Apple Said to Be in Talks to Buy Beats for $3.2 Billion

Re:Apple Said to Be in Talks to Buy Beats for $3.2 Billion by dragonwriter on Thursday May 08, 2014 @07:54PM (#7718480)

> if they wanted a music subscription service, they could easily create one of their own.

Actually, they have one. (iTunes Radio)

Of course, the fact that this has to be pointed out to someone arguing how strong Apple's brand is relative to Beats might illustrate the value they get from buying Beats better than anything else.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Apple Said to Be in Talks to Buy Beats for $3.2 Billion by paul_f on Thursday May 08, 2014 @08:12PM (#7718557)

My understanding is iTunes radio is Pandora, not Spotify. Big difference. One is Internet radio, the other a true music subscription service.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Apple Said to Be in Talks to Buy Beats for $3.2 Billion by baddox on Thursday May 08, 2014 @09:11PM (#7718759)

They've got iTunes Match and iTunes radio, which are both similar to but just slightly to either side of Spotify.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Apple Said to Be in Talks to Buy Beats for $3.2 Billion by leemcalilly on Thursday May 08, 2014 @09:43PM (#7718865)

I use iTunes Match and iTunes radio, and still use Spotify to be able to search and play any song I want without having to buy it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Apple Said to Be in Talks to Buy Beats for $3.2 Billion by justinreeves on Thursday May 08, 2014 @11:06PM (#7719104)

I'd say more than slightly. Spotify's main draw is that you can search for the song you want to listen to, and you can hear that song.

iTunes match works off your own personal collection, and Radio is just like Pandora. Neither allows you to look for things you don't own and listen to them.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Apple Said to Be in Talks to Buy Beats for $3.2 Billion by pbreit on Friday May 09, 2014 @12:11AM (#7719320)

iTunes Radio is not a music subscription service. First, it is free. Second, it doesn't allow you to call up tracks on demand. BIG difference.

[ Parent | on HN ]