VentureBeat - Latest Comments in Rhapsody to hit the iPhone — nice, but too expensive

Re: Rhapsody to hit the iPhone — nice, but too expensive

links of london — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 02:48:32 -0000

Here, I want to say: you are successful, I hope you will do better!

Re: Rhapsody to hit the iPhone — nice, but too expensive

jojo78 — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 20:46:32 -0000

Yes, online access only is going to suck. But once they have the offline capability Rhapsody is great. The only existing problem with Rhapsody is the lack of good mobile devices, but the iphone/touch is going to be great.

Rhapsody is not really expensive when you count the fact you don't have to buy music. Itunes would be driving me to the poor house if I bought all the music I listen to and have in my library. It really is a good service.

Re: Rhapsody to hit the iPhone — nice, but too expensive

synthmeister — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 14:54:10 -0000

This is doofus. If you lose the 3G or wifi connection, you lose the music? Why bother?

They could have saved themselves a lot of trouble by simply creating an iPhone optimized website for Rhapsody with a simple subscriber login.

No approval from the app store necessary.

Re: Rhapsody to hit the iPhone — nice, but too expensive

sxates — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 11:41:27 -0000

$15/mo is too expensive to listen to any song any time anywhere?

I pay that for Zune, which is quite similar, and would love to have access to the zune library from my iphone. I pay that right now just to have music to listen to at my desk, and adding it to my phone would just be a bonus. Maybe if the iphone was the only place you listened to music it would be a tough sell, but I think the subscription model is right on, and am looking forward to it being supported on more devices.