Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[widert]

Would be interesting to know what you guys think about this.

In my opinion, the introduction of Apple Music will move consumers even further towards streaming of music, and hence JRiver needs to come up with a solution that allows for this to stay relevant...

Team up with Spotify or Tidal and create a solution that enables streaming to multiple zones with full control throug jremote? (Not through the WDM driver...)

Tom

[Hendrik]

Those companies are not interested in cooperation. We have tried.

[~OHM~]

Would be interesting to know what you guys think about this.

In my opinion, the introduction of Apple Music will move consumers even further towards streaming of music, and hence JRiver needs to come up with a solution that allows for this to stay relevant...

Team up with Spotify or Tidal and create a solution that enables streaming to multiple zones with full control throug jremote? (Not through the WDM driver...)

Tom

I for one have no interest in any of this and I am a consumer.....just saying

[flac.rules]

Those companies are not interested in cooperation. We have tried.

Yeah, I agree, I think its a dead end to try to cooperate with companies like that, they want to keep the marked for themselfs. However, the fact is that streaming is getting more and more popular, the WDM driver is somewhat tailored to this, are there other things MC could do to be more "compatible" with streaming providers without the help of the providers? Is streaming popular among MC customers and potensial customers? I think that is interesting questions.

[widert]

Yeah, I agree, I think its a dead end to try to cooperate with companies like that, they want to keep the marked for themselfs. However, the fact is that streaming is getting more and more popular, the WDM driver is somewhat tailored to this, are there other things MC could do to be more "compatible" with streaming providers without the help of the providers? Is streaming popular among MC customers and potensial customers? I think that is interesting questions.

Streaming will take over music distribution almost completely with the introduction of Apple Music. I see, except from using JRiver, no use at all to buy/download music anymore... Perhaps the introduction into the market by Apple will make the other providers more willing to cooperate with JRiver?

[BillT]

Streaming will take over music distribution almost completely

Unfortunately that is probably true for new consumers who don't know any better.

The content providers love that model; they have almost total control over distribution and use and can continuously suck income out of the consumer.

As a collector of music for many decades it doesn't fit my requirements.

You need constant access to a reliable internet connection. That's not universal by any means.

The technical quality of the material is often very questionable (however high the claimed data rate).

Availability of material is split over multiple providers, so the consumer probably needs multiple subscriptions.

The providers can (and will) change the terms of access and the content that can be accessed at any time at their whim.

The providers can go out of business with no notice (and will).

I can see the attraction to the young, naive, smart phone addicted youth.

It's not so attractive to some of us!

[ldoodle]

Unfortunately that is probably true for new consumers who don't know any better.

The content providers love that model; they have almost total control over distribution and use and can continuously suck income out of the consumer.

As a collector of music for many decades it doesn't fit my requirements.

You need constant access to a reliable internet connection. That's not universal by any means.

The technical quality of the material is often very questionable (however high the claimed data rate).

Availability of material is split over multiple providers, so the consumer probably needs multiple subscriptions.

The providers can (and will) change the terms of access and the content that can be accessed at any time at their whim.

The providers can go out of business with no notice (and will).

I can see the attraction to the young, naive, smart phone addicted youth.

It's not so attractive to some of us!

And an artist could opt/pull out of these services!!

[flac.rules]

Well, like it or not, streaming is taking over, and if MC wants to be more than a very small player in this field, they must take that into consideration. Maybe they are content with being a very small player, I do not know, but the future of streaming is certainly something to consider at least, and it already has been done somewhat with the great WDM-feature.

[Vocalpoint]

Streaming will take over music distribution almost completely with the introduction of Apple Music.

"Apple Music" will most certainly not take over music distribution completely. There are a ton of streaming services out there now and none of them have "taken over" anything. There will be the usual ways to get your music for a long time to come whether it be CD, download or what have you.

And Apple is going to get a huge wakeup call when they find out just how close people really are to the "free" model that Spotify has. There is no way Apple will ever catch those guys charging any listener $10 or 12 bucks per month. Plus you have to use iTunes - which instantly places you using the worst music software ever created (at least on Windows).

My long range outlook on this will be a healthy does of early adopters during the "free trial" and then a quiet slip into the background of all the other players. With Spotify still firmly in the lead.

