I have doubts we?ll ever see that app. I think Apple is more likely to incorporate it into iPhone OS v4.0 so that you can choose it from your iPod app and stream from the background.
I would like to see a completely web-based app that streams your iTunes library.
I assume that iTunes library includes all your songs, not just the ones you bought via iTunes. That uploading feature is something that lala offered.
And I agree that the app is likely to be rolled into the iPod app rather than provided as a separate app.
Steve Jobs? plan to take back the personal computing business from Microsoft proceeding apace
"When it comes to understanding consumers and what they will want, Apple is one of the strategically smartest companies in the world. And the recently reported deal to acquire music streaming start-up Lala is another indication that the company is planning to become the central cloud for consumers," Erik Sherman writes for BNET.
"That raises some interesting questions about what the future of the company might be, because focusing on the cloud means realizing that business is beyond proprietary hardware and software. And the answer may be a clever marriage of open and closed, promoting Apple hardware and eventually making it king of the personal computer heap," Sherman writes.
"Why Apple might want a streaming company is head-scratching, in an odd kind of way" Sherman writes. "It should be crystal clear. An important business to them is selling access to downloading songs. Streaming media is a natural counterpoint, because there will be people who want the equivalent of a radio station, with a larger variety of music than the typical collection, and streaming should also lead to additional track sales. And if you can stream audio, why not video or e-books or any kind of media?"
Sherman writes, "This would also seem to logically tie to the big server farm that Apple is building in North Carolina... [Then] last month, we saw that Apple filed a patent on a way to force people to watch ads and which could be used to let a user obtain 'a good or service, such as the operating system, for free or at reduced cost.'"
"Time to tie it all together," Sherman writes. "You have streaming media, enforced ad-watching, and rumors of the new cheaper device coming out. So add it all up. How about advertising-supported streamed media that also ties in to subsidized hardware? And don?t assume that the media is just music."
Can $0.10 per song cover the distribution costs of lifetime streaming of a song? I doubt it. Unless they have some stats data proving that the majority of the songs are not streamed too often after being purchased or they have some means of eliminating customers that stream too much
Um, this keeps getting mentioned then ignored, but the first report on the sale specifically mentioned that LaLa's streaming music licenses are not transferable on sale of the company.
Apple hasn't bought the right to stream unpurchased music, at any price. What they have bought is the team that worked out how to scan a users drive for music they already owned and replicate that in the cloud.
This undoubtably involves additional licensing which also did not transfer, but it's a pretty good bet that for that piece, at least, Apple is actively looking to work something out.
This actually neatly splits the difference between those who feel Apple "must" respond to all you can eat streaming services (which in fact have never proven very popular with consumers) and those who think renting your music isn't very attractive.
Um, this keeps getting mentioned then ignored, but the first report on the sale specifically mentioned that LaLa's streaming music licenses are not transferable on sale of the company.
Apple hasn't bought the right to stream unpurchased music, at any price. What they have bought is the team that worked out how to scan a users drive for music they already owned and replicate that in the cloud.
This undoubtably involves additional licensing which also did not transfer, but it's a pretty good bet that for that piece, at least, Apple is actively looking to work something out.
This actually neatly splits the difference between those who feel Apple "must" respond to all you can eat streaming services (which in fact have never proven very popular with consumers) and those who think renting your music isn't very attractive.
I have to imagine there are some patents involved otherwise the purchase of just talent is expensive at an $80M up front price. Apple could have persuaded Lala engineers to come to Apple at a significant pay and benefit increase without having to pay that that lump sum.
Then there is the rumour that Lala approached Apple. I can?t imagine them approaching Apple unless they had some IP worth selling.
The article is speculative nonsense. Apple may or may not do anything with Lala. They may very well be buying it to bury the concept as has been mentioned in other threads about this subject.
But hey, what the heck. Congrats Apple on buying a company for completely unknown reason!
Hence the term rumour site (though possibly rumor in the country of origin)
I'm just surprised Apple haven't bought several other companies in this manner. My assumption is that, since showing their ability to push terms on content providers, Apple have had a tough time expanding their media services portfolio (hence delayed DRM-free offering & my hamstrung AppleTV). This isn't a move to open iTunes up by running it on any browser, as the 'browser' could be embedded into Apples apps as with iTunes, but by acquiring different organisations they could buy the rights to how the content is viewed i.e. concessions that wouldn't have been made to them directly such as the one-media-instance-per-device the labels and studios have been trying to push.
I have to imagine there are some patents involved otherwise the purchase of just talent is expensive at an $80M up front price. Apple could have persuaded Lala engineers to come to Apple at a significant pay and benefit increase without having to pay that that lump sum.
Then there is the rumour that Lala approached Apple. I can?t imagine them approaching Apple unless they had some IP worth selling.
Right. Mostly I'm just tired of reading people talking about getting the streaming licenses, or speculating that Apple bought them up to eliminate a competitive threat or to keep anyone else from getting them.
Whatever else we don't know about the acquisition, these two are pretty well ruled out.
Right. Mostly I'm just tired of reading people talking about getting the streaming licenses, or speculating that Apple bought them up to eliminate a competitive threat or to keep anyone else from getting them.
Whatever else we don't know about the acquisition, these two are pretty well ruled out.
Seems to me, the LaLa team must have presented Apple with a DYNAMITE business plan integrated with iTunes and "Apple Strategic Planning".
The presentation would feature operating hard assets (servers, systems, apps, customer dbs) and soft assets (business relationships, leases, proof of concept, brilliant engineers and leadership).
A plan with some incredible ROI. Now, you have an $80mm Xmas Gift. (The angels, early investors, and employees must be thanking Santa Steve right now.)
