Release Notes - Spotify for Desktop (0.9.0.133)

[Goodman]

What's new in this version (0.9.0.133):

• Fixed internal issues that were causing interruptions these last couple of days

More information

The last couple of days our service has seen some unexpected interruptions. This release should alleviate most of it not all of those issues.

If you experience any issues after updating to this version please reply here and provide as much detail as possible.

And should you need help figuring out what "much detail" could mean (you're not alone in this) then please have a look at the troubleshooting guides at the top of the desktop help forum.

[Liam]

---

@Rollo_ wrote:

---

@LiamW wrote:

---

@what2thewhat wrote:

what a load of horse sh*t

---

Not really.

---

Yes, really. 

Liam, I haven't seen a single post by you where you've done anything except tow the company line.   You are not helpful.

---

People that deliberately cause upset to another person, for no reason other than they feel like it are called bullies.

I'm assuming you're a bully. The best thing to do with bullies is ignore them, and make sure they know what they are doing are wrong:

This post is wrong. It causes upset, and the information in it is incorrect also.

There we go.

[gigiriva]

---

@Stupify wrote:

---

@Goodman wrote:

In an ideal world we want every Spotify user to have the same experience and be able to use the same content inside the app. At some point that means helping everyone get to the same version.

---

In an ideal world these updates would have never happened. At some point have to stop paying you money. So I just canceled my premium subscription.

---

In an ideal world spotify developers would be farmers

[Adam]

Hey guys, keep this on topic please. Liam (and the other superusers) do a great job at helping out where they can. If you want to comment on this 0.9.0.133 update or Per's follow-up, feel free to do so. Bickering amongst each other doesn't help anyone. Thanks all.

[BigKev57]

---

@Stupify wrote:

---

@Goodman wrote:

In an ideal world we want every Spotify user to have the same experience and be able to use the same content inside the app. At some point that means helping everyone get to the same version.

---

In an ideal world these updates would have never happened. At some point have to stop paying you money. So I just canceled my premiumsubscription.

---

In an ideal world spotify developers would be farmers

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

In an ideal world Spotify management and developers would be unemployed and replaced by people who know how to do their jobs and know about customer care.

[Rollo_]

Peter wrote:

Don't be so disrespectful. 

Peter, It was very disrespectful to force this update down our throats when its been made very clear in literally thousands of posts that we don't want it.  This latest forced upgrade has made me feel violated.

And as far as Liam is concerned, I am no bully.  I have on several occasions called him on posts he has made where the information he's relayed has been less than factual, particularly regarding reverting to older software, which he has repeatedly claimed is "impossible to do."

[what2thewhat]

Just booted up the latest update. IMMEDIATELY CRASHED. COMPLETELY CLOSED DOWN. I DIDN'T EVEN PLAY A SONG. 

[what2thewhat]

You can't even so much as resize the Spotify window without causing significant lag. This is complete garbage. Trash. Rubbish. 3rd world development.

[detmer14]

The issue still exists that if a user has many, many playlists, some completely full (over 9,000) songs, it takes 5 to 10 hours for Spotify to refresh the song database EACH and EVERY time Spotify is reopened. If a DEV wants to look at my playlists to see what I'm talking about, please let me know.

Is something being done to look into this? This issue began with the update/s that added "follow" functionality for artists and friends. I like the ability to follow artists, but I currently try to keep my laptop running for weeks at a time. Because, if I restart, it means I'll have to restart Spotify which will be rendered virtually useless for 5 - 10 hours.

Any update on this?

[Gabhan]

---

@detmer14 wrote:

The issue still exists that if a user has many, many playlists, some completely full (over 9,000) songs, it takes 5 to 10 hours for Spotify to refresh the song database EACH and EVERY time Spotify is reopened. If a DEV wants to look at my playlists to see what I'm talking about, please let me know.

Is something being done to look into this? This issue began with the update/s that added "follow" functionality for artists and friends. I like the ability to follow artists, but I currently try to keep my laptop running for weeks at a time. Because, if I restart, it means I'll have to restart Spotify which will be rendered virtually useless for 5 - 10 hours.