VP

[Vocalpoint]

Well, like it or not, streaming is taking over, and if MC wants to be more than a very small player in this field, they must take that into consideration.

They are taking it into consideration - read here...

http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=98006.0

VP

[blgentry]

From a philosophical point of view, I think streaming is the next step in the CHEAPENING of music.  I use the word cheapening to mean "devalued", or "no longer valuable or appreciated".

Music is special, wonderful, important, and artistic.  Every step to remove resolution, to make it easier to get, to make it more temporary, more transient.... every step removes some of it's specialness.  This is why I'm against streaming.

I feel like the last man on earth with this opinion, as just about everyone I know is into streaming now. 

Brian.

[Vocalpoint]

Music is special, wonderful, important, and artistic.  Every step to remove resolution, to make it easier to get, to make it more temporary, more transient.... every step removes some of it's specialness.  This is why I'm against streaming.

+1

I only use Spotify as a demo tool to see if I like a specific release. Then I go out and get it - either physical or download.

But oddly - we never actually use it to listen to music here. That why MC is in the house.

VP

[flac.rules]

They are taking it into consideration - read here...

http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=98006.0

VP

I don't really see how having "their own", restricted streaming service takes that into account in any large way.

[mwillems]

Streaming will take over music distribution almost completely with the introduction of Apple Music.

Anyone who thinks this is confused about Apple's market share/market influence.  Apple only has about a fifth of the device market globally, and well less than half even in the U.S. (which outside of Japan is where they have the greatest market penetration).  What's more their device market share is declining year-on-year.  In terms of computers and laptops, they've only ever been a few percent of the market (they're basically neck and neck with Linux at this point). 

Android has a much larger slice of the device pie than Apple, and Google Music didn't "take over music distribution."

Apple sells luxury products and is a style leader.  They aren't in a position to "take over" much of anything at this point (barring a stunning uptick in iproduct adoption). 

[csimon]

You need constant access to a reliable internet connection. That's not universal by any means.

Correct - mine is terrible!  I find too much emphasis on streaming and the cloud.  And in any case, I don't trust services that are in someone else's hands.

I want to play *my* music collection, not someone else's. Nor rely on services that could be taken away at the drop of a hat, which are lower quality anyway, or stop working because there's a server somewhere that's not responding.

[BryanC]

Not interested. I've seen this play out before. Get people hooked on a too-good-to-be-true service and then slowly change the T&C and quality of the product to increase profits until people start making petitions and front-page Reddit posts about how evil your company is. Meanwhile you've raked in billions and have forced people to become dependent on your service (in this case, music streaming) because the cost of replacing all of that music they never actually owned is too high.

This doesn't even mention the insidiousness of DRM. Oh, you want to listen to music that you've paid for on a device that doesn't respect our DRM? You need to purchase a new one, from US. Eventually the PMP companies all have to incorporate those DRM technologies because people won't buy a player that's not compatible with their ecosystem. As the non-DRM players are no longer profitable they are phased out, which makes it that much more difficult to pry away from DRM when the consumers finally have had enough of their shenanigans

When I buy music, I can use or play it wherever I want and will be able to do so for the rest of my life. How much is that worth? Certainly more than the $200-$300/yr I'd save by switching to streaming right now. And certainly more than the amount of money you'll be forced to *pay to play* over the years in the ecosystem you get stuck in.

[Vocalpoint]

I don't really see how having "their own", restricted streaming service takes that into account in any large way.

What were you expecting? For JRiver to be allowed to duct tape themselves onto some other service?

All these services have clearly positioned themselves to be "their own" with each having a lockout mode - where you need their product to get their content.

Your comment was "Well, like it or not, streaming is taking over, and if MC wants to be more than a very small player in this field, they must take that into consideration"

So either they can offer nothing (Be a media player only) and be a "no" player or create their own streaming infrastructure and be a "streaming" player. Yes?

That said - If you are thinking that JRiver has the resource and clout to complete with Spotifys and Apples of the world - you probably need to dial back your enthusiasm a bit. When compared with the user base and reach of a Spotify and/or Apple - MC is an extreme niche product with a miniscule (but very devoted) following.

That they are attempting any kind of streaming activity should be a good thing - yes?

