Let me get this straight... they are "clowns" why? Because they are happy and want to celebrate the biggest deal in his and their friends life? Because they maybe had a little too much beer and are happy? I'd like to see all of you when your favorite team wins a big game or championship and how you act in your homes or at the bar! Guess you are always calm and never get excited.
Actually I don't recommend that anybody drink. If you do have to drink don't do so to the point of getting drunk.
A lot of this (to me) is subliminal racism.
No it is blatant racism. Many people here are demonstrating that they either don't know what they are talking about or are complete racist. There isn't much room to maneuver here, the opinions expressed can only be the result of one or the other. Frankly I suspect about a 50/50 mix here, as some of the comments are just plain stupid.
If Beats were owned by Bono or Robert Plant I think a lot of people here would have zero problem with the alleged deal. But for heavens sake, not some rappers, not some guys from the city... not these guys, it's the downfall of Apple. Small minded people. I don't own anything from Beats, but there is no question Beats is a huge brand and whether you like Dr. Dre, Hip-Hop or the headphones themselves, their products are extremely successful and make a ton of money.
It isn't just one product either!
Jimmy Iovine is a business and music legend and so is Dr. Dre. Don't be such typical Apple elitist and snobs, get off your high horses. Sell your stock and Apple products today, Tim and Apple won't miss you. Amazing.
The flip side of this is that the audio industry has a very large segment of its market built around snob appeal in the first place. You see this in some of the posts where brand XYZ is what I use because it is the best. It is a mentality that is hard to deal with. Especially when people discount how headphones and earphones behave based on an individuals physical characteristics.
In the end I have to agree, Apple doesn't need you guys! Actually it is probably embarrassing for Apple to have such a large number of customers demonstrate this much ignorance or racism.
Apple represents quality. Their mantra has been quality over quantity and quality over sales. A second-rate headphone company does not represent quality.
Then explain iTunes, iPod and the compressed music. Apple has taken its share of arrows for years because of the poor audio quality of the iTunes library. That never stopped the main stream customers from coming though. The reality is if you want to make money you go after the mainstream market not the snob market.
Again the world is not filled with snobs. Consumers don't care about quality as much as some because they don't use music in the same way. If you are working in the kitchen, garage or shop, the music is there for fill, it isn't there so you can experience the technical excellence of the artist. Hell if the average person sings along any idea of high quality goes out the window. Most people realize that they can't sing, matching the abilities of their favorites, but that doesn't stop them from singing. Again it comes back to a different use for music, where it is often used to relieve stress or boredom.
I just find it amazing that so many apply their own definitions of quality to justify the hatred for this deal. Often they just don't grasp that they are a tiny minority when it comes to users of music. In the end that is what this is all about, the users of the music.
It's not a matter of snobbishness that people cannot generally tell the difference between relatively low and high-quality audio.
Then explain iTunes, iPod and the compressed music. Apple has taken its share of arrows for years because of the poor audio quality of the iTunes library. That never stopped the main stream customers from coming though. The reality is if you want to make money you go after the mainstream market not the snob market.
Again, you conflate "quality" with snobbishness, which is a logic failure.
If it helps, think of the word "quality" being the same as "aspirational", which is why Apple won't sell a cheap-ass plastic phone.
Excuse me sir- I hate to burst your bubble but
audiophiles do not buy or own Beats.
And why would that be? Contrary to popular opinion Beats does have some good headphones. Are they the best? Well that is an interesting question isn't it. In the end it comes down to what sounds right for the individual owner.
In any event you reinforce my perspective that audiophiles are indeed part of the snob audio equipment culture. I've followed the industry for a long time, especially some of the magazines associated with the market and frankly it got to the point that I just used the articles as a source of humor and something to laugh at. It is an industry where reviewers dream up differences in amplifiers costing thousands sometimes tens of thousands of dollars that nobody can really hear.
Now admittedly headphones do have rather significant differences but the thing people mis is that every one of these headphones sound different on a different head. Buying a headphone based on a review is foolhardy to say the least. Beyond that how you wear headphones can dramatically impact the quality of the sound. If there was a perfect headphone for all possible uses, every professional out there would be using the same model of headphones. They don't of course because we all have preferences, we all have different ears and different heads.
