or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple wants over-the-air music downloads for 3G iPhone
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple wants over-the-air music downloads for 3G iPhone - Page 2

post #41 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

So what. If I can get cheaper songs then I do.

That's fine, but don't complain if they are looking out for themselves too.

Quote:
Is this another Steve Jobs is looking out for the little guy argument? Steve Jobs is only loyal to the current Mrs. Jobs, his kids, and the shareholders. Steve Jobs is not our friends.

We've gone through this argument too many times already here.

Companies aren't supposed to look out for the little guy. They are supposed to look out for themselves, their employees, and their investors.

Smart management knows that often the best thing for those three groups is to give the little guy what is the best product, at the best price for what it is.

Apple has done that with iTunes. you can be shortsighted about it, or you can see through the ruse the labels are playing with Amazon.

Quote:
Welcome to the biz world. Some win, some lose.

I'm aware of that son. It's who wins and loses that matter. If the wrong ones win, then WE lose. You want the labels to win this. Good for you.
post #42 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Your business is your business to be sure. But network operators see it differently. That's their business, and they have to make a profit, and keep the airwaves open. Sometimes, other than for greed, and I'm not denying that's a part, charging fees prevents people from staying on all the time downloading. If that happens, everyone's rates will go up, or they will start throttling, that is what Cox and Comcast do now with P2P.

Melgross, I currently live in Finland where more people have cell phones than landlines. Everyone is connected at all times. It is a matter of capacity, and planning for it. The Finns do and do it quite well. I have an unlimited data plan for approximately 15 dollars. This means I can stay connected 24/7/356 and no one will say anything. I have a friend that has two 3G phones that do nothing but stay connected all the time with his 2 Macs. So staying online may be an issue in the States but not for the rest of Europe. The difference is that the US is not used to these types of services and it can be daunting to say the least. So, in my opinion, your argument, while having its merits does not apply here.
post #43 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

T

Well this part I can and will disagree with. The companies certainly need to die there is no doubt at all about that, but that outcome can be assured without dirtying ones self with questionable activities. The answer is to not do business with the record companies and the artists signed with them, that are after this. I do mean to "do business" as like it or not most musicians are in it for the money. Keep them from benefiting form a relationship with the big labels and sooner or later they will get the hint. It is not just the purchase of tracks managed by the record companies either, one has to make sure the artist never benefit from any of their financial efforts while signed with these labels. That means no money spent on concerts, tee shirts or anything else offered up.

Dave

It's not that simple. The labels put up all of the money for production, distribution, and marketing.

While it's nice to imagine that one can do without the labels, very few artists would agree. they don't want to get rid of the labels, they want more money, and who doesn't? But the labels have most of these new acts fail. That money comes from somewhere. It comes from the more successful acts. The same thing as publishing.

It's true for movies and Tv as well. The few big hits pay for all the failures.

People forget that.

Where would a beginning act get the backing to produce a high quality album? It's got to come from somewhere, and so far, there's no evidence that wholesale numbers of artists can do it on their own, or that most people are interested in recordings done in someone's basement. As a fad, sure, but not long term.
post #44 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

That's fine, but don't complain if they are looking out for themselves too.

Not complaining. If Apple lives or dies it will not affect me one way or another. I will find someone else to sell me what I want.

Quote:
We've gone through this argument too many times already here.

Companies aren't supposed to look out for the little guy. They are supposed to look out for themselves, their employees, and their investors.

Smart management knows that often the best thing for those three groups is to give the little guy what is the best product, at the best price for what it is.

Apple has done that with iTunes. you can be shortsighted about it, or you can see through the ruse the labels are playing with Amazon.

Apparently not nearly enough because some here actually think Steve will be inviting them to dinner or the next board meeting to ask for their input. Sure the record companies are playing a game and so is Apple. Someone will have to win, and someone will lose. I do not care which. As long as I get cheaper songs, I win. If not, I will have to find other ways to get what I want. As for my "short sighted-ness" my vision is fine. I can even see with my wallet sometimes and I see that I am getting better deals, quality with Amazon. I invite you to prove to me how saving money is short sighted.