VP

[Vocalpoint]

This doesn't even mention the insidiousness of DRM. Oh, you want to listen to music that you've paid for on a device that doesn't respect our DRM? You need to purchase a new one, from US. Eventually the PMP companies all have to incorporate those DRM technologies because people won't buy a player that's not compatible with their ecosystem. As the non-DRM players are no longer profitable they are phased out, which makes it that much more difficult to pry away from DRM when the consumers finally have had enough of their shenanigans

Or the fact that I could see Apple suddenly killing off the ability for Spotify (or others) to offer their apps via the App store.

I can't see Apple allowing their sheep any chance to use anything but iTunes for their streaming fun.

VP

[flac.rules]

What were you expecting? For JRiver to be allowed to duct tape themselves onto some other service?

All these services have clearly positioned themselves to be "their own" with each having a lockout mode - where you need their product to get their content.

Your comment was "Well, like it or not, streaming is taking over, and if MC wants to be more than a very small player in this field, they must take that into consideration"

So either they can offer nothing (Be a media player only) and be a "no" player or create their own streaming infrastructure and be a "streaming" player. Yes?

That said - If you are thinking that JRiver has the resource and clout to complete with Spotifys and Apples of the world - you probably need to dial back your enthusiasm a bit. When compared with the user base and reach of a Spotify and/or Apple - MC is an extreme niche product with a miniscule (but very devoted) following.

That they are attempting any kind of streaming activity should be a good thing - yes?

VP

Well, I opened for discussion about this earlier in the thread, I don't have much when it comes to expectations on this front. It probably is difficult, maybe even impossible, but I think it shoudl be dicussed what MC could do to be more "compatible", with the streaming services, the WDM-driver is already a part of this.

And i do not agree that the only options are to offer nothing or be a streamings service themselfs.

To be honest, the MC-streaming service is totally useless for me, I don't see it as a good thing, other than i hope it gives the company some income for little work.

[Vocalpoint]

Well, I opened for discussion about this earlier in the thread, I don't have much when it comes to expectations on this front. It probably is difficult, maybe even impossible, but I think it should be discussed what MC could do to be more "compatible", with the streaming services, the WDM-driver is already a part of this.

I think the overall "expectations" for MC to be able to be "compatible" with any of the major services is nil. The majors became majors by keeping their services on their platforms and doing things their way. Unless you have a boat load of cash to front some sort of "compatibility" potential. But Jim and co have mentioned many times that they are not in that game.

And i do not agree that the only options are to offer nothing or be a streaming service themselves.

Well - what else is there. Let us all know.

To be honest, the MC-streaming service is totally useless for me, I don't see it as a good thing, other than i hope it gives the company some income for little work.

Well- you asked the question. At least JRiver is trying to provide something - even if that something is not a big ticket item for many of us. But if you keep thinking that MC is gonna offer Spotify - built in - using the WDM driver - you will probably be waiting a long time.

When I really need to stream something quickly - it's easier to just use Spotify and be done with it.

But for real serious listening - I will simply continue to use MC the way I have always used it - my way.

VP

[dmac6419]

At vocalpoint why should music be free ,jriver aint free

[~OHM~]

But for real serious listening - I will simply continue to use MC the way I have always used it - my way.
VP

 

[Vocalpoint]

At vocalpoint why should music be free ,jriver aint free

Where did I say music should be free? Artists should be getting every nickel they have coming to them and I would be happy to pay them directly if I could

And I am also happy to pay JRiver as well. Nary has an app given me so much enjoyment.

VP

[flac.rules]

I think the overall "expectations" for MC to be able to be "compatible" with any of the major services is nil. The majors became majors by keeping their services on their platforms and doing things their way. Unless you have a boat load of cash to front some sort of "compatibility" potential. But Jim and co have mentioned many times that they are not in that game.

Well - what else is there. Let us all know.

Well- you asked the question. At least JRiver is trying to provide something - even if that something is not a big ticket item for many of us. But if you keep thinking that MC is gonna offer Spotify - built in - using the WDM driver - you will probably be waiting a long time.

When I really need to stream something quickly - it's easier to just use Spotify and be done with it.

But for real serious listening - I will simply continue to use MC the way I have always used it - my way.

VP

I said the same earlier, I think it is pointless to expect cooperation from the streaming services, therefore one should look at other solutions.