Comments
I have doubts we?ll ever see that app. I think Apple is more likely to incorporate it into iPhone OS v4.0 so that you can choose it from your iPod app and stream from the background.
I would like to see a completely web-based app that streams your iTunes library.
I assume that iTunes library includes all your songs, not just the ones you bought via iTunes. That uploading feature is something that lala offered.
And I agree that the app is likely to be rolled into the iPod app rather than provided as a separate app.
Steve Jobs? plan to take back the personal computing business from Microsoft proceeding apace
"When it comes to understanding consumers and what they will want, Apple is one of the strategically smartest companies in the world. And the recently reported deal to acquire music streaming start-up Lala is another indication that the company is planning to become the central cloud for consumers," Erik Sherman writes for BNET.
"That raises some interesting questions about what the future of the company might be, because focusing on the cloud means realizing that business is beyond proprietary hardware and software. And the answer may be a clever marriage of open and closed, promoting Apple hardware and eventually making it king of the personal computer heap," Sherman writes.
"Why Apple might want a streaming company is head-scratching, in an odd kind of way" Sherman writes. "It should be crystal clear. An important business to them is selling access to downloading songs. Streaming media is a natural counterpoint, because there will be people who want the equivalent of a radio station, with a larger variety of music than the typical collection, and streaming should also lead to additional track sales. And if you can stream audio, why not video or e-books or any kind of media?"
Sherman writes, "This would also seem to logically tie to the big server farm that Apple is building in North Carolina... [Then] last month, we saw that Apple filed a patent on a way to force people to watch ads and which could be used to let a user obtain 'a good or service, such as the operating system, for free or at reduced cost.'"
"Time to tie it all together," Sherman writes. "You have streaming media, enforced ad-watching, and rumors of the new cheaper device coming out. So add it all up. How about advertising-supported streamed media that also ties in to subsidized hardware? And don?t assume that the media is just music."
Apple hasn't bought the right to stream unpurchased music, at any price. What they have bought is the team that worked out how to scan a users drive for music they already owned and replicate that in the cloud.
This undoubtably involves additional licensing which also did not transfer, but it's a pretty good bet that for that piece, at least, Apple is actively looking to work something out.
This actually neatly splits the difference between those who feel Apple "must" respond to all you can eat streaming services (which in fact have never proven very popular with consumers) and those who think renting your music isn't very attractive.
Um, this keeps getting mentioned then ignored, but the first report on the sale specifically mentioned that LaLa's streaming music licenses are not transferable on sale of the company.
Apple hasn't bought the right to stream unpurchased music, at any price. What they have bought is the team that worked out how to scan a users drive for music they already owned and replicate that in the cloud.
This undoubtably involves additional licensing which also did not transfer, but it's a pretty good bet that for that piece, at least, Apple is actively looking to work something out.
This actually neatly splits the difference between those who feel Apple "must" respond to all you can eat streaming services (which in fact have never proven very popular with consumers) and those who think renting your music isn't very attractive.
I have to imagine there are some patents involved otherwise the purchase of just talent is expensive at an $80M up front price. Apple could have persuaded Lala engineers to come to Apple at a significant pay and benefit increase without having to pay that that lump sum.
Then there is the rumour that Lala approached Apple. I can?t imagine them approaching Apple unless they had some IP worth selling.
You could have copied it but removed the links.
Now even if they remove it, you are spamming the list.
Was too early in the morning to think ... now removed... thanks :for heads up)
The article is speculative nonsense. Apple may or may not do anything with Lala. They may very well be buying it to bury the concept as has been mentioned in other threads about this subject.
But hey, what the heck. Congrats Apple on buying a company for completely unknown reason!
Hence the term rumour site (though possibly rumor in the country of origin)
I'm just surprised Apple haven't bought several other companies in this manner. My assumption is that, since showing their ability to push terms on content providers, Apple have had a tough time expanding their media services portfolio (hence delayed DRM-free offering & my hamstrung AppleTV). This isn't a move to open iTunes up by running it on any browser, as the 'browser' could be embedded into Apples apps as with iTunes, but by acquiring different organisations they could buy the rights to how the content is viewed i.e. concessions that wouldn't have been made to them directly such as the one-media-instance-per-device the labels and studios have been trying to push.
Or maybe Lala just got streaming right.
McD
I have to imagine there are some patents involved otherwise the purchase of just talent is expensive at an $80M up front price. Apple could have persuaded Lala engineers to come to Apple at a significant pay and benefit increase without having to pay that that lump sum.
Then there is the rumour that Lala approached Apple. I can?t imagine them approaching Apple unless they had some IP worth selling.
Right. Mostly I'm just tired of reading people talking about getting the streaming licenses, or speculating that Apple bought them up to eliminate a competitive threat or to keep anyone else from getting them.
Whatever else we don't know about the acquisition, these two are pretty well ruled out.
Right. Mostly I'm just tired of reading people talking about getting the streaming licenses, or speculating that Apple bought them up to eliminate a competitive threat or to keep anyone else from getting them.
Whatever else we don't know about the acquisition, these two are pretty well ruled out.
That "anyone else" might have been Google.
Seems to me, the LaLa team must have presented Apple with a DYNAMITE business plan integrated with iTunes and "Apple Strategic Planning".
The presentation would feature operating hard assets (servers, systems, apps, customer dbs) and soft assets (business relationships, leases, proof of concept, brilliant engineers and leadership).
A plan with some incredible ROI. Now, you have an $80mm Xmas Gift. (The angels, early investors, and employees must be thanking Santa Steve right now.)