Spotify Points Finger at Apple Over an Unwelcome Change To Volume Control Tech (techcrunch.com) 82
Spotify claims Apple may be again in violation of European regulation, the Digital Markets Act (DMA), which requires interoperability from big technology companies dubbed "gatekeepers." From a report: This time, the issue isn't about in-app purchases, links or pricing information, but rather how Apple has discontinued the technology that allows Spotify users to control the volume on their connected devices.
When streaming to connected devices via Spotify Connect on iOS, users were previously able to use the physical buttons on the side of their iPhone to adjust the volume. As a result of the change, this will no longer work. To work around the issue, Spotify iOS users will instead be directed to use the volume slider in the Spotify Connect menu in the app to control the volume on connected devices. The company notes that this issue doesn't affect users controlling the volume on iOS Bluetooth or AirPlay sessions, nor users on Android. It only applies to those listening via Spotify Connect on iOS. As a result, Spotify iOS users globally will be directed to use the new in-app volume slider beginning on September 3.
When streaming to connected devices via Spotify Connect on iOS, users were previously able to use the physical buttons on the side of their iPhone to adjust the volume. As a result of the change, this will no longer work. To work around the issue, Spotify iOS users will instead be directed to use the volume slider in the Spotify Connect menu in the app to control the volume on connected devices. The company notes that this issue doesn't affect users controlling the volume on iOS Bluetooth or AirPlay sessions, nor users on Android. It only applies to those listening via Spotify Connect on iOS. As a result, Spotify iOS users globally will be directed to use the new in-app volume slider beginning on September 3.
"But Everything Apple Makes is Better" (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm so sick of hearing "Everything Apple Makes is Better" from Apple fanboys.
Even if was true (and it's not), their monopolistic bullshit ensures that if you ever step outside of Apple's walled garden, you will pay for it.
Monopoly (Score:1)
I have an iPhone, an Android tablet, and a Windows desktop, sync'd with OneDrive and iCloud.
I guess I'm doing something wrong as I'm not paying for anything.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly this lol. Maybe just use what you like, let others use what they like and ignore anyone who has something to say about it?
Re:"But Everything Apple Makes is Better" (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not a simple matter of simply not buying it. Because of their position in the mobile market, in tandem with their forced browser monopoly, the mobile web is doing what the normal web was doing back when IE6 was a thing, and it's just shitty. This is the whole reason that, even though I'll never own an iphone (had one once, never again) I really want to see the walled garden torn down. Meanwhile, the rest of us have to deal with proprietary app shit because you guys can't comprehend open systems. To you open systems means malware, mainly because you buy the same bullshit that the entire security software industry peddles because apple peddles the very same security theater shit. If you guys had it your way, nobody would be able to change their own car tires or break pads because it's "too dangerous".
Re:"But Everything Apple Makes is Better" (Score:4, Insightful)
Honestly, yeah. The walls aren't supposed to be there. So, I don't care if you paid extra for those walls, I'm going to tear them down regardless.
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly, yeah. The walls aren't supposed to be there. So, I don't care if you paid extra for those walls, I'm going to tear them down regardless.
If you don't use an iPhone, isn't it quite Imperialistic to insist those that do must conform to your OPINION of how they should Use same?
Re: (Score:2)
If Apple would simply allow third party browsers with zero restriction or reservation, that's all I'd care about. They'd never allow that though. Even in the EU they're not, they added arbitrary and capricious restrictions with the specific intention that nobody can reasonably port any browsers over.
Re: (Score:2)
If Apple would simply allow third party browsers with zero restriction or reservation, that's all I'd care about. They'd never allow that though. Even in the EU they're not, they added arbitrary and capricious restrictions with the specific intention that nobody can reasonably port any browsers over.
Because their ain't no bigger potential Security Hole than an Unknown, Un-Vetted Renderer. There's just too long and sordid of a history with browsers being at the bottom of Exploits, and an HTML Renderer is just too honkin' too much Code for Anybody to properly Analyze for unintentional (or intentional) Shenanigans Every. Single. Time. Joe's Most Excellentest Happy Browser App decides to Drop yet another Revision.
