Spotify for browsers

[djazz]

From this getsatisfaction thread: https://getsatisfaction.com/spotify/topics/please_make_browser_based_spotify

Andres (Employee) over 3 years ago:

"We have no plans to make a browser based version, we feel we can provide a much better product with an app and offer features which wouldn't be possible via a web browser."

Today, webapps are the most spread apps, as they work the same across devices (cross platform).

Three years ago, it would be difficult to build Spotify for browsers, because it would require APIs that you could not simply access from JavaScript. Today, with HTML5, APIs exists for:

• Bi-directional secure (TLS) WebSockets with UTF8 or binary 
• Native audio playback
• A whole new types of input types such as "search" and "range"
• 2D Canvas Context for advanced dynamic drawing of 2D elements (lines, gradients, text, images, shapes, raw pixels)
• Realtime audio processing/analysis with the Web Audio API
• Sandboxed FileSystem access (e.g. for offline playlists, local settings)
• Application Cache for offline usage of the app
• Drag & Drop API (e.g. for dragging tracks to playlists)
• History API for sessions and bookmarking
• Binary data: Typed arrays/ArrayBuffer, Blobs and File API (for reading files, writing files)!
• XHR2: Binary data with Ajax/XHR requests
• WebWorkers, multithreaded JavaScript
• CSS3: Keyframe animations, smooth transitions, shadows, custom fonts, new selectors.
• PeerConnection API for Peer-To-Peer connections!!

Today, Google Chrome (the world's second largest browser) got all of these APIs and more (except WebRTC, but it's in the dev build, so it will soon be here too). Chrome even have it's own built-in appstore (Chrome Web Store) where users can install extension/apps, without having to restart their browser.

Another approach to get Spotify to the web is to use Native Client (NaCl) to compile C/C++ code for the web. An example is the game Bastion that was compiled with NaCl to run in Chrome.

This would be the easiest way for the Spotify developers, as they only had to tweak their code very little to make it compile with NaCl.

( Offtopic: I made a chrome extension for Spotify, which convert spotify links to links with mouseover info, for example image of the album, artist name, title of track, popularity. Get it HERE. Thank you :] )

[faithx5]

The explanation that you can do more stuff and offer features via a desktop app rather than a web app is a good reason to have a desktop app, but it is NOT a goot reason to not also have a web app. I don't care if the web app is stripped down to some degree, or if it just powers the Facebook plays and the new website Play buttons. But there needs to be SOMETHING because right now I'm paying for a service that I can pretty much only use when I'm at home or in the car, which is like 5% of my total available music-listening time. I can't install a desktop player at work, but they don't mind if we listen to browser-based music services. Not providing one is depriving your customers of something that essentially EVERY OTHER MUSIC SERVICE provides. I think Spotify is the best service out there on every other count, which is why I'm still with you guys, but this is a serious deficiency.

Even worse, when I click a Spotify play button on Facebook or a website, the last thing I expect is for it to want to launch an external app. That's ridiculous even if I AM at home and have Spotify installed. At work it's just downright insulting. Even if you don't launch a fully-featured web player, AT LEAST make it so those play buttons will work in the browser without trying to launch the desktop app.

[brewguy]

This would be a most wanted feature for me too while I am at work and want to use my Spotify account on the administrator locked laptop.

[user-removed]

I need a player at work too.

Only a simple player for the playlists.

That's all....

---

[gouldtr]

This is basically the only reason I use MOG. Everyone else I know that pays for a streaming music service uses Spotify, so the network effect for me personally is huge (I'm missing out on a lot), but I just can't get behind a service that refuses to develop a web application in 2012. Especially when there are other streaming services like MOG that have super slick web apps. Surely I'm not the only one, and Spotify is missing out on a good number of potential customers. 

[Smartboy]

I just wanted to add my support to this idea. The reason I cancelled my spotify service and went to Rdio was because of their excellent web player (especially now). I realize that you wouldn't be able to provide all features that your desktop version has, but as many people have pointed out, they don't want all the features. And the fact that Rdio packs most features that Spotify does provide into their browser client shows it is possible, especially cross browser. I am a Computer Science student who works at the university a lot. Having to install a client on every computer I'm working on is a huge pain, and in many cases not even possible. Rdio, however, just works on these same computers.

I really want to come back, Spotify. Please give us the ability to just play our playlists in the browser at least!

[AlanPierson]

Yeah -- This is the _only_ drawback to Spotify, but it's a big one. It's very frustrating not to be able to use Spotify on computers where I can't install software. Still hoping that there will be a web app eventually. 

[felixnw]

I just registered here and I can not believe that no web player is provided...

In my case there is no sense at all in this service then

[minicraig]

I can't believe that a company who is trying to set themselves up as "a new way to enjoy music" hasn't caught up with the world and made a web app.

Music is the perfect thing to have on a web app, and HTML5 sets it up so nicely so that the service could provide all of the features of the desktop app with standard APIs.

[user-removed]

I miss spotify at work to. Would be perfect to have a web player available. Otherwise I have to check out competitors offers...

[Dryggler]

All over the world, people want to listen to Spotify at work but aren't allowed to install it on their computers. They can't listen on their phones or iPads because the signal isn't strong enough.  They don't download the whole library because they haven't got enough space. 

Paying $9.95 for premium wouldn't make sense for me, because the primary place I'd listen would be at work.  If Spotify offered web-basd streaming, then the monthly fee might actually be practical. 

It's a shame I have to use Pandora instead. Randomized playlists tend not to be my favorite way to listen to music.