Turn it around and look at the audio world from the other end. If one perfect microphone existed we wouldn't have the several 100 on the market to choose from at this moment in time. It would be a mistake to consider one microphone perfect for every need just as it is a mistake to assume that one headphone is superior to every other out there.
Apple simply doesn't have a play in the low end market. A cell phone that is data plan free would be ideal. Such a product would have zero impact on iPhone sales as iPhone doesn't play in that market.
It's not a matter of snobbishness that people cannot generally tell the difference between relatively low and high-quality audio.
My point is they don't care because obsession over high quality audio doesn't matter based upon the way they are using that audio. Music isn't used by most for a technical study of the performance, rather it is a way of relief from the daily grind. This is what people are missing here.
A good example would be a young mother out for a jog with the baby in a stroller. If she is listen to music at all it is only part of what is going on in her life at that very moment. Frankly it is also only part of what she should be hearing at that point.
Again, you conflate "quality" with snobbishness, which is a logic failure.
Nope, you mis the point, it was the audio snobs that attacked Apple and its iTunes offerings when they first came out. The quality of the compressed music was in fact pretty bad if you had high expectations of sound quality. In the end it made zero difference as the consumer either didn't care or didn't notice.
If it helps, think of the word "quality" being the same as "aspirational",
I really think you need to look up those two words in a dictionary.
which is why Apple won't sell a cheap-ass plastic phone.
Which is nonsense because the first iPhones where plastic.
However if Apple wants to keep the iPhone high end and offer a low end plastic phone,Beats would be a good brand to float the offering on. Right now I'd love to see a data free iPhone that can be easily used on a number of networks. Why? Pretty simple really I'd rather my data plan money go to support my iPad. I can get by fine with WiFi when I need to connect via my iPhone.
it might be a huge brand but there is nothing classy about it. And a lot of people considerate overpriced junk. Why would Apple want to be associated with that?
A lot of people aspire to that "overpriced junk".
The headphones are irrelevant, it's all about the licensing to help grow iTunes.
Wall St wants growth as other markets saturate, plateau and stagnate, Apple will deliver growth via iTunes revenue.
It's already started, iTunes makes more money at a faster growth rate than most of Apple's competitors with their entire businesses.
Nope, you mis the point, it was the audio snobs that attacked Apple and its iTunes offerings when they first came out. The quality of the compressed music was in fact pretty bad if you had high expectations of sound quality. In the end it made zero difference as the consumer either didn't care or didn't notice.
I really think you need to look up those two words in a dictionary.
Which is nonsense because the first iPhones where plastic.
However if Apple wants to keep the iPhone high end and offer a low end plastic phone,Beats would be a good brand to float the offering on. Right now I'd love to see a data free iPhone that can be easily used on a number of networks. Why? Pretty simple really I'd rather my data plan money go to support my iPad. I can get by fine with WiFi when I need to connect via my iPhone.
We have a failure to communicate here.
Apple makes aspirational products. They exude quality due to the high-margin components and extreme attention to detail, which also extends to their software integration. That Apple's first iPhone was plastic was not to suggest it was remotely "cheap".
My point is they don't care because obsession over high quality audio doesn't matter based upon the way they are using that audio. Music isn't used by most for a technical study of the performance, rather it is a way of relief from the daily grind. This is what people are missing here.
A good example would be a young mother out for a jog with the baby in a stroller. If she is listen to music at all it is only part of what is going on in her life at that very moment. Frankly it is also only part of what she should be hearing at that point.
As I was listening to music via headphones from my iPhone I was thinking how far I've come from listening to AM radio via a mono earpiece hooked up to a crystal radio and it was good, way, way better beyond anything I could have imagined back then, access to millions of songs all in my pocket.
Then their was vinyl, crackly fragile crap you'd have to change every 22 minutes then the constant hiss of cassette tapes but at least they didn't skip like portable CD players.
All in all I'm happy with what I've got and like most people will spend a bit of money on that.
some of you middle aged white guys just dont get it do you.
Its not about PERFORMANCE.
Its about STYLE.
Seriously. Go out some time and do some research.
You think women spend $4000 on a Louis Vutton bag because it PERFORMS better than a Urban Outfitters bag that cost 10x cheaper?
Really?
Exactly. These old white guys just don't get.