Nobody has that many Resources!
So, they restrict Rendering Engines to the one they trust to at
Re: (Score:2)
Right. You don't want to live in the garden, but you want it torn down and fuck anyone who does want to live there and is quite happy doing so. Just fuck those people!
Gotcha.
Exactly!
Re: (Score:3)
I don't want Google products in my life including on my iPhone. I don't want shitty "developers" to require me to use Chrome and have an internet defined by Google; that would be like internet in the IE6 days. Currently you have a choice of ecosystems and browsers and Apple does not have anywhere near like a monopoly, Sorry if you find it inconvenient that there are differences between browser implementations or that some browser implementors don't have the same priorities as Google. Personally, I have
Re: (Score:2)
I don't want Google products in my life including on my iPhone. I don't want shitty "developers" to require me to use Chrome and have an internet defined by Google; that would be like internet in the IE6 days. Currently you have a choice of ecosystems and browsers and Apple does not have anywhere near like a monopoly, Sorry if you find it inconvenient that there are differences between browser implementations or that some browser implementors don't have the same priorities as Google. Personally, I have no problems with Safari.
People who ought to know better conveniently ignore the fact that the Requirement to use WebKit is simply one of practicality; since Apple knows it doesn't have the Resources to pour over a foreign codebase as gigantic and deep-seated as a Rendering Engine for every potential Third Party Browser for Every Stinking Revision!
They don't want to see that the restriction comes not from a lust for Control; but rather a Concession to Reality.
And yes, Safari is a fine Browser.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The mobile web is basically Chrome, and a few compatibility hacks for Safari.
Try using Firefox for Android (and soon for iOS in Europe). It's very hit-and-miss. Some sites are broken beyond the point where they are even usable, and we are talking quite major websites too.
Site note: I've been trying to switch to Firefox for Android lately, because Chrome is deprecating Manifest V2 and uBlock Origin. Unfortunately I discovered something awful. uBlock on Android is an absolute battery killer. Power consumption
Re: (Score:2)
Firefox is the only browser I use, period.
Unfortunately I discovered something awful. uBlock on Android is an absolute battery killer. Power consumption of Firefox is in the order of 10x worse with it enabled. You can even see it causing scrolling to stutter on some websites
I can't say I've ever run into any of this. Though I also do 99% of my browsing with private tabs with all of the extensions enabled, so site specific data doesn't stick around long. The main purpose of it is to sidestep recommendation algorithms, which are really annoying.
Re: (Score:3)
First don't know why you are modded -1, there is nothing wrong with your comment.
I don't own an android, or a iPhone but I don't like it. If apple users want to be in a walled garden that's good but I don't believe it should be forced on apple users if you buy the phone you should have the right to do whatever you want with it, at your own risk.
I see this type of thing spreading, if it is deemed acceptable with apple then other companies will do it to. It has spread with everything moving to the cloud, soft
Re:"But Everything Apple Makes is Better" (Score:4, Insightful)
First don't know why you are modded -1, there is nothing wrong with your comment.
Because most of the time he's spouting complete horseshit.
Re: (Score:3)
First don't know why you are modded -1, there is nothing wrong with your comment.
Assuming you're using a desktop web browser, you can click on Score in the comment's topic header to see the details of a comment's score. In this case, you'll see Starting Score: -1. Someone generally has to be a very well known, very obnoxious, very stupid, and very bad troll to get to -1 for a starting score. Plenty of the run-of-the-mill annoying trolls around here still manage to have starting scores of 1 or even 2.
Re: (Score:2)
First don't know why you are modded -1, there is nothing wrong with your comment.
I don't own an android, or a iPhone but I don't like it. If apple users want to be in a walled garden that's good but I don't believe it should be forced on apple users if you buy the phone you should have the right to do whatever you want with it, at your own risk.
I see this type of thing spreading, if it is deemed acceptable with apple then other companies will do it to. It has spread with everything moving to the cloud, software not being owned by you, John Deer not allowing farmers to fix their own tractors. If we don't complain now and say its unacceptable the then it will only get worse and become impossible to avoid.
