Skip to main content

Google's new free streaming service takes a direct shot at Apple Music

Reuters, San Francisco: There's less than a week before Apple Music launches in more than 100 countries around the world -- it's reportedly coming to India too for Rs. 120 a month -- and already, Apple's biggest competitors are scrambling. Google launched a free version of its music streaming service on Tuesday. This makes Google's music service more like Spotify and is notable, because Google did not have a free tier before. User had to pay $9.99 a month to acccess the service.

Apple said earlier this month it would launch a music streaming service on June 30 for $9.99 per month along with a $14.99 per month family plan, with a free three-month trial.

As with other streaming services, such as Spotify and Rhapsody, Google Play Music curates playlists. Users can tailor playlists based on genre, artist or even activity, such as hosting a pool party or "having fun at work."

"We believe this is a play that will expose a lot of people to the service," Elias Roman, a Google product manager, said in an interview.

Unlike Google's subscription music service, the free service will carry ads, be unavailable offline and exclude certain songs.

Roman said millions of people look at Google Play Music each month but are not ready to pay for a subscription. By offering a free version of the service, he said, the search engine hopes more people will be compelled to pay for an upgraded version.

Ted Cohen, managing partner of TAG Strategic, a digital entertainment consultancy, said the timing of Google's launch was strategic.

"It's a smart time to do it with all the attention around Apple," Cohen said. "If they did it absent the Apple service, it wouldn't be the same story."

Google declined to say how many subscribers it has but said they more than doubled in 2014 from the previous year. But rivals Pandora, Spotify and Beats Music had far more mobile downloads than Google Play Music in 2014, according to data from analytics firm App Annie.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

India's biggest authorized porn industry.

INDIA Today: India's biggest authorized porn industry. Who are exploring Indian women, Indian culture & life through out the world. Pardon me for sharing all these porn pics. But these are from website of AajTak - India's No 1 Hindi channel of India Today Group .....

The Erosion of Democracy: BJP's Stranglehold on Indian Politics

In recent times, India has witnessed a concerning trend of democratic institutions being manipulated and opposition voices being silenced under the leadership of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The use of government agencies such as the Enforcement Directorate (ED), Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), and Income Tax Department (IT) to target opposition leaders has raised serious questions about the health of democracy in the country. The blatant misuse of these agencies to harass and intimidate political opponents undermines the very foundation of democracy. By incarcerating opposition leaders and subjecting them to legal harassment, the BJP government is effectively crushing dissent and monopolizing power. Such tactics not only weaken the democratic fabric of the nation but also erode public trust in the fairness and impartiality of the legal system. Furthermore, the stranglehold of the BJP government extends to the media, with reports of censorship and suppression becoming incre

Unmasking the Dark Veil of Electoral Bonds: The Lingering Shadow of Black Money in Indian Politics

By S.B. Mazumder In the convoluted saga of political financing in India, electoral bonds emerged as a promising solution, yet they only served to veil the pervasive presence of black money within the corridors of power. Despite assertions by the government that these bonds would bring transparency to political funding, the recent Supreme Court ruling striking them down as unconstitutional shines a stark light on the enduring issue of cash-driven politics. Electoral bonds were envisioned as a tool to sanitize the flow of funds to political parties by allowing donors to contribute ostensibly anonymously. However, this anonymity proved to be a double-edged sword, as it shielded potential quid pro quos between donors and political recipients. While parties were privy to the identities of their benefactors, the public was left in the dark, rendering the entire system vulnerable to manipulation and corruption. The government's promise that electoral bonds would cleanse the system of unac