The WDM driver has been mentioned several times, it improves compatibility with streaming services. Of course, it is no where near a complete spotify compatibility, but at the very least it lets you feed the audio through MC, it is something, something more than nothing.

[Vocalpoint]

I said the same earlier, I think it is pointless to expect cooperation from the streaming services, therefore one should look at other solutions.

But you still haven't indicated what you believe these other solutions are?

The majors had to go thru a ton of teething issues, contractual discussions with major labels, probably gobs of cash in infrastructure, development and so on. If I was a major that laid out that kind of capitol - I wouldn't want anyone piggybacking on my thing either

Personally - I could care less about any type of "streaming" as a prime source of music enjoyment. Here in Canada - with the high cost of mobile data plans - there will never ever be any concept of paying money to listen to a crappy 128KB stream to any of our devices. If we are on the road - it's the radio. If I am on the bus - it's my iPod. If we are popping beers on the patio at the house - it's MC.

And while others have mentioned "streaming" is the way with their circle of friends - I am hard pressed to find anyone in my circle that actually streams anything. Matter of fact - it's hard to find anyone in my circle that even cares about music anymore

VP

[flac.rules]

But you still haven't indicated what you believe these other solutions are?

No, because I posted it as a topic that should be discussed, potential ways to "solve" this problem. I have never said I have the solution, I want a "brainstorming" of what solutions could be possible. Streaming is very popular, and will probably be more popular in the near future.

[Fangio]

The only 'streaming' I want to do is listening to my music around the house. Accurate audio sync between zones is of infinitely greater interest to me.

[Vocalpoint]

No, because I posted it as a topic that should be discussed, potential ways to "solve" this problem. I have never said I have the solution, I want a "brainstorming" of what solutions could be possible. Streaming is very popular, and will probably be more popular in the near future.

Well - there really are only three ways to get your rock and roll fix.

1. Either have the physical media (Digital file, CD, LP etc) and a player to play it with.
2. Have a streaming app and hit their library either free or by subscription.
3. Turn on the radio and put up with that crap.

MC is a closed app with it's own infrastructure - the same as every other software "player" out there. While I (The consumer) do not see a defacto need to alter MC to be a streaming powerhouse in any way - others may feel differently.

Reality is clear tho - the days of using an app like "MC" as a primary media source are numbered. While old schoolers like me with the time and resource (and desire) to assemble a huge digital music library will always have a need to have MC around - there are countless thousands or millions who have neither the time, resource (or any interest whatsoever) to assemble anything - so streaming fits their agenda perfectly.

JRiver is probably looking at the future and feeling a bit tense about it - understandably. But I would not count out the old schoolers just yet And I also would not waste any time trying to make MC into the next Spotify either. That ship has sailed and nothing JRiver can (or might do) would make a Spotify user suddenly swing over to MC - which is what this is really about anyway.

That said - if JRiver can make their streaming project work - more power to them. But in the end - I think licensing, regional restrictions and a whole bunch of other red tape will probably prevent it from having a wide reach.

VP

[flac.rules]

What you are saying just isn't the case, one can use a streaming app in conjunction to MC to some degree today (more in the past, with for instance the netflix-plugin).

I have never suggested that MC should be a streaming provider, I don't think it has that much merit (maybe as some "easy money" if the make that from it, but nothing more). I want some kind of brainstorming around being more or less compatible with existing streaming services.

[Vocalpoint]

One can use a streaming app in conjunction to MC to some degree today (more in the past, with for instance the netflix-plugin).

My question would be - why bother? Why would I (not necessarily you) want to take any already heavily compressed, lossy, crappy music feed coming out of the Spotify desktop app and run that "in conjunction" with MC? To save myself a massive headache - I would just leave the Spotify app running and leave it at that. That's just about as good as I (or anyone else) needs that stream to be.

While I fully appreciate what MC does with my hi def lossless library via my main system - I could never see myself wanting to run a crappy lifeless Spotify stream through it for 8 hours a day. Conversely I can see myself wanting to run 8 hours of my own library through it

I want some kind of brainstorming around being more or less compatible with existing streaming services.

Back on the topic of compatibility - I never see it happening and not just with MC.  