I agree with when you say most iPhone users probably don't want this, and if you gave them an option to turn it of the vast majority of them would not use it. Hell i wouldn't be surprised if most android user never use anything but the preinstalled apps stores. But the people who want to should have the right to do so.
Quit trying to impose your world view on those who have already made their fully informed CHOICE!
Apple Users don't run around trying to get Google to change Android, FFS! I mean, how pointless, sick, and just plain WEIRD would that be?!?
Think about it.
Re:"But Everything Apple Makes is Better" (Score:4, Informative)
It is that Apple does what it needs to do with less bullshit than other options.
No, they do it with a lot more bullshit, you just don't know any better. Apple is the reason things like this require a stupid proprietary app:
https://www.amazon.com/Endosco... [amazon.com]
Notice how it has a wired connection? That's just to power it, because iOS doesn't support USB cameras. In order to actually use it on iOS, you have to first install some dumb chinese app that wants things it doesn't need like your location data, then you have to disconnect your phone from your wifi connection and directly connect it to the camera. So you need both a wired and wireless connection, and you can't use your home wifi while you're using the camera. There are similar devices that work with literally everything except iOS and don't need proprietary apps at all. Any camera app will do, including the one built into your phone, and all you have to do is connect it to the USB port. Plug and play, imagine that? I don't know how you can possibly label the apple mandated way as "less bullshit" unless you're a total moron.
Part of the overall problem is you guys are married to your app store and you can't comprehend that there's anything outside of it. That's exactly why apple forces you to use the worst mobile browser: So many mobile websites are basically useless without web extensions. Take reddit for example, who will annoy you to death until you download their retarded app. If I need to use reddit for any reason, guess what? I can search it with startpage in the regular web browser because reddit's search is crap, and I can read the page without switching to another app. Ublock kills their annoying overlays that often won't even let you see the page at all without installing their dumb app.
The workflow for quickly finding information on the web is actually a royal pain on iOS, for exactly this reason. But to you, somehow constantly switching apps that don't even navigate consistently most of the time is somehow doing it with less bullshit.
Re: "But Everything Apple Makes is Better" (Score:2)
No, that's not it at all. I'll take well-defined interoperable hardware that will last as long as I have it over one that requires an app that they'll stop maintaining after a short time whereupon the hardware becomes useless junk.
I get that, as an apple fan, you're all in on planned obsolescence and want even more of it, but many of us aren't.
Re: (Score:2)
No, that's not it at all. I'll take well-defined interoperable hardware that will last as long as I have it over one that requires an app that they'll stop maintaining after a short time whereupon the hardware becomes useless junk.
I get that, as an apple fan, you're all in on planned obsolescence and want even more of it, but many of us aren't.
Bullshit.
Lots of iPhone Users actually enjoy that we get Support for our Older Generation equipment.
Helps get more value from our purchase. Duh.
Brought to you by my iPhone 8. . .
Re: (Score:2)
Please estimate separely how many iPhone and Android users want to attach an endoscope to their scope via usb port.
Basically anybody who has a DIY mindset. This isn't the only type of camera to be used in this way, here are two others I've used:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/prod... [amazon.com]
https://www.amazon.com/gp/prod... [amazon.com]
That first one I linked is similar to the first such of one of these cameras I bought for running electrical wiring into a space where a fish rod wouldn't quite do it, and then rejected once I found out how much of a PITA it is.
Apple is t for everyone. If you know it isn't for you then don't get one. It's really simple.
That's wonderful, but remember your comment was "Apple does what it needs to do with les
Re: (Score:2)
There is nothing wrong with mobile Safari. It works exactly like Chrome and Firefox.
It definitely does not. But I know why you would think this: Look at your website dude. The web has gone a looong ways in the last three decades.
Perhaps you should investigate what the "request desktop site" option is for? And render /. for example, the way it would be rendered on a laptop?
The point of a mobile layout is so that it is more ergonomic on smaller screens. Using the desktop version goes counter to that. I get that you don't know the difference, because again, you haven't learned anything new since 1993. That's why you still try to solve every problem with linkedlists.
Ah, btw. the Chrome based browsers make the submit and preview buttons absurd small on Android.