Quote:
I'm aware of that son. It's who wins and loses that matter. If the wrong ones win, then WE lose. You want the labels to win this. Good for you.

I will let the "son" remark pass, just this once. I guess old age flaring up. If Apple is such the wunderkind that everyone thinks and Steve Jobs is the genius that all proclaim from on high, then the record companies will lose and Steve or (He Who must not be named) will score a victory for all mankind.
post #45 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

Melgross, I currently live in Finland where more people have cell phones than landlines. Everyone is connected at all times. It is a matter of capacity, and planning for it. The Finns do and do it quite well. I have an unlimited data plan for approximately 15 dollars. This means I can stay connected 24/7/356 and no one will say anything. I have a friend that has two 3G phones that do nothing but stay connected all the time with his 2 Macs. So staying online may be an issue in the States but not for the rest of Europe. The difference is that the US is not used to these types of services and it can be daunting to say the least. So, in my opinion, your argument, while having its merits does not apply here.

If a few people do it, the company usually doesn't care. But if large numbers of people do it, they begin to care.

Very few people who have unlimited plans come anywhere near that 100% up time. Even here, where my computer DSL is on all the time, as is my daughters, and our browsers are almost always open, meaning that we are "on" all the time, we always aren't at our machines, and there is little traffic coming across, except for the e-mails, which take a few seconds each, every now and then, and Apple's time server connection, active a couple of seconds every minute or so.

But if a fair percentage of people are downloading a couple of hours a day, that will grow old fast for the cell carrier.
post #46 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

Not complaining. If Apple lives or dies it will not affect me one way or another. I will find someone else to sell me what I want.

Apparently you don't look to deeply into things.

Quote:
Apparently not nearly enough because some here actually think Steve will be inviting them to dinner or the next board meeting to ask for their input. Sure the record companies are playing a game and so is Apple. Someone will have to win, and someone will lose. I do not care which. As long as I get cheaper songs, I win. If not, I will have to find other ways to get what I want. As for my "short sighted-ness" my vision is fine. I can even see with my wallet sometimes and I see that I am getting better deals, quality with Amazon. I invite you to prove to me how saving money is short sighted.

Apparently not enough is right. The argument is clear. If you don't understand what I said, and can't respond to it, then this isn't a discussion.

Quote:
I will let the "son" remark pass, just this once. I guess old age flaring up. If Apple is such the wunderkind that everyone thinks and Steve Jobs is the genius that all proclaim from on high, then the record companies will lose and Steve or (He Who must not be named) will score a victory for all mankind.

You argue like my daughter does. Skip the points you want to ignore, and repeat the same line.
post #47 of 103
It is perfectly legal for you to burn copies of music you legally own on Blank Music CDs and share those copies with friends provided the transaction is non commercial and the music will be used for personal use. Section 1008 of the Copyright Act allows such use. I suggest engaging in more of that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hutcho View Post

What the hell difference does it make to the music companies whether someone is downloading something over a fixed line or 3G connection? It makes no difference to them at all. It will make a difference to Telco's, but that is about it.

Maybe it's just the fact that they are blood sucking scum. I hope everyone makes more of an effort to pirate music and that they slowly die.
post #48 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

If a few people do it, the company usually doesn't care. But if large numbers of people do it, they begin to care.

Very few people who have unlimited plans come anywhere near that 100% up time. Even here, where my computer DSL is on all the time, as is my daughters, and our browsers are almost always open, meaning that we are "on" all the time, we always aren't at our machines, and there is little traffic coming across, except for the e-mails, which take a few seconds each, every now and then, and Apple's time server connection, active a couple of seconds every minute or so.

But if a fair percentage of people are downloading a couple of hours a day, that will grow old fast for the cell carrier.

Sorry but I do not buy this argument. Here in Finland you have almost 98% saturation of mobile phone users. Most of the phones here are 3G capable. many to most people do not have a land line. I say again, do not have a land line. So they are either using DSL (only for data), or they are using their 3G modems. The operators know this, provision for this and are doing a nice biz based off of this biz model. Unlimited data here means just that, unlimited.
post #49 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Apparently you don't look to deeply into things.



