Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Yeah that sucks, but maybe there's a lesson to be learned here:

Don't purchase streaming services for a one-time cost. Streaming services should be subscription services. Just don't do this. Let the industry know that if you're to purchase something, you should have infinite access to it — otherwise it should be a subscription service.

Btw, Apple probably wouldn't buy a streaming service unless they're planning to offer one themselves. Not that it changes your situation in any way. Just saying that they probably didn't do it just to shut it down.



yup. this is why i use zune pass. monthly streaming subscription AND 10 free song purchases a month (DRM free)


I use Zune Pass too and I've been generally satisfied with it. It's a lot better now than it used to be, almost to the point where I could probably ditch my Rhapsody subscription but Rhapsody proves pretty useful and has been venerable for ages now. I never could get into lala and I'm glad I didn't after this move.


Another good alternative is emusic.

$10/month for 30 DRM-free downloads. Only downside is it's only independent labels, so no Rolling Stones. Lots to choose among, though. Their website says they've got 6 million tracks from 60,000 record labels.


I upvoted cuz nobody else will, because you're using "zune pass".


They might if Google was starting to do business with them. I wonder how this affects their integrated search with lala for streaming results: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=MGMT&aq=f&a...


Apple might incorporate LaLa's business model into iTunes. So maybe the $100 credit will still be able to buy many streaming albums. Obviously they're still in the process of integrating LaLa and we have yet to see the results.


I do sometimes buy streaming services for a one-time cost, but I make sure to think of it as a subscription for ~a year.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: