for Spotify is the quality of experience. For
example, the median playback latency for starting a track is just 265 ms.