They are so small, without zooming in, they do not register a touch.
I've never seen this, but I don't use anything chrome based either. I s
Re: (Score:1)
I do not solve problems with liked lists.
I use libraries that come with the language.
If you use the mobile version of a web site, instead of the desktop version: that is your fault. And everything that is wrong in the browser is the fault of the "programmer" of the web site.
I read and write this in Chrome on a cheap Android phone (Brand is Infinix, from China) in desktop mode.
But if it amuses you, I can give you a similar answer from my iPhone in a few days.
There is nothing wrong with Safari that I am aware
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It is that Apple does what it needs to do with less bullshit than other options.
No, they do it with a lot more bullshit, you just don't know any better. Apple is the reason things like this require a stupid proprietary app:
https://www.amazon.com/Endosco... [amazon.com]
Notice how it has a wired connection? That's just to power it, because iOS doesn't support USB cameras. In order to actually use it on iOS, you have to first install some dumb chinese app that wants things it doesn't need like your location data, then you have to disconnect your phone from your wifi connection and directly connect it to the camera. So you need both a wired and wireless connection, and you can't use your home wifi while you're using the camera. There are similar devices that work with literally everything except iOS and don't need proprietary apps at all. Any camera app will do, including the one built into your phone, and all you have to do is connect it to the USB port. Plug and play, imagine that? I don't know how you can possibly label the apple mandated way as "less bullshit" unless you're a total moron.
Part of the overall problem is you guys are married to your app store and you can't comprehend that there's anything outside of it. That's exactly why apple forces you to use the worst mobile browser: So many mobile websites are basically useless without web extensions. Take reddit for example, who will annoy you to death until you download their retarded app. If I need to use reddit for any reason, guess what? I can search it with startpage in the regular web browser because reddit's search is crap, and I can read the page without switching to another app. Ublock kills their annoying overlays that often won't even let you see the page at all without installing their dumb app.
The workflow for quickly finding information on the web is actually a royal pain on iOS, for exactly this reason. But to you, somehow constantly switching apps that don't even navigate consistently most of the time is somehow doing it with less bullshit.
FOAD!!!
You're so full of shit it's running out your ears!
Re: (Score:2)
The fact that this was modded troll lmao.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm so sick of hearing "Everything Apple Makes is Better" from Apple fanboys.
Even if was true (and it's not), their monopolistic bullshit ensures that if you ever step outside of Apple's walled garden, you will pay for it.
But that walled garden is the one thing that does make it better... It means all the Apple fanbois are stuck in side of it, leaving the rest of the world blissfully free of them for the rest of us to enjoy. Let them have their gilded cage made with their own gold.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Android changes are random (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
... Pixel - the way Google intended Android to be.
You mean they make the user experience smoother, as a kind of topical anesthetic ointment that renders you less aware of your privacy being ass-raped?
Re: (Score:3)
Just trying to understand... how would that be caused by the OS? How do you know it's not a bug of the application? (Bug that is exposed in your particular OS / hardware combination.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is with the phone.
An App can no longer change the behaviour of the louder and softer buttons.
So the does not get informed by the OS, that one of those buttons got pressed.
Apple, as usual, gave gobs of Notice that they were Deprecating that particular API; but Spotify Ignored it.
Then they bitched.
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, I assumed that. ... makes no sense that buttons that actually are about "volume" do not work anymore in a certain context.
But I understand them
But it is clear, too that it is annoying when you are in the compass app, and listen to music in the background, the compass app does random things with those buttons instead of allowing you to change the volume.
Kind of a dilemma.
Re:Android changes are random we (Score:2)
Yeah, I assumed that. ... makes no sense that buttons that actually are about "volume" do not work anymore in a certain context.
But I understand them
But it is clear, too that it is annoying when you are in the compass app, and listen to music in the background, the compass app does random things with those buttons instead of allowing you to change the volume.
Kind of a dilemma.
It's a problem six different internal Dev Teams are all lobbying for their pet behavior to be allowed on the limited physical controls on a modern Smartphone.
Add to that fact that most Users hate when the same physical control is used for more and more Modal Functions. I frankly think that Apple's iPhone "Action Button" concept is ill-conceived as a UX Concept.