Any update on this?

---

You realise that at an average of 3.5 minutes per song, thats over 500 hours of music in one playlist. Given 8 hours sleep, that's over a month solid if you are listening every waking hour. Not trying to defend the Spotify developers here, but what is the point of a 9000 song playlist?

[detmer14]

To organize songs. I'll give you some examples.

I want to be able to listen to a playlist with all of the music from all of the Bluegrass artists I like. Currently, these comprose 4 playlists - 3 of them being completely full. There are no duplicates between the playlists. I just want to be able to do a completely random play including all songs. Of course it won't play all of the music, but it's a great random mix.

If I played a Bluegrass Radio station, it would be extremely impossible to replicate the variety of these playlists. If I only played a subset of the music in these playlists, the listening experience wouldn't be the same.

I also have many Acappella playlists, some of them completely full. These are playlists where I can go find ALL of my acappella music.

The alternative is to generate a separate playlist for each and every artist and then include those in a playlist folder. That would be a LOT more playlists to manage. You would also have to move these artist playlists in and out of folders depending on the type of mix you wanted to have.

I know that I'm not the typical Spotify user. I'm an extreme power user with specific listening needs. But I would bet there are some similar Spotify users who like to organize music this way.

[AndrewFry]

Any word on a work around to stop this forced update?

I have been holding out and using 8.8 and 9.0 as the updates come for a while now hoping it gets better...I just decided to go back to 8.5 and man I was having all sorts of good feelings. How quick and responsive it used to be. How I could have so much more information in front of me at one time. Not to mention the great black background that was so easy on my eyes. Playlist time was (roughly) listed. So many other little things are gone too...

Now it has been ripped away from me again for this albeit "funcitonal" but very crappy replacement version that lags around like a browser on a dial up modem running through America Online in the year 1998. Designed for people with vision as bad as my grandma.

Either fix your 9.0 product that is obviously still in Beta or let us use whichever version we want and disable automatic updating. How hard is it to just implement a "theme" option to let us choose font size and background color? This wouldn't fix lagging around all the time but it'd be a start...

Companies that force draconian new policies on paying customers are never long for this world. As tempting as the masses are, they will not hear about your glorious product unless you have a hardcore base of support.

Please stop ruining my experience with your product.

[Rollo_]

Spotify has shown us that they are not interested in the Power Users.  We are the minority.  Spotify is interested in the 'phone'  and 'social' people.  That's where the $$ is.

[Stupify]

---

@Gabhan wrote:

You realise that at an average of 3.5 minutes per song, thats over 500 hours of music in one playlist. Given 8 hours sleep, that's over a month solid if you are listening every waking hour. Not trying to defend the Spotify developers here, but what is the point of a 9000 song playlist?

---

I use the playlist feature to get quick access to a song I find and want to hear more often. I discover something great on the internet, then search for it on spotify and if I find it, it's added. Sometimes I also find songs on spotify itself. The playlist also acts as a quick list of shortcuts to artist pages because the artist names are clickable. After months of finding music, the amount of songs I save builds up and grows large and it's all sorted in the order I've found them. So my biggest list has 258 tracks now.

The way I use playlists as shortcuts to artist pages is hindered by the new versions, because playlists are grey and artist pages are white webpages. They don't even feel like they belong to the same program, they're so radically different.

[brudy]

---

@Rollo_ wrote:

Spotify has shown us that they are not interested in the Power Users.  We are the minority.  Spotify is interested in the 'phone'  and 'social' people.  That's where the $$ is.

---

Are they though? I'm not so sure. What are they getting out of the 'social' thing? Marketing data by who we follow? But what data exactly? I don't know. Seems to me that they need to increase the amount of premium subscribers - that they'd want people to pay. That has to make more money than serving ads unless they have just a ton of free users. What they really should do, and sadly I'd pay for this at this point, is have different levels of paid user, with different clients available for each. It sucks that I'd pay more for a functional 8.5 and a mini player, both with airplay, but that's where I'm at.

But since Spotify can't even deliver a functional client at this point, I'm not holding my breath. As someone else posted somewhere it's like watching a train wreck happen, you can't avert your eyes as they self-destruct.

[Stupify]

Social networks are cool these days!

And Spotify wants people to share Spotify songs with friends in order to get even more Spotify users. This is why Facebook accounts were a requirement for such a long time: they wanted people to log in with FB so they could gain access to the Facebook profile and spam songs in there without the user noticing. While the feature was optional, it was turned on by default and most users won't notice it before it's too late and a bunch of music was spammed.

Facebook is no longer required so none of this applies any more, except for users who take the lazy man's route.

[Liam]

---

@Rollo_ wrote:

<snip>

And as far as Liam is concerned, I am no bully.  I have on several occasions called him on posts he has made where the information he's relayed has been less than factual, particularly regarding reverting to older software, which he has repeatedly claimed is "impossible to do."

---

I never said that. I said it was possible to do so, but not recommended. At least that's what I went to say, and even if I didn't, then right now it looks like it's correct.

I, personally, can see where they are coming from with this. Maybe it's annoyed some users - I just don't understand why can't just leave Spotify and leave everyone in peace?

Maybe this is a bad thing, maybe it isn't. You all have your own opinions, but you can't slag other people off with them.

[BigKev57]

@brudy: What Spotify are gaining is investment from the Hollywood record labels. By use of the social media the record labels are able to hype up their artists and songs. A typical example of this was the hyping of Daft Punk's single Get Lucky. A piece of bland dross that was hyped to number one around the globe. Spotify CEO Daniel Ek received a personal plaque from Sony for the number of streams of the song on Spotify. There is a picture on his twitter of it today. The song was pumped out as advertising through facebook etc to everybody whether they were interested or not.

[detmer14]

Examples of Playlists over 9.000 songs:

A playlist of lots of Instrumental Christmas music - 1 of 4 that I have, none of which have duplicate songs.

Christmas Instrumental

A playlist of Piano music - 1 of 2 that I have

Piano

Collection of all sorts of Rock and Alternative music - currently 2,400 songs

Alternative / Rock

Playlist of almost 8.000 Gaelic/Scottish/Irish/Celtic songs:

Gaelic Irish Scottish

[bastholm]

So... I've used the workaround so I wouldn't be updated to the latest versions. But, suprise surprise! Today my Spotify was forced to update.

So, now I have a version I don't want... 

I've said it before; I'd cancel my subscription, but got second thoughts as the old version was still functional with the workaround. Now, nothing is stopping me from cancelling this piece of garbage Spotify has become. 

I can't really understand how a company like Spotify can give so little attention to all those complaints. The earlier thread about the 0.8.8 update had 2000 posts. This one already have ~700. Come on.. give us a break, will ya? What's been improved since the complaints started? Nothing critical, I'd say. Still the same white page, still can't search with ctrl+f on an artists page and so on, and so on...

[brudy]

---

@BigKev57 wrote:

@brudy: What Spotify are gaining is investment from the Hollywood record labels. By use of the social media the record labels are able to hype up their artists and songs. A typical example of this was the hyping of Daft Punk's single Get Lucky. A piece of bland dross that was hyped to number one around the globe. Spotify CEO Daniel Ek received a personal plaque from Sony for the number of streams of the song on Spotify. There is a picture on his twitter of it today. The song was pumped out as advertising through facebook etc to everybody whether they were interested or not.

---

I get it, but we're still the people pushing the play and share buttons. Social only goes as far as users push things. If Sony and Spotify want to push through their respective SM channels, that's their choice, but it isn't like they're forcing us to share or listen to a specific song. I didn't seen any Daft Punk advertising on FB or in spotify. But I think I'm trained to essentially ignore online advertising. If it ever came to that, I'd be out, but it seems to me that the social integration is secondary functionality. And let's be honest, they can't even get that right.