Do you really think these teens and 18-24 year olds buy Beats because they "perform" better? No, they buy it because it's cool and when they watch TV or music videos all the celebrities, athletes and artists are wearing them. Beats is getting kids with little to no disposable income to buy $200-400 headphones just like they buy a $200-250 pair of Air Jordans. It's an accessory and they don't give a crap if a pair of Grados or other reputable brand sound better (I have both Grados and Beats myself). These kids and young adults aren't audiophiles listening to classical music. They listen to hip-hop, r&b, electronic, house, etc. and they want their music loud. You guys don't seem to get that. Everyone I know that's under the age of 21 want (read: don't need) iPhones or Macs because they perform better, that's just icing on the cake. They want iPhones and Macs because they look cool and they view them as accessories just as much as an electronic device. They see celebrities with their iPhones and MacBooks just like they do wearing Beats headphones.
I think the reason for this rumored purchase has more to do with the streaming service from Beats and more importantly Jimmy Iovine himself. What better way to make licensing deals with the record companies than to have a record company executive with many connections and influence on your side.
Do you really think these teens and 18-24 year olds buy Beats because they "perform" better? No, they buy it because it's cool and when they watch TV or music videos all the celebrities, athletes and artists are wearing them. Beats is getting kids with little to no disposable income to buy $200-400 headphones just like they buy a $200-250 pair of Air Jordans. It's an accessory and they don't give a crap if a pair of Grados or other reputable brand sound better (I have both Grados and Beats myself). These kids and young adults aren't audiophiles listening to classical music. They listen to hip-hop, r&b, electronic, house, etc. and they want their music loud. You guys don't seem to get that. Everyone I know that's under the age of 21 want (read: don't need) iPhones or Macs because they perform better, that's just icing on the cake. They want iPhones and Macs because they look cool and they view them as accessories just as much as an electronic device. They see celebrities with their iPhones and MacBooks just like they do wearing Beats headphones.
I think the reason for this rumored purchase has more to do with the streaming service from Beats and more importantly Jimmy Iovine himself. What better way to make licensing deals with the record companies than to have a record company executive with many connections and influence on your side.
Guess what? Jimmy Iovine is also an "old white guy".
As Sog mentioned, it's about style and street trend but it's also about bass! Which is what the apple headphones lack to a certain extent. No matter what, the beats are to most selling headphone on the market and they expanded their line to Bluetooth speakers such as the pill and so on. The younger crowd are bass addicts, yes they sound horrible, but you have to see what they are listening too and what the older generation listens too.
I'm not sure if Monster is still part of beats, but the internals of beats are Monster cable. On top of that, it's a major competition to Bose headphone. And as someone mentioned before, the streaming music is what apple really needs to finally really compete with pandora.
The older crowed, or share holders won't see the benefit now, but it's a major benefit for apple in the long run.
We get that wasting 3.2 billion on style (wholly devoid of substance) when you already have style (and substance) is idiocy. Therefore this argument for the purchase is patently false.
Guess what? Jimmy Iovine is also an "old white guy". :no:
Racism is detestable, no matter who is doing it.
Yeah, but he's actually in touch with today's young generation unlike most people in this thread. The majority of people don't sit at home and listen to music with high-fidelity sound reproduction in mind.
Comments
Shouldn't they be drinking malt liquor?
Cannibalizing potential iPhone sales?!
No way.
An Android phone, not an iOS phone. One that would serve the lower-end market that Apple will never want to touch otherwise.
Actually I don't recommend that anybody drink. If you do have to drink don't do so to the point of getting drunk. No it is blatant racism. Many people here are demonstrating that they either don't know what they are talking about or are complete racist. There isn't much room to maneuver here, the opinions expressed can only be the result of one or the other. Frankly I suspect about a 50/50 mix here, as some of the comments are just plain stupid. It isn't just one product either!
The flip side of this is that the audio industry has a very large segment of its market built around snob appeal in the first place. You see this in some of the posts where brand XYZ is what I use because it is the best. It is a mentality that is hard to deal with. Especially when people discount how headphones and earphones behave based on an individuals physical characteristics.
In the end I have to agree, Apple doesn't need you guys! Actually it is probably embarrassing for Apple to have such a large number of customers demonstrate this much ignorance or racism.
Then explain iTunes, iPod and the compressed music. Apple has taken its share of arrows for years because of the poor audio quality of the iTunes library. That never stopped the main stream customers from coming though. The reality is if you want to make money you go after the mainstream market not the snob market.
Again the world is not filled with snobs. Consumers don't care about quality as much as some because they don't use music in the same way. If you are working in the kitchen, garage or shop, the music is there for fill, it isn't there so you can experience the technical excellence of the artist. Hell if the average person sings along any idea of high quality goes out the window. Most people realize that they can't sing, matching the abilities of their favorites, but that doesn't stop them from singing. Again it comes back to a different use for music, where it is often used to relieve stress or boredom.
I just find it amazing that so many apply their own definitions of quality to justify the hatred for this deal. Often they just don't grasp that they are a tiny minority when it comes to users of music. In the end that is what this is all about, the users of the music.
It's not a matter of snobbishness that people cannot generally tell the difference between relatively low and high-quality audio.
Then explain iTunes, iPod and the compressed music. Apple has taken its share of arrows for years because of the poor audio quality of the iTunes library. That never stopped the main stream customers from coming though. The reality is if you want to make money you go after the mainstream market not the snob market.
Again, you conflate "quality" with snobbishness, which is a logic failure.
If it helps, think of the word "quality" being the same as "aspirational", which is why Apple won't sell a cheap-ass plastic phone.
I think many of your are just prejudice of black people.
Geez, there's always some white retard who has to bring up the race card. F*** off.
And why would that be? Contrary to popular opinion Beats does have some good headphones. Are they the best? Well that is an interesting question isn't it. In the end it comes down to what sounds right for the individual owner.
In any event you reinforce my perspective that audiophiles are indeed part of the snob audio equipment culture. I've followed the industry for a long time, especially some of the magazines associated with the market and frankly it got to the point that I just used the articles as a source of humor and something to laugh at. It is an industry where reviewers dream up differences in amplifiers costing thousands sometimes tens of thousands of dollars that nobody can really hear.
Now admittedly headphones do have rather significant differences but the thing people mis is that every one of these headphones sound different on a different head. Buying a headphone based on a review is foolhardy to say the least. Beyond that how you wear headphones can dramatically impact the quality of the sound. If there was a perfect headphone for all possible uses, every professional out there would be using the same model of headphones. They don't of course because we all have preferences, we all have different ears and different heads.
Turn it around and look at the audio world from the other end. If one perfect microphone existed we wouldn't have the several 100 on the market to choose from at this moment in time. It would be a mistake to consider one microphone perfect for every need just as it is a mistake to assume that one headphone is superior to every other out there.
My point is they don't care because obsession over high quality audio doesn't matter based upon the way they are using that audio. Music isn't used by most for a technical study of the performance, rather it is a way of relief from the daily grind. This is what people are missing here.
A good example would be a young mother out for a jog with the baby in a stroller. If she is listen to music at all it is only part of what is going on in her life at that very moment. Frankly it is also only part of what she should be hearing at that point.
A lot of this (to me) is subliminal racism.
Then there’s something wrong with you.
Which is nonsense because the first iPhones where plastic.
However if Apple wants to keep the iPhone high end and offer a low end plastic phone,Beats would be a good brand to float the offering on. Right now I'd love to see a data free iPhone that can be easily used on a number of networks. Why? Pretty simple really I'd rather my data plan money go to support my iPad. I can get by fine with WiFi when I need to connect via my iPhone.
it might be a huge brand but there is nothing classy about it. And a lot of people considerate overpriced junk. Why would Apple want to be associated with that?
A lot of people aspire to that "overpriced junk".
The headphones are irrelevant, it's all about the licensing to help grow iTunes.
Wall St wants growth as other markets saturate, plateau and stagnate, Apple will deliver growth via iTunes revenue.
It's already started, iTunes makes more money at a faster growth rate than most of Apple's competitors with their entire businesses.
Nope, you mis the point, it was the audio snobs that attacked Apple and its iTunes offerings when they first came out. The quality of the compressed music was in fact pretty bad if you had high expectations of sound quality. In the end it made zero difference as the consumer either didn't care or didn't notice.
I really think you need to look up those two words in a dictionary.
Which is nonsense because the first iPhones where plastic.