But yeah, Spotify is just being a whiney bitch. Apple nearly always gives a very reasonable amount of Notice for these sorts if things, and t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's fine, but what are the "Android" changes you are complaining about? Your title says Android and your description says Spotify shuffle, something that iOS users are complaining about enough that Ars even ran an article about it.
Re: Android changes are random (Score:2)
Never heard of that. Is that a new party game, kinda like pass the parcel?
Re: (Score:2)
Does your phone have a "shake to shuffle" gesture enabled?
Sonos in the same boat (Score:3)
Apple doesn't like it when the volume buttons are used to control a device where the phone is not the audio source. Control the volume for music played over Bluetooth or Appleplay, no problem. Control the volume of a wifi speaker streaming audio from elsewhere: verboten.
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, because the volume control for the iPhone is for the volume volume control of the iPhone.
Should the TV remote also control your iPhone volume?
Re: (Score:2)
Dumb take. The phone is the primary source and control method. The phone's app is the active media playback.
Yes I full expect when I use my TV as a Spotify Connect output, or as a UPnP renderer, or as a Miracast endpoint that the device in control of the stream is able to ... control the stream.
Spotify Connect Is A Glorified Remote (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
The technical details shouldn't really matter. What goes on inside the black box is less important then the impression you get from the user experience. And it behaves to the end user the same as an app that generators the audio.
I wonder if Apple just thinks Sonos might be desperate for money right now and might try to file a patent lawsuit against Apple for similar things to what Google got hit with.
Re: (Score:3)
Apple broke it because the Spotify app isn't "playing music" when using Spotify Connect. It's just passing commands through a wireless connection.
Falseish. Spotify remains the active media player on the device, it just happens to be synced to a remote device which is playing the output. This is also why your watch will show the current track on your speakers even though it's nothing to do with your watch - your phone is in control. It's also why when you receive a phone call the music stops - media playback *on the phone* is halted. It makes no sense for the volume control to control Spotify if you have a bluetooth speaker selected, but not control i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What happens if your phone rings while using "Spotify Connect?" Does the audio go to the remote speaker?
No. The same thing as what happens when any other media is playing. The media is paused and the audio comes out of the current system connected to *THE OS*. I.e. if you're playing Spotify through bluetooth the audio will come out of bluetooth. If you're playing Spotify connect, Tidal connect, in the middle of a screen share or casting sessions, the audio will come out of your phone.
Spotify connect is not bluetooth, but that is a distinction without a difference. The OS historically uses the volume control t
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like a bug fix (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Why would you want that? I use the hardware volume buttons to control my music playback on Android all the time, on all music apps. I don't even have to look at the phone, just put my hand in my pocket and tap volume up or down.
And what sort of bug are they supposedly fixing? The "that was a useful feature" bug?
Re: (Score:2)
So by controlling the volume on Android using the buttons, you also control the volume on your car's audio as well?
Because the problem is, Spotify Connect is not a music playing app. It's just used t
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, you control the volume of the signal being sent to the car's "radio". You ALSO have the car's volume controls, they work in tandem. So if you set the phone volume low, the car has a lower base volume signal to amplify. Set either to 0 and you get no sound.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think they are saying the volume controls do nothing for Spotify. That is different and useless behaviour.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't use use this (I still buy CDs and rip them!), so pardon my ignorance: how do I use the volume buttons on my phone to control the phone's volume if Spotify Connect has hijacked the buttons?
Re: (Score:2)
They still control the phone's volume. The phone's volume is still the phone's volume, whether you are playing music or using the phone for voice chat or w/e. It's one device, one speaker/headphone/aux output.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't have to unlock my phone, or even have the app open, to use the physical volume buttons.
Re: (Score:2)
Note that Spotify always blames changes in the latest version of iOS, but users see different behavior on the same version of iOS.
Point the finger at Apple (Score:2)
Dark side of platform economy (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Why the fuck (Score:2)
Things like this are why I left Apple TV (Score:2)
.
So I punted Apple TV and moved everything over to JRiver's Media Center. It has been over 10 years since I switched, and I have not looked back.