Skip to main content

Sorry Google, but Spotify will still offer me what YouTube cannot

Image result for NEW YOUTUBE MUSIC
IMAGE: Google

One of the worst kept secrets in the tech world has finally been announced: YouTube and Google Play Music are finally going to start converging. The new YouTube Music app will start rolling out next week with the long term plan to phase out Google Play Music. The new app will compete with Spotify with a $9.99 per month plan that will let you have unlimited skips, ad-free listening, and background playing; there will also be a free version that allows listening with ads. The current YouTube Red will become YouTube Premium for just an additional $2.00 per month on top of the YouTube Music subscription. Because the point of this article is about music playing, I will not talk much about that.

Image result for NEW YOUTUBE MUSIC
IMAGE: Google

At first glance, this seems great right? There was no need for both YouTube Music and Google Play Music as they are competing streaming platforms owned by the same company (Google) so it makes sense to actually consolidate apps as opposed to offer competing ones (even for Google). This will better prepare them to take on Spotify and Apple Music. So far so good.

Admittedly, I tend to go back and forth between Spotify and Google Play Music, and yes, I am one of those dreaded FREE users. I love the playlists of Spotify, and I have found that it offers excellent suggestions to my created playlists; I also don't find ads intrusive to my listening experience. However, the one thing it does not offer is playback of locally stored MP3 files which is where Google Play Music shines.

I love the fact that I can upload my over 1000 songs to either Google Play Music or my device, and then I can play them whenever I wish. This is what originally brought me back to Google Play Music which I started using for all of my streaming needs at the time as well. However, I found that the playlists were sub-par and the music suggestions were greatly lacking. With integrated AI, it sounds like YouTube Music may be significantly better in these areas so now is the time to commit fully to Google's streaming service right? Wrong!

As far as music streamers go, I am pretty easily satisfied. I would like to listen to solid playlists, make a few of my own, listen to the music that I own, and have access to all of my favorite podcasts. It would seem that YouTube Music would be perfect for a free user like me, but there is one significant thing missing from YouTube Music that will send me right back to Spotify as soon as Google Play Music goes under: background listening.

While I completely understand the regular, free YouTube app not allowing me to stream videos in the background (it is a video site after all), I do not understand this decision at all in terms of music streaming. People seldom listen to music with just the app open unless they are in their vehicle or otherwise engaged at home; people love to multi-task. When I am at home, I often like to play some music while looking through my phone, and when I have my headphones in, I am often looking at other things as well. Spotify and Google Play Music both allow this functionality, and this, as well as the ability to upload my own music, made Play Music perfect for me. Why would Google remove core functionality?

Granted, I am a free user, and my opinion is irrelevant currently. However, free users are the most frequent converters to premium users; people want to make sure they like the service before diving in with cash. So while subscribing would remove this issue for YouTube Music, the service may not have that opportunity. Those massive amount of free users that either don't have the money right now or have no need for ad-removal will spend their time on Spotify as it will give them the best experience. And if they should ever decide to upgrade, where do you think they will spend their money? The streaming platform they have been on forever or one they are not familiar with because it did not provide an ideal experience in the past? I think the answer is pretty clear, personal libraries be damned.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

13 Reasons Why shows why it is not as easy as blaming technology for our societal problems

IMAGE: IMDB Let's start with a little background for those that are not familiar. 13 Reasons Why is a Netflix show that follows the story of Hannah Baker, or rather, the story after Hannah Baker. After intense bullying, harassment, and ultimately sexual assault, Hannah takes her own life leaving behind a set of tapes detailing the reasons she committed suicide. In the newly released season two, 13 Reason follows the trial in the lawsuit between Hannah's parents and the school district. An incredibly graphic show, 13 Reasons leaves little to the imagination. Hannah's suicide is shown fully on screen as are the various depictions of sexual assault including the now controversial scene featuring character Tyler in the season two finale. Designed to instigate discussion about some of the darker sides of society, 13 Reasons Why remains polarizing for how it depicts certain topics; however, one topic that is rarely discussed or mentioned is the affect that technology has on
1 comment
Read more

RCS (Chat) may finally push carriers to give us the plans we really want

IMAGE: TechAdviser.co When The Verge first released its exclusive analysis on the future of Google messaging including the seeming death of Allo, the branding of Chat, and the push toward RCS, I did not think too much of it. After all, I had been reading about Rich Communication Services as the successor to Short Message Service for years; the popularity of apps such as WhatsApp, Messenger, and iMessage showed that people loved the feeling of more personalized messages. Uncompressed pictures and stickers were just the beginning of what RCS was capable as in-thread boarding passes started to become a reality. Unfortunately, as is always the case, carriers and companies could not agree on a profile for universal RCS leading to no direction and no adoption; Apple sitting comfortably on the outside with the exclusivity of iMessage did not help the matter either. However, Google with Chat seems to have put RCS back on track. As noted in the article, many carriers and manufacturers h
Post a Comment
Read more

How 30 minutes more per Morning Changed my Life - Part 2

Body           I think the most obvious change (and the one I had most sought after) was too my body. After the holidays, I felt miserable with both how I looked and how I felt. I had not been doing anything physical and had consumed more food in a short amount of time than I had done all year. This state of mind is what led me to undertake this journey in the first place.           However, unlike when I was going to the gym, I chose to also completely change my diet. I decided that to completely invest in the program, I needed to quit sabotaging my own results. I gave up on almost all sugars, quit drinking soda, and began monitoring everything that went in to my body. While it is not only more expensive, but also more time consuming, to change my diet, I have found the results to be well worth it.           I have found that in only two months that the changes have been night and day. I have completely lost every bit of weight that I put on during the holidays as well put mysel
Post a Comment
Read more