Apparently not enough is right. The argument is clear. If you don't understand what I said, and can't respond to it, then this isn't a discussion.



You argue like my daughter does. Skip the points you want to ignore, and repeat the same line.

It must be pretty quiet there with you then when only one opinion, (yours) is the right one. As I said, and will say again, I do not care if Apple lives or dies. It is just one of the companies that currently gets my money. If someone else comes along and provided better service (AMAZON), then I am there. If Apple matches them, then Apple gets my money. This shouldn't be to hard to understand. If I am going to fast let me know. I can even repeat if necessary.
post #50 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

It is perfectly legal for you to burn copies of music you legally own on Blank Music CDs and share those copies with friends provided the transaction is non commercial and the music will be used for personal use. Section 1008 of the Copyright Act allows such use. I suggest engaging in more of that.

No, it does not. Copyrght law says that you CAN'T do that.

You are allowed to lend them the CD. You are allowed to give someone the original CD as long as you don't retain a copy. You are allowed to make a copy for yourself, either as a backup, or to play in another device.

Would you be so kind as to find the code that supports your argument here in Section 1008, as you specified?

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/ht...8----000-.html

Or this.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/search/index.html

If you can't find it where you said it was, perhaps you would like to look at the entire copyright code.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/ht...sup_01_17.html
post #51 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

Sorry but I do not buy this argument. Here in Finland you have almost 98% saturation of mobile phone users. Most of the phones here are 3G capable. many to most people do not have a land line. I say again, do not have a land line. So they are either using DSL (only for data), or they are using their 3G modems. The operators know this, provision for this and are doing a nice biz based off of this biz model. Unlimited data here means just that, unlimited.

In theory, that's what it does mean. but it's doubtful that there is enough bandwidth being used at this time to qualify.
post #52 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

This shouldn't be to hard to understand. If I am going to fast let me know. I can even repeat if necessary.

And melgross is saying this play is a long-term loose proposition, because the labels are intentionally undercutting Apple, via Amazon, so they can regain bargaining control and ultimately raise your prices.

As you say, this shouldn't be too hard to understand.
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #53 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

It must be pretty quiet there with you then when only one opinion, (yours) is the right one. As I said, and will say again, I do not care if Apple lives or dies. It is just one of the companies that currently gets my money. If someone else comes along and provided better service (AMAZON), then I am there. If Apple matches them, then Apple gets my money. This shouldn't be to hard to understand. If I am going to fast let me know. I can even repeat if necessary.

You're going so fast, you aren't even seeing the actual discussion.
post #54 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flounder View Post

And melgross is saying this play is a long-term loose proposition, because the labels are intentionally undercutting Apple, via Amazon, so they can regain bargaining control and ultimately raise your prices.

As you say, this shouldn't be too hard to understand.

Thank you.

I've been trying to make this point for several posts, but he won't address it at all.
post #55 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flounder View Post

And melgross is saying this play is a long-term loose proposition, because the labels are intentionally undercutting Apple, via Amazon, so they can regain bargaining control and ultimately raise your prices.

As you say, this shouldn't be too hard to understand.

And I say again, they can do whatever they want. Apple is not doing us a favor. Apple, aka Steve Jobs is not looking out for me or you. He is trying to get the best deal for his shareholders. If the prices rise and the shareholders get more money, you will see how much Steve comes to the rescue.

In the end, I will still get what I want from one source or another.

That shouldn't be to hard to understand as well.
post #56 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Thank you.

I've been trying to make this point for several posts, but he won't address it at all.

If you go back, you will see that I agreed with you and answered that I do not care. Maybe you should read a bit before you hit the enter key.
post #57 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

If you go back, you will see that I agreed with you and answered that I do not care. Maybe you should read a bit before you hit the enter key.

