I'm just gonna go ahead and call it a hoax. The whole story is shite. There is no Apple/Beatz deal. Its a marketing ploy by beatz to get a higher price out of some other potential buyer.
Eh, I wouldn’t say that just yet.
I WOULD say that if WWDC rolls around and nothing happens, though. Then the discussion begins on who gets fired for claiming it.
In the case of Beats... Apple needs to revamp the iPod line. They could easily ditch the entry iPods and integrate an iPod into Beats headphones. Put a battery over the headband and have the songs stored in the headphones with no wires. The iPhone can control it wirelessly and push songs to it...
Thanks, Marvin, I love you're thinking. It could be a very inventive way to keep the iPod line fresh. iPod Touch, nano & shuffle stay essentially the same. "Beats by Apple" is a multi-configurable product (would a wireless reciever be too heavy?) as you mentioned.
I, personally, would like to have wireless headphones that play well with my (Apple) TV. Not sure that I'm ready to pay Apple's premium but if could be one more easily-added-function of "Beats by Apple."
Beats can provide the following services for consumers:
Smart smoke alarms, wireless speakers, wifi hotspot, wireless router/modem which in turn will get streaming data from the apple store and provide music and ad-hoc television programing.
Beats will also provide wearable medical devices that will double as headphones. These devices will keep tabs on what we eat, exercise, vital signs and so forth. Information will be shared live to medical providers in case of emergencies and serve up telemetry about the individuals's health in an instance.
"Then you'd think lots of tech companies (like Google and Facebook) would be after Beats."
You'd think so, wouldn't you. I'd add Amazon, Spotify, Pandora, iTunes Radio ... oops!
But wait, all of these companies (and many others) already do curation -- for example, Amazon's: "People who bought Product A, also bought Product B, also bought Product C, and also bought Product D,
I've been observing Apple for 36 years * -- and Apple never invented anything. Rather, Apple looks around, observes what they (Apple people) want, what other people [should] want (where the puck is going to be) -- then evaluates the solutions that are available to satisfy those wants. Usually, the available solutions are crap -- or mediocre, at best. In some cases, Apple will decide to enter the market and offer an Apple solution.
* I tie it together in the final reel.
I hate to quote overlong posts but it's hard to edit on an iPhone.
Sorry, I understand -- will try to be brief. But you are making simple, broad assertions about a complex topic.
Yes. We know the marketing schtick that beats claims it does. Whether it does or not. It's based on a company they bought for a few million.
Beats acquired the Mog Streaming Service in July 2012. Another part of MOG was sold separately to someone else, and MOG still exists as an independent company:
On July 2, 2012, Beats announced it had acquired the online music service MOG, in a purchase reported to have been between $10 million to $16 million. Beats stated that the acquisition was part of the company's goal to develop a "truly end-to-end music experience." The acquisition did not include the company's blog and advertising network, the MOG Music Network,[1][2] which was sold in a separate transaction to the broadcasting company Townsquare Media in August 2012.[3] MOG initially indicated that it would continue to operate independently with no immediate change in service.[2]
Soon after, Beats started to develop a new music service
A few months later in December 2012, the company hired Trent Reznor of the band Nine Inch Nails to serve as its Chief Creative Officer, and to help develop a new music service codenamed "Daisy". As opposed to its competitors such as Spotify, Daisy planned to use a combination of personalization based on user listening habits, in combination with expert music curators. The company initially announced a launch by late 2013.[4] The company had hired music industry members, radio personalities, and songwriters to serve as a music curation team for the service, led by former Clear Channel Communications executive and KIIS-FM music director Julie Pilat.[5][6]
This is what Beats offers -- with the MOG streaming service (acquired for ~$16 Million) being only the streaming piece. Beats either already had, hired, built or acquired the other parts.
The deals (and relationships) with the record labels and the library of over 20 million songs have value. I have read both that the "deals are transferrable" and that "the deals are not transferrable" to Apple. Regardless, it appears that the dealmakers are part of the Apple acquisition.
Features
Because Beats has deals with all major record label groups, the service offers a library of over 20 million songs that can be streamed on-demand by users. Users can download songs for local playback, but due to Digital rights management, they will not remain playable after expiration of the subscription. The service uses a personalization system combining recommendations based on listening habits and algorithms with human curation and playlists from music professionals, including other "guest" curators, such as Rolling Stone, Rap Radar, and Pitchfork.[9] Song searches prioritize the original, master recordings of songs over other versions (such as covers). A feature known as "The Sentence" allows users to generate playlists by filling four blanks in a sentence with words describing various activities, moods, and genres.[4][7]
Furthermore the idea of human curation is not new, nor is it patentable. Nor to my mind is it possible.
I never claimed the idea was new or patentable. I do believe the implementation of the process may be patentable. I definitely believe human curation is possible!
There are literally trillions* of possibilities of song orderings. The potential ordering of N tracks is N! 10 tracks can be ordered 3,628,800 ways. 100 tracks can be ordered in
9.3326215443944e+157 ways.