Kinda like the thread from a month or two ago where MC and Tidal were in talks to maybe work together - I think I remember the JRiver gang saying that Tidal wanted JRiver dev to start changing a bunch of stuff in a major way in  MC to fit "their" idea of compatibility. And quite rightly JRiver told them it wasn't going to happen.

So therein lies the rub. Seems the biggest the service you try to approach on "compatibility" - the more final say that service wants in granting you "access" the their stuff or - it costs way to much to buy in. Or they simply say no.

VP

[flac.rules]

My question would be - why bother? Why would I (not necessarily you) want to take any already heavily compressed, lossy, crappy music feed and run that "in conjunction" with MC?
While I fully appreciate what MC does with my hi def lossless library via my main system - I could never see myself wanting to run a crappy lifeless stream through it for 8 hours a day. Conversely I can see myself wanting to run 8 hours of my own library through it

Back on the topic of compatibility - I never see it happening and not just with MC. 

Kinda like the thread from a month or two ago where MC and Tidal were in talks to maybe work together - I think I remember the JRiver gang saying that Tidal wanted JRiver dev to start changing a bunch of stuff in a major way in  MC to fit "their" idea of compatibility. And quite rightly JRiver told them it wasn't going to happen.

So therein lies the rub. Seems the biggest the service you try to approach on "compatibility" - the more final say that service wants in granting you "access" the their stuff. If JRiver really wanted to be "compatible" with some streaming service - where do they draw the line on altering MC to fit the "other guys" idea of compatibility. I wouldn't be giving up my brand or look or feel either if it was my app.

VP

People who aren't interested in streaming isn't in the group more "streamingfriendly" features would cater to, so it frankly doesn't matter what that group of people thinks about those features, what matters is how many people who use streaming use MC, and potentially stop using because of streaming, and how many people using streaming could potenially be MC-customers. Quite a lot of people use streaming services.

To repeat my self yet again, I do not see talking to the companies getting anywhere, I think MC must look at ideas where they are not dependant on the good-will of the streaming services. Your rub is thus not relevant for that part of the discussion.

[Vocalpoint]

To repeat my self yet again, I do not see talking to the companies getting anywhere, I think MC must look at ideas where they are not dependant on the good-will of the streaming services. Your rub is thus not relevant for that part of the discussion.

So steal the stream without them knowing? Or simply find a way to pipe an already present stream in the PC - thru MC? Isn't that already doable via the WDM driver?

Apologies but I do not know where you are going with this...

VP

[flac.rules]

So steal the stream without them knowing? Or simply find a way to pipe an already present stream in the PC - thru MC? Isn't that already doable via the WDM driver?

Apologies but I do not know where you are going with this...

VP

Yes, piping present stream, or rather, piping present streaming service, WDM is audio only, it gives no feedback to the streaming services int he form of changing songs, getting info about what is played and so on, neither does it support video.

[Vocalpoint]

Or rather, piping present streaming service

Well - if a providers stream actually contains proprietary metadata about song changes and so on - using the data correctly would most likely only ever work for the app connected to the service itself.

I will assume that Spotify "owns" their stream AND - it's metadata payload.

Taking/manipulating that metadata without the "good will" of the provider - sounds - well...a tad illegal.

VP

[flac.rules]

Well - if a providers stream actually contains proprietary metadata about song changes and so on - using the data correctly would most likely only ever work for the app connected to the service itself.

I will assume that Spotify "owns" their stream AND - it's metadata payload.

Taking/manipulating that metadata without the "good will" of the provider - sounds - well...a tad illegal.

VP

Maybe, maybe not, that is why I am asking if anybody has any ideas on what do do, just to take an example in spotify, the name of the song playing turns up in the task manager beside the spotify-icon, this is probably extractable somehow, maybe not general enough, or not worth the trouble, but just to illustrate what kind of ideas I am thinking of.

The one "taking" the metadata is the spotify-user, that has a paid service, i am not a lawyer, but seems unlikely that this is illegal to me, it is just extracting info from a service you already have paid for for you own use.

[Vocalpoint]

The one "taking" the metadata is the spotify-user, that has a paid service, i am not a lawyer, but seems unlikely that this is illegal to me, it is just extracting info from a service you already have paid for for you own use.

Fair enough. But paid user or not - I do not think you could start messing with the service.

