
That was quick: Grooveshark disappears from the Google Play Store (again) - mtgx
http://thenextweb.com/google/2012/08/31/that-quick-grooveshark-disappears-google-play-store-again/
======
saboot
Last week I was using grooveshark at home, when suddenly it opened a new tab
showing that malicious "Windows Update" virus advertisement. This has been a
problem with grooveshark in the past, and it's very ridiculous that they
haven't sorted it out yet.

~~~
short_circut
There are a whole heap of issues it is ridiculous that they have not worked
out. Mislabeled songs, incomplete songs, poorly organized library, low quality
tracks, viruses, partial albums.... etc...

And from what I understand also they haven't sorted out the whole licensing
issue behind the music they serve.

------
shinratdr
I don't get why people like Grooveshark. It's like LimeWire in a webapp. I
thought we had collectively moved past that.

~~~
tomjen3
People like it because it is LimeWire in a webapp.

Actually, scratch that -- they like it because it lets them listen to whatever
the song they want to listen to, whereever they want to listen to it. As far
as I know, nobody has that kind of selection anywhere else.

~~~
killwhitey
Youtube does, and is used as a main music player for a lot of people.

~~~
ashray
Yes, but youtube doesn't have an offline player feature and if it did, the
videos would still be larger than Grooveshark audio.

------
littletables
Grooveshark is an eloquent discovery tool. Music discovery is always a
challenge for music lovers.

Example just now made me want to comment here - very simple.

Friend posted a YouTube video with a song on Facebook. I went to Grooveshark
and listened to the song, and others by the artists - not song samples, but
the whole songs, which I made a little playlist with. Hooked on the band
discovery, I just went and bought two albums.

------
ashray
I honestly believe that Grooveshark will never get love from the major record
labels. They just pissed them off and the record industry likes to play
hardball.

I gave them a tech suggestion a few weeks ago for their mobile apps. Obviously
the apple app store won't allow them and neither will Google Play. Their
obvious route in this situation should be to leverage HTML5 Localstorage.
(this is with respect to storing songs for offline listening..) They haven't
gotten around to it yet but I hope they do sometime soon.

I have an rDio subscription but I love Grooveshark because I can always find
every song there. rDio doesn't have deals with every label around the world so
if I want to listen to something slightly offbeat - chances are that only
Grooveshark will have it.

~~~
nashequilibrium
I am not familiar with the music app scene, but whenever I am working I have
grooveshark open, I can find any song, especially the latest ones. I also
don't have facebook so I can't use those apps, the whole experience is very
seamless. At the gym I use the Pandora app but if I had access to grooveshark,
I would definitely replace Pandora with it. Maybe to do what it takes to get
this level of seamlesness is what is causing a backlash from record labels. I
also love not being forced into social sharing.

------
rglover
I've loved (and used) Grooveshark since the early days. I have most of my
music saved to my account and go to the site daily to play music. What's
always irked me though was that it wasn't a subscription service. I would
gladly pay for an app of its caliber monthly without a thought.

I pay for the pro version now (I believe it's at 25/year) and it's just too
low. I imagine revenue from a (monthly) subscription service would give them a
lot of cash for handling labels. In turn, I think they'd garner the
respect/legitimacy needed to get them in the app store.

