[hxegon]

Do you think apple's subscription feature is worth paying 30% more for spotify?

Do you think spotify should just suck it up and take the hit to keep prices the same because apple is providing a service (access and subscription handling) worth 30% of the price? Not even Amazon charges that much.

I don't know if the anti-competitive practices mentioned are illegal, but they're certainly scummy. The company that owns the walled garden shouldn't be bullying spotify to try and prop apple music up.

[p2t2p]

What if Apple Music is for free? Should be Apple be punished then, like MS for IE being free?

[vkou]

Then Apple is using its success in one market (Selling phones) to price-dump in another market (music).

It would be the poster child of an anti-trust case.

[thirdsun]

Does this view still apply if Apple considers the music subscription as part of the product/device?

Consider the countless users that, perhaps rightfully, argue that Apple should include more than 5 GB of iCloud storage for backups, user data, etc. That could be considered part of the product while it still competes in a different market with Dropbox and similar services.

[gigatexal]

Yes. Or do what everyone else does and negotiate a lower rate. The simplicity of in app transactions is great and offering that to customers makes a lot of sense. I’m More likely to keep a subscription if it’s through iTunes; it also makes moving to new devices super easy as all I have to do is login with my iTunes account and all my subscriptions are there or that and hit restore purchases and boom I’m done.