I did look, and you didn't respond to that. All you said is that you will buy from the cheapest, and damn the rest, though not in those words.
post #58 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

And I say again, they can do whatever they want. Apple is not doing us a favor. Apple, aka Steve Jobs is not looking out for me or you. He is trying to get the best deal for his shareholders. If the prices rise and the shareholders get more money, you will see how much Steve comes to the rescue.

In the end, I will still get what I want from one source or another.

That shouldn't be to hard to understand as well.

Why do you keep bringing up the obvious? It doesn't matter whether Apple cares or not.

But, if the labels get what they want, YOU won't get what you want.
post #59 of 103
the music labels don't understand their consumers or digital lifestyle. who does most of the ringtones, ringbacks what about teens, hey they don't download "new" tones, they bluetooth them to there friends, so what ever "milk the customer" that the labels have work arounds are there. they (music lablels) don't understand or want to understand the customer...they want control like they had prior to itunes

as far as amazon, people don't want the amazon interface, us geeks can dig it, but joe and joan itunes, ipod consumer wants simple interface with simple simple simple downloads. amazon won't work as a "competitor": to itunes, with predictions of itunes/ apple getting 25% of worldwide digital music in the next few years (i think i saw that on macnn)
the music labels want amazon and every other "itunes" killer to grow to kill or hurt itunes...won't happen itunes is it, will be it, and is so dominant that "it" is what the labels will have to deal with. also wait for apple to have the off contract artists sign up. won't be long and won't take much, if the "middle man" is out, apple could keep the same margin and GIVE MORE TO THE ARTIST---gee that's a new idea. gee how many billions does apple have to be it's own label. hmmmmm sounds like another SJ angle
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
post #60 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

Good point but unlimited data is unlimited data. I should (in theory) be allowed to download as I please regardless. I am not sure about the contract thing you mentioned. You might be right but I do not think the terms have been released.

Fine print aside, the contract you have with your carrier only gives YOU access to unlimited/unlimited data. If Apple has signed a contract that states that they can't compete with the mobile operator in a certain way or use their service in a particular manor then Apple must abide by that, regardless of what you desire.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

Data is data. If I want to sit and wait 10 mins for a song to download that is my biz, at least give me the chance to do it. SImplicity has nothing to do with it. It is all about choice.

Yes it is, but before that data is YOUR data, it's someone else's data. We may not mind waiting 10 minutes for a song but the carrier might. You say you are "not sure about the contract thing," but do you really have to have in-depth knowledge of the contract to know that Apple had to concede to certain limitations to get onboard with the current carriers? If you were selling ringtones for $3.99 and offering a unlimited/unlimited data plan for half the price of your other phones would you really allow the excessive purchases of music and ringtones for $.99? If data is data and unlimited is unlimited and you can do what you should be given the choice then you should be allowed to purchase TV shows and movies over that same data network, too.? Can't you see how this there is more than the end-user's contract is involved here?

Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

Melgross, I currently live in Finland where more people have cell phones than landlines. Everyone is connected at all times. It is a matter of capacity, and planning for it. The Finns do and do it quite well. I have an unlimited data plan for approximately 15 dollars. This means I can stay connected 24/7/356 and no one will say anything. I have a friend that has two 3G phones that do nothing but stay connected all the time with his 2 Macs. So staying online may be an issue in the States but not for the rest of Europe. The difference is that the US is not used to these types of services and it can be daunting to say the least. So, in my opinion, your argument, while having its merits does not apply here.

Again, your agreement is for you, not for other's trying to piggyback on that network. There is a reason that the iPhone can't be tethered with a Mac when OS X has had the convenient Internet Sharing for so many years now. While there are countries with plans like Finland there are also plenty of countries that seem to have worse plans than the US. Finland's population density and progressive network does not appear to represent the whole of Europe.

If iTunes Store is allowed to be used over the cell networks then you can bet they will be. I don't see why anyone would think Apple could benefit from not allowing its use.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #61 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I did look, and you didn't respond to that. All you said is that you will buy from the cheapest, and damn the rest, though not in those words.