That would be like me "doctoring" my cable feed here in the house. Sure - I pay for the service - but my cable co would freak if they found me decrypting movie channels and capturing  .avi files to burn to DVD...

VP

[flac.rules]

Fair enough. But paid user or not - I do not think you could start messing with the service.

That would be like me "doctoring" my cable feed here in the house. Sure - I pay for the service - but my cable co would freak if they found me decrypting movie channels and capturing  .avi files to burn to DVD...

VP

I think the legal consideration can be discussed if there are concrete things the devs consider implementing, this is more of an idea phase.

[Vocalpoint]

I think the legal consideration can be discussed if there are concrete things the devs consider implementing, this is more of an idea phase.

FWIW - I think it's pretty clear (with the Doctor Who project) - what JRiver is considering with respect to "streaming".

Seems like the focus is their own backyard - not in accommodating or operating in conjunction with any other services at this time.

Fine by me.

VP

[flac.rules]

FWIW - I think it's pretty clear (with the Doctor Who project) - what JRiver is considering with respect to "streaming".

Seems like the focus is their own backyard - not in accommodating or operating in conjunction with any other services at this time.

Fine by me.

VP

Could be, I will let that be up to the developers, if you don't think your time is well spent coming with suggestions, it is fine not too.

[OverTheAir]

The only 'streaming' I want to do is listening to my music around the house. Accurate audio sync between zones is of infinitely greater interest to me.

This plus a more user friendly means to add and interact with streaming radio services from JR.  It seems from the comments so far that streaming is assumed to be use of an all in one service like a Spotify, Tidal or Pandora?  I tend to use what I consider streaming differently.  I use the Logitech Media Server (Slimserver as was) and software Squeezeplay clients on Windows and Linux PCs (in other words no proprietary hardware devices) to play either my own CD rips, podcasts or free "radio" streams off the internet, all through the same interface if I wish.  Everything syncs up seamlessly all around the house across 4 different systems if I wish, even across a rather flaky wireless link.  BTW (and I may have this wrong since I haven't checked in detail) but all that software seems to be open source if an alternative to DLNA is required in order to achieve seamless syncing; if only to perhaps learn from it.

As an example of content I can listen to KDFC (Bay Area classical station), or Linn Classical, or Venice Classic Radio as my favorites but there seem to be a gazillion other choices if I wish.  Its easy to browse and change channel if I fancy something different.  The quality of some of the radio channels aren't great with too much compression, but we shouldn't generalize.  Linn for example streams at 320kbps, NRK Classic (Norway) and P2 Musik (Sweden) at 192kbps, while KDFC and Venice are at 128kbps.

Just my 2c  

[Vocalpoint]

Could be, I will let that be up to the developers, if you don't think your time is well spent coming with suggestions, it is fine not too.

That's cool. My time is probably better spent on coming up with things that keep MC getting better in the environment where I use it most - inside my house.

VP

[flac.rules]

To spin abit around this, Spotify for instance has an API, not open to commercial programs(?) but it exists, how about plugin-support? That might solve some of the streaming services at least. How about the rest? Like Netflix, they have a web-interface right? Maybe making the program better at accessing streaming web-content from inside MC?

[mojave]

Like Netflix, they have a web-interface right? Maybe making the program better at accessing streaming web-content from inside MC?

Netflix was supported in JRiver for years. Support was removed in release 20.0.39.

20.0.39 (11/17/2014)
8. Changed: Removed Netflix support since their public API closed down on 11/14/2014.

[flac.rules]

Netflix was supported in JRiver for years. Support was removed in release 20.0.39.

Yeah I know, but that doesn't change the situation today.

[glynor]

To spin abit around this, Spotify for instance has an API, not open to commercial programs(?) but it exists, how about plugin-support?

This is already possible. MC's plugin architecture would absolutely allow one of us to build a Spotify plugin that would work with their public API. But JRiver cannot do it, and if you do it, Spotify could revoke your API key at any time. Would they? Probably not, I'd guess, but they won't approve JRiver building it into their app directly.

[glynor]

just to take an example in spotify, the name of the song playing turns up in the task manager beside the spotify-icon, this is probably extractable somehow, maybe not general enough, or not worth the trouble, but just to illustrate what kind of ideas I am thinking of.

