I am wondering what content there is, previously on the old pay per play model Apple has/had a massive back catalogue of artists to sell.

I understand when Beats Music was bought it had a significant range of content from artists, though it was said to be behind Spotify the market leader.

Is "Apple Music" stuck with the rights attached to the former Beats setup, or does it have the rights to stream the whole iTunes Music catalogue?

I only ask this because Beats only ever had streaming rights in the US and nowhere else. It even makes me question whether it would have been better for Apple to setup their own streaming service rather than piggy back on the coat tails of Beats. I don't know which markets will get the service at launch, I just wonder whether the content is consistent across markets or matches its iTunes catalogue.

The whole iTunes catalogue is not available.

I believe they started from scratch, getting permission from all the major labels but not all artists have allowed their music to be streamed, e.g. Prince. They do have some exclusives such as Taylor Swift's "1989" though.

It's pretty good although not massively better than Spotify, in terms of what's available. However, if something isn't available you can buy it from iTunes or elsewhere and it will add it to your Apple Music library so it can be streamed from anywhere.

I've never used Beats before so cant give a comparison.
So far from what I've actually checked there's no Beatles back catalogue and there's only a few tracks available from the Michael Jackson Xscape album, as of yet I've not come across anything else not being available that I'm interested in.
I'm sure there's probably more due to licensing issues, but on the whole I don't think anyone would be disappointed by the vast amounts of content that is available.

There has always been issues getting Beatles rights it wasn't until 2007 that they were even on ITunes so not surprising they aren't on Apple Music imagine they eventually will be though.

I've found whole albums not available, especially compilations, I usually listen to dance music, entire albums not available which is a bit useless.

With AC/DC now streaming, The Beatles should be coming soon. I suspect Apple Music will get it first.

Apple Music is amazing.

Beats 1 is worth £9.99 a month alone. I listen for many hours every day.

Throw in the huge iTunes library you get access to, the awesome discovery features, and massive exclusives like Taylor Swift 1989, and collections syncing across all your devices -

Apple Music is the future of music as far as I'm concerned.

It's very good. The ui is good and when the iPhone is connected to the car you can change tracks with the steering wheel controls. In addition to this all the track info shows up on the media screen in the car. Spotify doesn't do this.

So what makes it better than say Spotify?

Both are good. Comparison here http://uk.businessinsider.com/apple-...srepublic?r=US

Thanks for the input guys

I understand its coming to Android at some point? Never in a million years did I ever expect Apple to begin creating Android apps......

On the face of it the differences content wise are minimal, even UI on the iPhone at least looks comparable between the two.

I am heavily into using Spotify, the playlists I have numberes nearly 100 and as far as I know they can't be exported to other music platforms. Spotify is the incumbent, however they are unique in that a few of the big music labels and independent ones have shares in the platform. Apple is battling against an industry united mostly behind the one platform. Although as we know Apple is often used to turning the market on its head.......

Agree with them that, in Windows desktop Spotify appears- at first glance at least- to be far easier to use.

Taylor Swift exclusive, they will be signing up in the multi billions just to listen to her bland middle of the cemetery type music.


Posted by Erasmus Sleeps

I've noticed with Google Music more tracks seem to be 'Album only' so not available as part of your Google All access subscription.

E.g. "TFI Friday - The Album" has 40 tracks, and only 19 available to stream. I'd be interested to know what Apple Music has available. If you have to buy the album to get all the tracks, makes you wonder why you are paying twice.

That situation isn't unique....If you search on Spotify for Take That's album Progress there aren't many tracks available, yet a later reissue entitled "Progressed" is available with all songs from the first and some new ones.

Exactly the same on Apple Music, 19 tracks you can stream out of 40 on the list.

The record companies make these decisions, not Apple or Spotify etc. :-/

Thanks. I realise that it's not their decision, but was wondering if Spotify or Apple Music were likely to have different agreements in place.

I have to say I've been using Google play all access for a year or two now and it gets better with each update. I rarely find songs that arent available any more and the auto playlists and radios are great. At £7.99 for the whole family its a bargain too - although I think it's a little more expensive for new subscribers now.

Never felt the need to try out Spotify.

What doesn't quite make sense is take "Suede - Beautiful Ones" which is one of the greyed out tracks. You can listen to that on Apple Music by searching for it as an individual track or just heading over to Suede's page where you can listen to all of their albums. So I'm not too sure why it's excluded from the TFI album. As you say it must be a record company decision.

I'm guessing the issue is compilation albums are dated and don't belong in todays streaming world.