Humans aren't going to do that.
* actually far more as you can see by the 100! figure.
You are correct that humans aren't going to do that -- that would be 20 million songs curating 1,000, or so, humans.
But, 1,000, or so, humans, who are experts in the music field, can certainly put together playlists based on: a mood, genre, activity, location, the type of other persons involved ... then, those playlists can be algorithmically combined with other playlists, with your preferences and listening history to create a tailored playlist for you at that particular moment.
Sure, there are many choices for each entry in the tailored playlist -- but the curation process does not need to narrow a playlist entry down to only the absolute best single song. Rather, it needs to select a song that is a good choice that is appropriate for you at this moment. Rinse, and repeat for the next song.
Yes. We know the marketing schtick that beats claims it does. Whether it does or not. It's based on a company they bought for a few million.
As illustrated above what Beats offers is a new service developed after the MOG acquisition that is much, much more than what "it bought" for a "few million".
You seem not to trust "marketing shtick" or the "claims" about the services of a company that makes them.
It appears that Beats is profitable, well-connected and a respected company.
I would only remind you that Apple is a company with "marketing shtick" and it makes "claims" about the services it offers -- one of which is far inferior to the Beats offering.
That's cool, but I think the curation process is actually more important. The museum with the most paintings is not the best place to go. The food app with the most recipes is certainly not the best recipe app. The one with a nice collection of the best recipes is, like Jamie Oliver or The Photo Cookbook.
Yes, with Apple's Beats app (their subscription service) you can search for any artist you like, but the secret sauce will be 100s of clever tastemakers that have carefully crafted lists to go with that artist. Having algorithms for certain things is useful, but algorithms are no substitute for human talent when it comes to creating lists of songs when you have the right people. You can't just build the same thing as that, it takes time and deep industry connections to hire all of that talent. But not if you buy a company that has those people, has done the hard work for you, and will be working for you when the deal is inked.
And they get a money making headphone brand and a great dealmaker thrown in on the deal. That combination of things is certainly worth 3.2B.
And they can use a great content dealmaker to try to get deals inked in other areas like TV, and yes, they can build on the Beats brand by further improving the build quality and audio quality of those headphones year over year and be the fashionable market leader for after market headphones. They would likely continue to bundle EarPods with iPhones, but they will surely convince some iPhone buyers to add a pair of Beats at additional cost.
I think when we carefully consider these various factors a 3.2B Beats acquisition looks like a better deal every day.
I'm not so convinced. If you have a party or event on, then having a DJ (curator) is very important. But he has to be there, to feel the vibe of the room and respond to it. Pre-curated just won't do. And young people, do they want an expertly selected 3 hours of Jazz greats (or of anything), or do they just want to listen to whatever their friends are Tweeting, or whatever the top 10 are?
I admire expertise in all forms, including music curation, but I don't think it is the be-all and end-all solution to iTunes catalog organizational/discovery problems. It's one more arrow in the quiver, and not a particularly general purpose one at that. They already tried "iTunes Essentials" which were basically curated selections from different genres, I wonder how successful they were, I haven't seen any figures, but don't remember them on the top sales charts either.
If you are there and feel the vibe of the room -- what's to prevent you from creating another playlist as the mood changes? One of Beats advantages Is that it's dynamic, and on demand!
That comparison isn't going to fly. But I think if this guy could manage to get Apple a TV subscription deal I'd certainly consider him well worth this acquisition. With the right TV subscription deal I think the future of television is, without doubt, a great all in one subsidised TV as part of a contract. Just like how signing a contract gets the average person the best phone on the market today, future TV hardware could work just like that. Not to mention that no matter how good an Apple TV set top box is going forward TVs themselves will eventually perform all of the functions of these boxes and thusly render them redundant. It's only a matter if time. In 20 years time every TV on the planet will be a smart TV 5 times smarter than the smartest TV that exists today. IMO Apple has no choice but to be in the smart TV business. And you can bet your life Apple knows this and wants in. If they can get the content I see iTV getting green lit. If they get the content the writing's on the wall.
Smart tvs? People said that about fridges thirty years ago; we're still waiting.
Dr. Dre has been anything BUT silent. Bragging about being the first hip-hop billionaire.
I'm not a lawyer but I'd say that video offers zero evidence that Dre's comments are referring to an Apple buyout of Beats for $3.2 billion. I don't recall Apple or Beats were mentioned at all. Even if we could get a verifiable time on when that video was taken (not simply uploaded) there is no way to prove, based on the video alone, that his comments refer to either Apple buying Beats for $3.2 billion. On top of that even with the proposed buyout this site — which I've heard over-estimates the net worth of celebrities — has Dre at 4/5th of that billion dollar goal, although I suppose that Dre could use that pre-taxed value to say he was technically a billionaire even if for only a moment.
Full internet!? Wow, sounds good. Btw all modern LCD TVs make movies looks like trash and completely mess with the 24 fps frame rate. Ask any well known cinematographer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RkNvxo42D0 Inaccurate colours, silly contract, odd frequencies, motion blur.