Post #35 is where you asked about being naive. I agreed that Amazon is the one being pimped (paraphrase) but still if this is the way the cookie crumbles then it does. Apple and Steve are supposed to be sooooo much smarter than everyone else. This is his chance to prove it. And the fact still remains, I will buy from the cheapest source that satisfies my needs.
post #62 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Why do you keep bringing up the obvious? It doesn't matter whether Apple cares or not.

But, if the labels get what they want, YOU won't get what you want.

This sounds like Chicken Little. They sky is falling. I have a bit of faith that the smart and conscience consumers will vote with their wallets to bring the record companies in line.
post #63 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Fine print aside, the contract you have with your carrier only gives YOU access to unlimited/unlimited data. If Apple has signed a contract that states that they can't compete with the mobile operator in a certain way or use their service in a particular manor then Apple must abide by that, regardless of what you desire.

I never implied that my contract stipulated anything outside of dealing with me. I have no idea what Apple signed or agreed to, but if you do then by all means speak up. If my operator says unlimited data, I can assume that he is not going to "packet tag" and trace my traffic and then say: "nope, these are coming from Apple, better limit that". I just don't see that happening. I am speaking of my operator here in Finland. Where I go next, maybe but that would not be unlimited data. It would be unlimited data with conditions. That would have to be stated in the contract I would say.

Quote:
Yes it is, but before that data is YOUR data, it's someone else's data. We may not mind waiting 10 minutes for a song but the carrier might. You say you are "not sure about the contract thing," but do you really have to have in-depth knowledge of the contract to know that Apple had to concede to certain limitations to get onboard with the current carriers? If you were selling ringtones for $3.99 and offering a unlimited/unlimited data plan for half the price of your other phones would you really allow the excessive purchases of music and ringtones for $.99? If data is data and unlimited is unlimited and you can do what you should be given the choice then you should be allowed to purchase TV shows and movies over that same data network, too.? Can't you see how this there is more than the end-user's contract is involved here?

True the data belongs to someone else but my agreeing to pay for access to any and all data that I want for an unlimited amount of time with no limitations pretty much says I can stay connected all the time as long as I pay my bill. I see this happening daily with personal friends, and co-workers at the embassy who purchase 3G modems and plug them into their computers and run them constantly. So, it is pretty obvious the operators do not mind as they are selling these products for this permitted usage.


Quote:
Again, your agreement is for you, not for other's trying to piggyback on that network. There is a reason that the iPhone can't be tethered with a Mac when OS X has had the convenient Internet Sharing for so many years now. While there are countries with plans like Finland there are also plenty of countries that seem to have worse plans than the US. Finland's population density and progressive network does not appear to represent the whole of Europe.

I never said FInland represented all of Europe. My statements surrounded my experience living here and how I utilize my unlimited data connection from my GSM operator. Maybe you inferred a bit more than I was saying. Regardless, I was not in the meetings with Apple when the decision to tether the iPhone was left out. Maybe it was an oversight that will be corrected in the new iPhone. Once again, it does not matter to me. I have an N82 that tethers just fine, and doubles as my Internet connection device while away from home.

Quote:
If iTunes Store is allowed to be used over the cell networks then you can bet they will be. I don't see why anyone would think Apple could benefit from not allowing its use.

I see this happening for sure, if it is allowed from Apple. I am sure my operator here in Finland will not mind, but then again, I am not privy to those decision.
post #64 of 103
Why I should pay for the same song again and again and again... if I purchase album from favorite artist, then having the same song in ringtone or over the air or whatever way should be free...
I pay the fee to operator for data plan... that's they'r business... I pay for phone, that's Apple's business... so 1 pay only once for song.. and that's how I thank Singer for the song.

I thing the future will go more Nokia proposed way - pay some $$ by buying the phone and get all the music free... Future in Music industry is FlatRate... If the studios will not understand that - pirating will never end.

