'So much'? You honestly think an artist/label getting $0.003 per play is 'so much'? What world do you live on. At least with iTunes if say 1000 fans your track, you'll get at least $500 from the sales. But if those same 1000 just streamed the track from Spotify, they'd each have to play the track 166 times to get the same royalties.
You honestly think an artist/label getting $0.003 per play is 'so much'?
Yes. And this sense of entitlement is getting on my nerves.
The cost of music distribution has gone from infinite to ZERO in just about 130 years. This is a great achievement for us as a species and we should adapt accordingly instead of bemourning expired business models.
The music industry was constructed around the bottleneck of physical media distribution. This bottleneck does not exist anymore.
Sorry, that's not what I meant. I meant that the record companies ask for enough money that the company can stay in business but so much that they make a big profit.
Personally I think the amount artists get paid by streaming services is wrong. $0.003 and even less per stream is what I've seen but we also must remember that artists signed to the major labels get paid a much higher cut due to deals they make with the streaming services. I think the services would work best if artists/labels could opt-in and the price per stream was fixed for all artists ($0.02 per play seems fair to me).
It varies by month, by country, and by record label. So it's hard to give an exact figure for every artist. $0.003 is on the top end of the scale though.
That's actually a good thing. I don't see "casual" sites using WebGL any time soon, more likely it'll be professional or purpose built sites (like online design software). Installing another browser will be a very small hassle for someone who wants to use such services online.
Microsoft is simply not in the position of deciding which standards will live or die any more.
It's just another nail in the coffin of IE. The sooner we get rid of it, the better.
They like to do this. They stand firm. They hold out and insist that they probably have a better idea. 5 years later... everyone laughs at the browser that is only used by people that either have no choice, or are too old to really understand what they're using. Go ahead Microsoft. Keep making dumb choices. I doubt anyone with a brain even notices.
Isn't that the complement (in the maths/logic sense) of their target audience for the redesign? Surely they're trying to attract new users or those who've drifted/moved/run away from MySpace.
It is a fun little site, I really enjoyed playing with it.
You really need to add some spam prevention, title & comment length limits, fix exploits, etc.
I wanted to play around with it some more, but it's just pure spam now.
I don't even know what icky means but having Steve Jobs disliking styluses is not a reason to dismiss 5000 years off writing experience. For me the Galaxy Note is on the good tracks: allowing both.
I'll never forget Steve-o in the iPhone announcement keynote saying, "Maybe we'll use a stylus. Stylus?! Yecch! No!" I mostly agree.
There are a few apps I use that benefit from styluses, such as Penultimate (and probably Paper, if I could get over their obscene pricing scheme) but the capacitive stylus I have is really lame and I hate using my finger as a pen.
I guess it might have been better to not use the pay-per-brush model and just offer a single upgrade price to get everything. Still, you get to try it for free.
