kevin whitlam's dashboard

I totally agree... I am an avid spotify fan... but these adverts are becoming far too often now.

Could this be the end of spotify?

Surely what made spotify so popular in the first place is now going to be its achilles heel. They need to advertise to keep the funding going... but I will be uninstalling soon as I find that sometimes.. every 2 songs I seem to get an advert.. and at one time.. I had 3 adverts in a row...

Please dont spoil it spotify team... This was your unique selling point.

I think we are getting confused in this post... rather then having cached music files, I think we are all asking for spotify to be able to pay the songs in your lists without internet connection. (For laptops etc)...

There has to come a point where you draw the line between what features you miss out on and bandwidth you can save, to what people can rip from spotify.

The most intelligent of people out there already know how to rip songs from spotify. Its a very easy process, But your saying you cannot have offline content because of fears that people will rip the music from spotify.. well thats a poor answer if you ask me. the bottom line of having Offline content will be to decrease bandwidth on spotify servers (Very dramatically)... therfore giving people a better experience as they do not have to keep downloading the same track over and over again. we live in a day and age where nothing is safe... and even players like the iplayer from BBC or youttube content can be ripped. but still they offer offline content as they know this saves server/bandwidth time.

For the spotify team to say this would put an end to streaming controlled advertisement music is poor.

if its possible to cache and play offline music files, its also possible to play offline cached adverts..... but always remember that its not about somebody playing music continually offline, its about saving bandwidth and server time... so that person would probably still be online while playing there offline/cached music tracks.

If advertising is the problem, make cached music files only available for 1 week, therefore you must be online to recieve new adverts. once new adverts are downloaded, they can be placed inbetween the cached tracks again... thus making the offline/cached music files available for another week.

the actual cache of the music files can be encrypted so that only spotify can decrypt them to play them... thus making it harder for people to rip... but again.. always bear in mind that people can rip songs from spotify now... so what are you losing???

Look forward to any responses!! – kevin whitlam, on August 13, 2009 07:36

You are correct, but it would flag up that there is something wrong with the album, and surely that's enough for spotify personel to look and find whats wrong.

You could include special ratings .. 1 to 5 star or 0 meaning missing/faulty content. when leaving 0 rating for an album/song, it could then ask you for feedback for the offending item(s). this would cut down a lot of reading which has to be done by spotify team.

There is a simple solution to this song reporting facility... rather than having a report as such... you have an individual rating report for each song, and the quality of the song can be determined by the over all percentage of the reports.

For example, 100 people vote.... 60% of them report the song is of bad quality. 40% of them say the song is OK. therefore this song will need looking at. plus the rating can also be published to everyone in the search results list. everyone's a winner.

so I suggest that in the results list, you would have a 5 star quality result, along with a 5 star rating result. (Obviously the 5 star rating is something we are not discussing at the moment. :-)

Im glad someone agrees with this. I just feel everyone likes stats. (well I do)... I would like to know when/where and how many times. as well as what albums these songs have come from etc....

I feel as if your missing the point here... I am currently listening to the FREE version of spotify because I think £10 a month is too much.

But if it was £5 or even maybe £6.50 (something much lower), I would start paying and still be willing to here the occasional advert every couple of hours.

This is my rough calculations....

10 people listening to FREE spotify = £0 revenue from paying people

New pricing structure.. £5 per month....
thats now £50 per month for paying customers...

Yes I know you will lose out to start with for those people who are currently paying..

BUT!! bringing the cost down will entice more people (like me) to pay the £5 subscription per month.. therefore upping your total revenue... and still getting to advertise every couple of hours still bringing in revenue from that.

Could I suggest starting a poll somehow... and I bet youd be surprised!

I would 100% pay £5 per month to listen to the same service with slightly less adverts in... (and maybe get rid of that annoying advert bar that keeps changing from the bottom to the side).

Start a poll... Go on!... :-)

I strongly disagree... everyone knows winamp has the ability to rip music, and thus allowing people to rip from spotify is morally wrong.

We are all blessed that free services such as this exist... and studies already show that free services such as this have brought down the figures of piracy.

why would you want to rip the track, or play it in another player when spotify will allow you to listen to it whenever you want... as many times as you want.. for FREE... but again.. think your missing the point of this topic.

This topic is all about bringing tracks to spotify via your own purchased music files on your PC.

Surely there is some people out there who think this is a good gadget/idea?

Are you serious with this comment??????

Its free.... 20 seconds of your life every 30 mins or so should make you more then happy.... maybe we should just give you spotify's entire music album on 50Tb drives just for you.... they will ship them shortly!!!! 5-6 weeks.