So actually I think in 5 year we will see Mobile phones for 1$ buy + 25..50$/month and you get unlimited internet, video, movies, music, news, eBooks, audiobooks, learning stuff and of course SMS and voice... all unlimited... all included in monthly price... and the one operator who will offer the most full package with content will get the consumer.
post #65 of 103
1. create ZiTunes for iPhone... nice big catalog of pirated songs, videos, music videos etc... etc...
2. create applications like iTorrent...
3. sell all this to Labels for hundrets of millions after a year... or be sued and in jail. Depends on management!


and you will see how much it will hurt Labels... like it was with Napster and like it is today with Torrents.

Here in my country (European union, Latvia) there is not possible to buy legal video or song from iTunes... the only way to get it - buy on CD or DVD and then copy over to PC and then to iPhone.

So many just skip the first part and download from torrents... done!

Why - becouse it is more convenient... even if you are ready to purchase the song, you don't have a chance!
post #66 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vigants View Post

I think the future will go more Nokia proposed way - pay some $$ by buying the phone and get all the music free... Future in Music industry is FlatRate... If the studios will not understand that - pirating will never end.

The world does seem to be moving that way as a whole, but so far people have shown they prefer to own their music outright.

One thing that those old B&W short videos from Popular Mechanics about the way life will be in future never consider is how culture will evolve. They always talked about new technological advancements but never how society changes, so they always had all these home and kitchen advancements for the house wife but never considered woman's suffrage and the like.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vigants View Post

1. create ZiTunes for iPhone... nice big catalog of pirated songs, videos, music videos etc... etc...
2. create applications like iTorrent...

Unless they are loaded via the SDK on a jailbroken iPhone (which is highly likely) you won't see these apps on the iPhone. Apple's rules strictly forbid it, which is probably part of the agreement with the carriers and perhaps even the studios/labels.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #67 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Companies aren't supposed to look out for the little guy. They are supposed to look out for themselves, their employees, and their investors.

Smart management knows that often the best thing for those three groups is to give the little guy what is the best product, at the best price for what it is.

So why does it seem like you think it's wrong for sapporobaby to feel that Amazon's mp3 service does just that? The same or lower price, no DRM to worry about ever, in a format that is guaranteed to work on any portable media player.

Quote:
Apple has done that with iTunes. you can be shortsighted about it, or you can see through the ruse the labels are playing with Amazon.

Please, iTunes is just as much a ruse for Apple as Amazon is for the record labels. Heck, I'd say iTunes is more of a ruse since Apple doesn't really need to make much money off of it so long as it encourages people to buy iPods, iPhones and AppleTVs (and even Macs at some point). At least Amazon probably wants and more than likely needs their mp3 download service to be profitable.

Again your comments point back to the paranoia that if Amazon "wins" and manages to shut down iTunes that prices will suddenly skyrocket. Which is STILL nonsense. iTunes has set the maximum price at 99 cents and it will be hard for the labels to get away with increasing it. Even iTunes couldn't get away with it for long once Amazon launched with DRM free tracks at the 99-cent price point versus iTunes' then $1.29 per DRM-free track price.
post #68 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

So why does it seem like you think it's wrong for sapporobaby to feel that Amazon's mp3 service does just that? The same or lower price, no DRM to worry about ever, in a format that is guaranteed to work on any portable media player.



Please, iTunes is just as much a ruse for Apple as Amazon is for the record labels. Heck, I'd say iTunes is more of a ruse since Apple doesn't really need to make much money off of it so long as it encourages people to buy iPods, iPhones and AppleTVs (and even Macs at some point). At least Amazon probably wants and more than likely needs their mp3 download service to be profitable.

Again your comments point back to the paranoia that if Amazon "wins" and manages to shut down iTunes that prices will suddenly skyrocket. Which is STILL nonsense. iTunes has set the maximum price at 99 cents and it will be hard for the labels to get away with increasing it. Even iTunes couldn't get away with it for long once Amazon launched with DRM free tracks at the 99-cent price point versus iTunes' then $1.29 per DRM-free track price.

Did, did you... just make, make sense?
post #69 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

Heck, I'd say iTunes is more of a ruse since Apple doesn't really need to make much money off of it so long as it encourages people to buy iPods, iPhones and AppleTVs (and even Macs at some point). At least Amazon probably wants and more than likely needs their mp3 download service to be profitable.