However if Apple wants to keep the iPhone high end and offer a low end plastic phone,Beats would be a good brand to float the offering on. Right now I'd love to see a data free iPhone that can be easily used on a number of networks. Why? Pretty simple really I'd rather my data plan money go to support my iPad. I can get by fine with WiFi when I need to connect via my iPhone.
We have a failure to communicate here.
Apple makes aspirational products. They exude quality due to the high-margin components and extreme attention to detail, which also extends to their software integration. That Apple's first iPhone was plastic was not to suggest it was remotely "cheap".
My point is they don't care because obsession over high quality audio doesn't matter based upon the way they are using that audio. Music isn't used by most for a technical study of the performance, rather it is a way of relief from the daily grind. This is what people are missing here.
A good example would be a young mother out for a jog with the baby in a stroller. If she is listen to music at all it is only part of what is going on in her life at that very moment. Frankly it is also only part of what she should be hearing at that point.
As I was listening to music via headphones from my iPhone I was thinking how far I've come from listening to AM radio via a mono earpiece hooked up to a crystal radio and it was good, way, way better beyond anything I could have imagined back then, access to millions of songs all in my pocket.
Then their was vinyl, crackly fragile crap you'd have to change every 22 minutes then the constant hiss of cassette tapes but at least they didn't skip like portable CD players.
All in all I'm happy with what I've got and like most people will spend a bit of money on that.
Exactly. These old white guys just don't get.
Do you really think these teens and 18-24 year olds buy Beats because they "perform" better? No, they buy it because it's cool and when they watch TV or music videos all the celebrities, athletes and artists are wearing them. Beats is getting kids with little to no disposable income to buy $200-400 headphones just like they buy a $200-250 pair of Air Jordans. It's an accessory and they don't give a crap if a pair of Grados or other reputable brand sound better (I have both Grados and Beats myself). These kids and young adults aren't audiophiles listening to classical music. They listen to hip-hop, r&b, electronic, house, etc. and they want their music loud. You guys don't seem to get that. Everyone I know that's under the age of 21 want (read: don't need) iPhones or Macs because they perform better, that's just icing on the cake. They want iPhones and Macs because they look cool and they view them as accessories just as much as an electronic device. They see celebrities with their iPhones and MacBooks just like they do wearing Beats headphones.
I think the reason for this rumored purchase has more to do with the streaming service from Beats and more importantly Jimmy Iovine himself. What better way to make licensing deals with the record companies than to have a record company executive with many connections and influence on your side.
Exactly. These old white guys just don't get.
Do you really think these teens and 18-24 year olds buy Beats because they "perform" better? No, they buy it because it's cool and when they watch TV or music videos all the celebrities, athletes and artists are wearing them. Beats is getting kids with little to no disposable income to buy $200-400 headphones just like they buy a $200-250 pair of Air Jordans. It's an accessory and they don't give a crap if a pair of Grados or other reputable brand sound better (I have both Grados and Beats myself). These kids and young adults aren't audiophiles listening to classical music. They listen to hip-hop, r&b, electronic, house, etc. and they want their music loud. You guys don't seem to get that. Everyone I know that's under the age of 21 want (read: don't need) iPhones or Macs because they perform better, that's just icing on the cake. They want iPhones and Macs because they look cool and they view them as accessories just as much as an electronic device. They see celebrities with their iPhones and MacBooks just like they do wearing Beats headphones.
I think the reason for this rumored purchase has more to do with the streaming service from Beats and more importantly Jimmy Iovine himself. What better way to make licensing deals with the record companies than to have a record company executive with many connections and influence on your side.
Guess what? Jimmy Iovine is also an "old white guy".
Racism is detestable, no matter who is doing it.
I'm not sure if Monster is still part of beats, but the internals of beats are Monster cable. On top of that, it's a major competition to Bose headphone. And as someone mentioned before, the streaming music is what apple really needs to finally really compete with pandora.
The older crowed, or share holders won't see the benefit now, but it's a major benefit for apple in the long run.
We get that wasting 3.2 billion on style (wholly devoid of substance) when you already have style (and substance) is idiocy. Therefore this argument for the purchase is patently false.
Simple.
Yeah, but he's actually in touch with today's young generation unlike most people in this thread. The majority of people don't sit at home and listen to music with high-fidelity sound reproduction in mind.