Disgruntled Spotify Linux users

[isaacj87]

I was bored and decided to look through Spotify's blog. I found myself interested in the comments left on the blog post itself and Spotify's GetSatisfaction page.

There seems to be some upset users that were trying to use Spotify's preview of their Linux client who were frustrated to find it didn't work without an upgraded subscription. According to the download page, the instructions state:

This is a preview build of Spotify for Linux. As a preview release this version is still unsupported, but we're running it ourselves and will try to make sure it keeps pace with its Mac and Windows siblings, there are issues regarding decoding of local music on the Linux platform so we haven't included support for local files in this version. As we haven’t found a reliable way to display ads yet, this version is only available to Spotify Premium and Unlimited subscribers.

It isn't completely obvious, but the message is there. I think some users didn't catch the disclaimer and some were just upset that they couldn't use their free accounts with the Linux client. In fact, some users posted some borderline rude comments towards Spotify and their employees participating in the discussion.

What do you guys think? Are Linux users justified in feeling like "second-class citizens" or are Linux users forgetting that Spotify is a business? Is Spotify wrong and just ignoring us? Also, since we've become so accustomed to using open-source alternatives, which are usually free, have we become more reluctant to spend money on services?

Here are the links:

Spotify Linux instructions

Spotify GetSatisfaction page

Spotify blogspot about Linux client

EDIT: I should also mention that there are good number of happy users too. So, this isn't a glass half-empty situation.

[blueturtl]

Not saying Spotify is in the wrong here, but what could possibly be so hard about displaying ads under Linux? That explanation has just stood there for months on end. Is someone working on a solution to the problem? What is the nature of the problem exactly?

Web browsers seem to have no problems retrieving and displaying ads under Linux. Sure, we can block them, but only because add-ons exist for the purpose. Spotify is closed up and non-extendable, so what exactly is holding them back?

[blueridgedog]

I too setup an account and downloaded the client only to hit the requirement to purchase a membership. Oh well...it may have been a great service.

[Madspyman]

I know there's a lot of hate towards Wine but it's helpful and a free solution to using Spotify for free in Linux. I'm using Spotify free in Linux right now.

[trollolo]

i see no reason for spotify at all. for the cloud, i use www.grooveshark.com better interface, ads can be removed via userscripts, and i can access it form any computer, which is the WHOLE POINT OF THE CLOUD.

why would i want to install a local client to view my cloud-based library? sheesh

[3Miro]

As we haven’t found a reliable way to display ads yet ...

Is there no way to display ads or are they just incompetent? This is like saying: "even though your system is completely open, we can quite figure it out, so we will provide no service"

[isaacj87]

Not saying Spotify is in the wrong here, but what could possibly be so hard about displaying ads under Linux? That explanation has just stood there for months on end. Is someone working on a solution to the problem? What is the nature of the problem exactly?

Web browsers seem to have no problems retrieving and displaying ads under Linux. Sure, we can block them, but only because add-ons exist for the purpose. Spotify is closed up and non-extendable, so what exactly is holding them back?

Honestly, I was wondering the same thing. It seems all versions of the client are built using Qt. Not sure what's different between the Linux client vs. Windows or OS X. If I could use my free account with the Linux client, I wouldn't of upgraded to an unlimited subscription.

[Primefalcon]

Honestly, I was wondering the same thing. It seems all versions of the client are built using Qt. Not sure what's different between the Linux client vs. Windows or OS X. If I could use my free account with the Linux client, I wouldn't of upgraded to an unlimited subscription.

You payed rather than just run it in wine...... why?

[isaacj87]

You payed rather than just run it in wine...... why?

Well, actually, I wanted to see how well the native client works. It was only $5 and you can cancel at anytime. (I have a nice bit of donated money from Android development). I'm even considering upgrading to Premium so I can stream music to my Android phone and have offline capabilities.

[VioletsPie]

If the grief here is that Spotify does not provide a quality native Linux client I can see why people are upset since they paid. However, it does not seem like the Linux client has yet to be advertised or even marketed to Linux users -- its existence came through word of mouth and blogs and such.

As for my end, I can't even get the key to work anyhoo.