[TheFriendlyGrizzly]

bastion, on 01 June 2012 - 10:22 AM, said:

graxspoo, on 01 June 2012 - 08:31 AM, said:

Basically the problem with Ping is, it wasn't a Facebook app. Who needs yet another social network? Apple should have simply integrated iTunes purchases into Facebook. That would have been a lot less engineering effort. I agree also with the 'marketing smell' that hung on it. An obvious aspect of this is, you couldn't post about non-iTunes related stuff.

And what about Ping users who had no interest in signing on with Facebook?

That will be solved for you in future operating system releases. Facebook will be an integral part of OS/[insert release number and/or feline here] whether you like it or not. Tim Cook is already floating that trial balloon.

[RedFive5]

It wasn't simple and it didn't Think Different.

(Also, had to google "conk", never seen it used like that. But, then again, I'm not a Sassenach!)

[bastion]

TheFriendlyGrizzly, on 01 June 2012 - 01:38 PM, said:

bastion, on 01 June 2012 - 10:22 AM, said:

graxspoo, on 01 June 2012 - 08:31 AM, said:

Basically the problem with Ping is, it wasn't a Facebook app. Who needs yet another social network? Apple should have simply integrated iTunes purchases into Facebook. That would have been a lot less engineering effort. I agree also with the 'marketing smell' that hung on it. An obvious aspect of this is, you couldn't post about non-iTunes related stuff.

And what about Ping users who had no interest in signing on with Facebook?

That will be solved for you in future operating system releases. Facebook will be an integral part of OS/[insert release number and/or feline here] whether you like it or not. Tim Cook is already floating that trial balloon.

No he isn't. There's a world of difference between providing tools to help users interact with a popular service and forcing them to use it.

[Kees]

TheFriendlyGrizzly, on 01 June 2012 - 01:38 PM, said:

bastion, on 01 June 2012 - 10:22 AM, said:

graxspoo, on 01 June 2012 - 08:31 AM, said:

Basically the problem with Ping is, it wasn't a Facebook app. Who needs yet another social network? Apple should have simply integrated iTunes purchases into Facebook. That would have been a lot less engineering effort. I agree also with the 'marketing smell' that hung on it. An obvious aspect of this is, you couldn't post about non-iTunes related stuff.

And what about Ping users who had no interest in signing on with Facebook?

That will be solved for you in future operating system releases. Facebook will be an integral part of OS/[insert release number and/or feline here] whether you like it or not. Tim Cook is already floating that trial balloon.

Lol, of course not. FaceBook will always be optional. They can't just blindly give away all your personal information stored on iCloud to FaceBook without your consent, because that's not what you signed up for with iCloud. They'd get sued silly, and rightly so for a change.

[GeorgeBridges]

Ping's real problem was that it wasn't necessary.

[bastion]

GeorgeBridges, on 03 June 2012 - 01:15 AM, said:

Ping's real problem was that it wasn't necessary.

In contrast to which other social network site/service?

[rocketmouse]

Speaking of "scrap the name," unfortunate choice of name to begin with...

[jescott418]

I think Social network's are about people. When you look at what people do they join what is most popular. Right now that is Facebook, Apple ignores Facebook not even a support in Notifications which is coming in the Mountain Lion. Even Google Plus has problems gaining users. Its mostly Male last time I checked. People don't sign up for multiple social sites and usually pick the one that their friends are using. I actually think a lot of new and even long time Apple loyalists are not as committed to Apple's ecosystem as they once were. Their is so many more options these days. Younger people just don't accept what one company does as their option. Ping is just not on a lot of people's lists.

[jescott418]

bastion, on 03 June 2012 - 02:59 AM, said:

GeorgeBridges, on 03 June 2012 - 01:15 AM, said:

Ping's real problem was that it wasn't necessary.

In contrast to which other social network site/service?

It really was not needed, because Facebook is popular and Ping was just ignored as not relevant to those that
use social networks. They could do what they wanted on Facebook. Sometimes Apple comes to the game late too.

[JohnHowelljl8s]

I tried to like Ping, but for me it two other major flaws:
1: Cool artist I follow shares a link to a song (especially music videos), OK, only a preview, and, not available in my region, dam, now I have to go out of iTunes and find it on Vimeo or Youtube (Where I get he whole video, then I stay there and dont go back to iTunes.
2:Oh, and iTunes is a TERRIBLE BROWSER!, I also dont have it on my linux laptop, or on my work computer. And as its also tied to my iTunes account whcih my family also uses, I like Seether, Metallica, Iron Maiden (my stuff) and all of the Glee albums (my Wife) and the ribbing I get from following Hanna Montanna and Katy Perry? OK, not going to share here, it not my account, its the families.

So basically, not Internaltion, and the client was not universal.

[bastion]

jescott418, on 03 June 2012 - 03:03 PM, said:

bastion, on 03 June 2012 - 02:59 AM, said:

GeorgeBridges, on 03 June 2012 - 01:15 AM, said:

Ping's real problem was that it wasn't necessary.

In contrast to which other social network site/service?

It really was not needed, because Facebook is popular and Ping was just ignored as not relevant to those that use social networks. They could do what they wanted on Facebook. Sometimes Apple comes to the game late too.

Certainly that's true. Most of the time, even. But that wasn't the point of my question. George and you say Ping wasn't necessary. Is Facebook necessary? Of course not. And to about half of the teenage-and-up US populating Facebook isn't even interesting (while abstractly something more focussed such as Ping might have been). So I don't understand the claim that what "went wrong" with Ping is that it "wasn't needed."

[StevenFishervsh2]

jakecross, on 01 June 2012 - 08:39 AM, said:

To your last point about sharing, I think this is something that Google Music does quite nicely. If you buy an album, you can share a link to it (on Google+ or elsewhere) through which your friends can enjoy one free stream of the album. I think that's the kind of innovative and creative idea that Apple maybe could have tried with Ping.

That's not a "innovative and creative idea that Apple could have tried."

That's something that the record labels allowed Google to do, and didn't allow Apple to do. Because despite what you might think, it's not all about money; the record labels have been treating Apple's competitors better than Apple for years. Remember Zune's squirting? Notice the much lower prices for Amazon music? All of these are the record labels attempting to break Apple's stranglehold of the music industry, offering competitors better terms than Apple.

"Damn that Apple. Damn them for saving us. Damn them for making money."

It's ridiculous, and it's hurting the record labels and consumers far more than it's hurting Apple.

[ChuckChuck]

Nothing went wrong, it was wrong from the start. It was useless, didn't add anything and that's why no-one used it.

[ChuckChuck]

StevenFishervsh2, on 05 June 2012 - 09:38 AM, said:

"Damn that Apple. Damn them for saving us. Damn them for making money."

It's ridiculous, and it's hurting the record labels and consumers far more than it's hurting Apple.

The endplay of any deal made with the music industry is getting people to sign up with a low attractive prices and then raising the prices. And Apple has said no to raising the prises, they did kinda said yes with the DRM free songs. But what the music companies want above all else is to have them raise the prices like they always hoped they would.