Are you comparing the "ruse" offered to customers in the form of iTunes media to encourage the purchase of Apple HW the same as the "ruse" that the studios want to sell their songs cheaper than $.99 and without DRM? Do you honestly think the studios want to sell higher bitrate audio with no DRM at a lower pricepoint through Amazon without trying to topple the online-distribution giant? Amazon is just the first step in a power play against iTS.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #70 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOFEER View Post

as far as amazon, people don't want the amazon interface, us geeks can dig it, but joe and joan itunes, ipod consumer wants simple interface with simple simple simple downloads. amazon won't work as a "competitor": to itunes, with predictions of itunes/ apple getting 25% of worldwide digital music in the next few years (i think i saw that on macnn)

Your comments remind me of a guy who referred to the iPod as the "media player for dummies".

Sorry, but your comments about the Amazon interface being too hard are pure nonsense. It's no harder to buy an mp3 from Amazon than it is to buy any other product from Amazon, yet millions of customers somehow manage to do that every day. And with the small downloader program that is required, Amazon couldn't really have made it much easier to get that track in your iTunes or Windows Media Player library unless they pushed the "Buy mp3" button for you.
post #71 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

Your comments remind me of a guy who referred to the iPod as the "media player for dummies".

Sorry, but your comments about the Amazon interface being too hard are pure nonsense. It's no harder to buy an mp3 from Amazon than it is to buy any other product from Amazon, yet millions of customers somehow manage to do that every day. And with the small downloader program that is required, Amazon couldn't really have made it much easier to get that track in your iTunes or Windows Media Player library unless they pushed the "Buy mp3" button for you.

The interface is simple. They did a good job with not bogging it down. I can see how some would even prefer it compared to the bloated iTunes software.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #72 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Are you comparing the "ruse" offered to customers in the form of iTunes media to encourage the purchase of Apple HW the same as the "ruse" that the studios want to sell their songs cheaper than $.99 and without DRM? Do you honestly think the studios want to sell higher bitrate audio with no DRM at a lower pricepoint through Amazon without trying to topple the online-distribution giant? Amazon is just the first step in a power play against iTS.

Solipsism,

You could be 10000000000% correct but still that is Apple's biz to defend itself. Not mine. That's like Melgross's inference that I should support Apple by paying more, getting lower quality, and DRM'd music. This way Steve can take on the big guys for me. That is a ....... well......never mind.
post #73 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

Solipsism,

You could be 10000000000% correct but still that is Apple's biz to defend itself. Not mine. That's like Melgross's inference that I should support Apple by paying more, getting lower quality, and DRM'd music. This way Steve can take on the big guys for me. That is a ....... well......never mind.


There is always the "battle vs. war" argument but I don't recall Melgross stating that we should support Apple.

Outside of the labels not offering Apple the same deals as Amazon in way of bitrate and DRM, I don't see why Apple would care. Most of these Amazon bought tracks are still ending up on iPods.


PS: I'm too modest to say I'm 10000000000% correct... I'm only 100% correct.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #74 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

This sounds like Chicken Little. They sky is falling. I have a bit of faith that the smart and conscience consumers will vote with their wallets to bring the record companies in line.

If they vote like you, then the sky WILL fall.
post #75 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

So why does it seem like you think it's wrong for sapporobaby to feel that Amazon's mp3 service does just that? The same or lower price, no DRM to worry about ever, in a format that is guaranteed to work on any portable media player.

Because all is not what is may seem. Don't fall into the same trap he has.


Quote:
Please, iTunes is just as much a ruse for Apple as Amazon is for the record labels. Heck, I'd say iTunes is more of a ruse since Apple doesn't really need to make much money off of it so long as it encourages people to buy iPods, iPhones and AppleTVs (and even Macs at some point). At least Amazon probably wants and more than likely needs their mp3 download service to be profitable.

The difference is that Apple has no interest in raising prices.