Beats is turning into a pure Hollywood nightmare? You're not making sense.
Hollywood- where's these Mega deals happen all the time based upon friendships or family relations resulting in drek-(read Lovine being Jobs' good friend). Meanwhile the price is bloviated based upon Beats crappy headphones and a subscription service that small and that new.
I will post a picture of Fonzi jumping the shark if this deal goes through.
Point to anything in the in video that proves he is talking about Apple. I don't even think Beats gets mentioned.
I'd at least like to see proof that the video was made — not just uploaded to the internet — right after that rumour dropped; which in itself would be weird since I doubt Dre needs a rumour to hit before knowing how talks with Apple are going, especially if Beats had been in negotiations with Apple for months.
PS: Forbes states that Dre would still be short of $1 billion by $200 million if this deal goes through at $3.2 billion.
Comments
Eh, I wouldn’t say that just yet.
I WOULD say that if WWDC rolls around and nothing happens, though. Then the discussion begins on who gets fired for claiming it.
In the case of Beats... Apple needs to revamp the iPod line. They could easily ditch the entry iPods and integrate an iPod into Beats headphones. Put a battery over the headband and have the songs stored in the headphones with no wires. The iPhone can control it wirelessly and push songs to it...
Thanks, Marvin, I love you're thinking. It could be a very inventive way to keep the iPod line fresh. iPod Touch, nano & shuffle stay essentially the same. "Beats by Apple" is a multi-configurable product (would a wireless reciever be too heavy?) as you mentioned.
I, personally, would like to have wireless headphones that play well with my (Apple) TV. Not sure that I'm ready to pay Apple's premium but if could be one more easily-added-function of "Beats by Apple."
Beats can provide the following services for consumers:
Smart smoke alarms, wireless speakers, wifi hotspot, wireless router/modem which in turn will get streaming data from the apple store and provide music and ad-hoc television programing.
Beats will also provide wearable medical devices that will double as headphones. These devices will keep tabs on what we eat, exercise, vital signs and so forth. Information will be shared live to medical providers in case of emergencies and serve up telemetry about the individuals's health in an instance.
Sorry, I understand -- will try to be brief. But you are making simple, broad assertions about a complex topic.
Beats acquired the Mog Streaming Service in July 2012. Another part of MOG was sold separately to someone else, and MOG still exists as an independent company:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beats_Music
Soon after, Beats started to develop a new music service
This is what Beats offers -- with the MOG streaming service (acquired for ~$16 Million) being only the streaming piece. Beats either already had, hired, built or acquired the other parts.
The deals (and relationships) with the record labels and the library of over 20 million songs have value. I have read both that the "deals are transferrable" and that "the deals are not transferrable" to Apple. Regardless, it appears that the dealmakers are part of the Apple acquisition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beats_Music
I never claimed the idea was new or patentable. I do believe the implementation of the process may be patentable. I definitely believe human curation is possible!
You are correct that humans aren't going to do that -- that would be 20 million songs curating 1,000, or so, humans.
But, 1,000, or so, humans, who are experts in the music field, can certainly put together playlists based on: a mood, genre, activity, location, the type of other persons involved ... then, those playlists can be algorithmically combined with other playlists, with your preferences and listening history to create a tailored playlist for you at that particular moment.
Sure, there are many choices for each entry in the tailored playlist -- but the curation process does not need to narrow a playlist entry down to only the absolute best single song. Rather, it needs to select a song that is a good choice that is appropriate for you at this moment. Rinse, and repeat for the next song.
As illustrated above what Beats offers is a new service developed after the MOG acquisition that is much, much more than what "it bought" for a "few million".
You seem not to trust "marketing shtick" or the "claims" about the services of a company that makes them.
It appears that Beats is profitable, well-connected and a respected company.
I would only remind you that Apple is a company with "marketing shtick" and it makes "claims" about the services it offers -- one of which is far inferior to the Beats offering.
If you are there and feel the vibe of the room -- what's to prevent you from creating another playlist as the mood changes? One of Beats advantages Is that it's dynamic, and on demand!
Smart tvs? People said that about fridges thirty years ago; we're still waiting.
But if Apple confirms a deal with Beats, then the video will provide conclusive evidence.
Bloviated—nice one!
Pots and kettles.
How? It's no more evidence than a palm reader has powers if they say you'll meet someone new and then it happens.
But if Apple confirms a deal with Beats, then the video will provide conclusive evidence.
How? It's no more evidence than a palm reader has powers if they say you'll meet someone new and then it happens.
Because of the video.
Point to anything in the in video that proves he is talking about Apple. I don't even think Beats gets mentioned.
I'd at least like to see proof that the video was made — not just uploaded to the internet — right after that rumour dropped; which in itself would be weird since I doubt Dre needs a rumour to hit before knowing how talks with Apple are going, especially if Beats had been in negotiations with Apple for months.
PS: Forbes states that Dre would still be short of $1 billion by $200 million if this deal goes through at $3.2 billion.