The problem with that approach, aside from the technical details, is that you're inviting a cat-and-mouse game between the two companies. Any time you're "illicitly" scraping something like that, all it takes is for Spotify to arbitrarily change things (intentional or not) and all of your work goes flush down the tubes.

Worse, you have customers who now expect a feature to work (and, you could argue, have paid for a feature) which might be gone forever, completely beyond your control. Even if you get it working again (pouring more time, money, and effort down the hole), they could break it again the next day.

If Spotify was the One-True-Service that everyone had and needed to be supported, it might be worth it. As it is, though, that's a dangerous game, especially since someone could do a nice job and do it "right" with the Spotify API. Just not JRiver.

[flac.rules]

This is already possible. MC's plugin architecture would absolutely allow one of us to build a Spotify plugin that would work with their public API. But JRiver cannot do it, and if you do it, Spotify could revoke your API key at any time. Would they? Probably not, I'd guess, but they won't approve JRiver building it into their app directly.

Ok, but no plugin exists, is there anything on the program side that can be done to make plugins easier or something, or is it just that nobody has bothered?

[flac.rules]

The problem with that approach, aside from the technical details, is that you're inviting a cat-and-mouse game between the two companies. Any time you're "illicitly" scraping something like that, all it takes is for Spotify to arbitrarily change things (intentional or not) and all of your work goes flush down the tubes.

Worse, you have customers who now expect a feature to work (and, you could argue, have paid for a feature) which might be gone forever, completely beyond your control. Even if you get it working again (pouring more time, money, and effort down the hole), they could break it again the next day.

If Spotify was the One-True-Service that everyone had and needed to be supported, it might be worth it. As it is, though, that's a dangerous game, especially since someone could do a nice job and do it "right" with the Spotify API. Just not JRiver.

Spotify isn't the best example, as an API exists, my point was just to spin a bit around what could be done to further support streaming services besides the WDM-driver, you always risk some change breaking compatibility, but that can happen with an API too, and it has already happened with several features in MC. I don't think the risk of it not working someday is a strong enough argument to never implement support.

[astromo]

This idea has merit. That's why it gets regular air time here on Interact. The same explanations are posted every time. To my reading, those explanations are both sensible and reasonable.

The end point is the same. The proponents of these streaming services want to protect their IP and the associated value stream, so they make it costly and difficult for commercial outfits to join in. Scope exists for an individual to invest their own time to code up a means of bridging the gap but it hasn't happened.

Put the call for help to the community not JRiver corporate. To date, I've not seen a capable and motivated individual(s) prepared to roll up their sleeves. No resentment from me on that score, just stating the facts as I see them.

Personally I think JRiver has done their best as far as their scope for action extends by developing the WDM driver. I know it's not perfect but at least it provides a work around. This scores kudos in my book.

So, unless there's a game changer out there to talk about can we move on?

[balky]

Unfortunately that is probably true for new consumers who don't know any better.

The content providers love that model; they have almost total control over distribution and use and can continuously suck income out of the consumer.

As a collector of music for many decades it doesn't fit my requirements.

You need constant access to a reliable internet connection. That's not universal by any means.

The technical quality of the material is often very questionable (however high the claimed data rate).

Availability of material is split over multiple providers, so the consumer probably needs multiple subscriptions.

The providers can (and will) change the terms of access and the content that can be accessed at any time at their whim.

The providers can go out of business with no notice (and will).

I can see the attraction to the young, naive, smart phone addicted youth.

It's not so attractive to some of us!

I think you hit the nail on the head there...

Here is how I view this...

Apple is well known to always have a target audience in mind whenever they put out any of their new products / services...

It will be quite ridiculous of them to expect anyone with a 20 year (just an example) collection of Vinyls, CDs... etc... in a like 30K file audio library, equipped with JRiver, impressive DACs, speakers amps and what not, suddenly drop everything and begin to stream 256kb m4a files... yuk...

Been using JRiver for audio since like 7 - 8 years already (currently with a +$5K audio gear) how in hell is anyone going to convince me that the apple streaming service will be a better choice for listening...

IMO, it is good if JRiver crew wish to add a streaming plugin, but for the class of devoted JRiver users, the majority of us might like to be able to turn the streaming functionality off if possible...