Quote:
Again your comments point back to the paranoia that if Amazon "wins" and manages to shut down iTunes that prices will suddenly skyrocket. Which is STILL nonsense. iTunes has set the maximum price at 99 cents and it will be hard for the labels to get away with increasing it. Even iTunes couldn't get away with it for long once Amazon launched with DRM free tracks at the 99-cent price point versus iTunes' then $1.29 per DRM-free track price.

Don't be so sure. The only reason why Amazon could do it was because they're being subsidized. Apple had to ower prices to meet theirs, but not with eveything. They're still higher across the board.

But if the labels present everyone with the same slightly higher price once Apple's grip is gone, they will have to cave in. Slightly higher prices don't seem to bother most people, hence, Apple's sales aren't falling. But, if people do switch in great enough numbers, it will happen that the labels will regain control.

Since they had publically admitted that they want higher prices, they will demand them.

Few are fooled by the pricing at Amazon.
post #76 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

Solipsism,

You could be 10000000000% correct but still that is Apple's biz to defend itself. Not mine. That's like Melgross's inference that I should support Apple by paying more, getting lower quality, and DRM'd music. This way Steve can take on the big guys for me. That is a ....... well......never mind.

I'm not saying you should. I'm saying that there is a plan that should be obvious, and that by following their plan, prices will, in the end, rise substantially, should it work of course.

It might not work, and the vast majority might continue buying from iTunes, helping it to maintain its 35% or so growth a year.

I certainly want all of Apple's songs to be 256K without DRM, at at the lowest sustainable cost, as well.

Most of the public doesn't seem to care, but following this through to its logical conclusion leads to higher prices eventually, which is what you don't want.

It's an interesting question about monopoly pricing here. Apple keeps the prices low because it wants the prices low so it will help to sell other products which are priced about the same as other's.

The labels want prices to be low so that they can break the competition, which is what monopoly pricing attempts to do to competition, and then, after the competition is broken, to have a free hand in raising those prices higher than before.
post #77 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

Solipsism,

You could be 10000000000% correct but still that is Apple's biz to defend itself. Not mine. That's like Melgross's inference that I should support Apple by paying more, getting lower quality, and DRM'd music. This way Steve can take on the big guys for me. That is a ....... well......never mind.

The problem is once the music labels succeed in forcing Apple to play by their rules then you will not be able to find a $0.89 songs on Amazon. You will start paying different amount for different songs just the way the labels want.

You know some people also argue that it is stupid to pay $0.99 or $0.89 for music while you can get it for free many different ways. I believe that we are in a critical time and that we should send a message to the music labels. For example, some people think that downloading music through torrent is one way (not me).
post #78 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hutcho View Post

What the hell difference does it make to the music companies whether someone is downloading something over a fixed line or 3G connection? It makes no difference to them at all. It will make a difference to Telco's, but that is about it.

Yeah it seems crazy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALPICH View Post

I much prefer the quick and decisive blow type of kill for the big record labels. Not that I just want to pirate music either. Just want more money to the artist and less cost for a song. Seriously.

Someone said that less than 5% of bands get "discovered", so there is a LOT of good music out there if we can find it.

It would be VERY interesting if Apple could help us find independent bands we might like, based on the label bands we already have. I'm not sure the technology to make that prediction is there yet - though there are some subscription services that try to predict music taste like that. Anyway - it'd be good to pay 1/3 as much for the songs AND have the artists see more money.
post #79 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Amazon is just the first step in a power play against iTS.

Well, strictly speaking I think pulling songs from some labels out of iTunes and the deal of
extorting money for each Zune from Microsoft were also steps. I think it is fair to say that
the Amazon deal is the first step that wasn't an utter pratfall.
post #80 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post

Well, strictly speaking I think pulling songs from some labels out of iTunes and the deal of
extorting money for each Zune from Microsoft were also steps. I think it is fair to say that
the Amazon deal is the first step that wasn't an utter pratfall.

I will concede to that.

If we are including bad moves then we can't leave out Walmart's online store.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple wants over-the-air music downloads for 3G iPhone