What are those fools at Roxio thinking? Napster 2.0 will apparently be a stand-alone app like iTunes and Napsters previous incarnation and will employ Windows Media Player including all the charming DRM that comes along with it AND it'll be Windows only. Oh! The humanity!
Releasing an online music store as a stand-alone app under the name Napster is... genius.
Didn't Napster actually try to do that at one point?
Yeah, I think that during Napster's legal woes they were trying to transform it into a legit business but the whole thing went down in flames before it could happen.
I should also clarify something in my previous post. Stand-alone app is good, Windows DRM/WMA is bad.
Although the article did hint that Roxio might be getting a slightly less restrictive l licence than buymusic managed. If they can get reasonable usage rights and a price point close to iTunes then they'll give Apple some real competition. If it's anything like buymusic then down in flames they shall go.
What are those fools at Roxio thinking? Napster 2.0 will apparently be a stand-alone app like iTunes and Napsters previous incarnation and will employ Windows Media Player including all the charming DRM that comes along with it AND it'll be Windows only. Oh! The humanity!
"July 23, 2003 - Roxio, Inc. (Nasdaq:ROXI), The Digital Media Company®, announced today the addition of Larry Kenswil to its board of directors. Mr. Kenswil is currently President of eLabs, a division of Vivendi Universal's Universal Music Group ("UMG"). eLabs is UMG's new media and technologies division, and is responsible for overseeing the company's efforts in new formats and e-commerce as well as developing strategies for protecting copyrights in the digital domain.
Mr. Kenswil has led eLabs since its inception in January 1999. Previously, he was UMG's Executive Vice President, Business and Legal Affairs. Mr. Kenswil sits on the Board of Directors of the Recording Industry Association of America (the "RIAA") and, previously, the Board of the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry ("IFPI"). He is active in government affairs on behalf of the music industry, having testified before both congressional and administration committees."
USA Today reports that early BuyMusic.com customers have found they can't transfer purchased tracks to their portable digital music players. "The Mac-only iTunes has won raves for ease of use, both in burning CDs and transferring songs to Apple's iPod players. But BuyMusic's tracks have started out as unplayable, even on portables lent to the press in a promotional blitz," notes the publication. "We're working on this," said Buy.com CEO Scott Blum, who says the company will have the glitch fixed today and that customers who have bought tracks will receive free re-downloads. USA Today also notes that BuyMusic will not release its first week's download figures, but "it's not millions," Blum said. As you may recall, the iTunes store sold over one million songs in its first week and 6.5 million since April. BuyMusic blocked access to the site for Macintosh users last Friday.
The Net retailer made a splash with a 160-foot-high Times Square billboard featuring a near-naked Tommy Lee
Note to future online music retailers: If an artist's most noteworthy work is "soundtracks for third-rate Tony Hawk Pro Skater clones" then you might not want to base a whole multi-million dollar ad campaign around him.
Don't be too sure. Let's see if any parallel comes to mind:
One company releases an innovative, future-thinking product. It is the first to the market, and is widely successful, even though it's not within the range of many consumers to buy.
Another company releases a knock-off, similar product, but buggier, and not so user-friendly. However, this company manages to put itself within the range of every joker and ex-pornstar out there. The product is wildly successful, the original company starts seeing the effect of its success, and, slowly but surely, becomes less and less competitive.
I just read the article at it quotes Blum as saying the "songs will be recoded to allow transfers." Does this mean that all songs available on the site need to be re-rippped? And if so, how the hell does he plan on getting this done anytime soon?
I just read the article at it quotes Blum as saying the "songs will be recoded to allow transfers." Does this mean that all songs available on the site need to be re-rippped? And if so, how the hell does he plan on getting this done anytime soon?
Maybe just certain files were encoded or wrapped with the wrong SDMI stuff, causing the transfer problems. I don't know if it's something that affets a large majority of the files offered.
Maybe just certain files were encoded or wrapped with the wrong SDMI stuff, causing the transfer problems. I don't know if it's something that affets a large majority of the files offered.
"early customers have found they can't transfer the tunes they buy on BuyMusic.com to digital portables."
"adding that many customers have been calling seeking help."
Apple has sold 6.5 million songs since April; BuyMusic won't release figures, but "it's not millions," Blum says.
I thought it was a bit suspicious that Blum didn't immediately start crowing about how many tracks they'd sold in the days after their launch. Didn't Mr. Blum say that he was expecting to sell a million tracks/day? I was a little worried at first, but I think that BuyMusic.com is a non-issue.
As for Napster 2.0, I don't know. There is certainly tons of name recognition, but the underlying product will have changed so much that
its original fans might not be terribly impressed. Plus, as recognized as the Napster trademark is, it's a name that has been dragged through the mud and has really been out of the spotlight for, what, a couple of years now? Seems like Roxio might have an uphill battle to let Joe/Jane Average know that Napster is now a legal alternative.
As for providing competition to iTMS, it may well do that. But, we really know very, very little about it. No pricing has been mentioned and no word on the license rights. Plus, it's not coming out until Christmas, so Apple still has a bit of time. And, if it really is using Windows Media as its codec of choice, then, IMHO, iTMS already has a leg up on N2.0.
No, the real worry, as always, is the beast from Redmond. Notice that MS has been strangely quiet up until last week when Bill finally mused that Microsoft might want to tie a music download service into Windows Media Player? They do that, and iTMS is toast on the Windows platform.
No, the real worry, as always, is the beast from Redmond. Notice that MS has been strangely quiet up until last week when Bill finally mused that Microsoft might want to tie a music download service into Windows Media Player?
Comments
http://www.atnewyork.com/news/article.php/2240801
Do all of iTunes rivals have to use WMA files because other than AAC there is no viable audio format that can incorporate DRM?
Didn't Napster actually try to do that at one point?
Originally posted by groverat
Releasing an online music store as a stand-alone app under the name Napster is... genius.
Didn't Napster actually try to do that at one point?
Yeah, I think that during Napster's legal woes they were trying to transform it into a legit business but the whole thing went down in flames before it could happen.
I should also clarify something in my previous post. Stand-alone app is good, Windows DRM/WMA is bad.
Although the article did hint that Roxio might be getting a slightly less restrictive l licence than buymusic managed. If they can get reasonable usage rights and a price point close to iTunes then they'll give Apple some real competition. If it's anything like buymusic then down in flames they shall go.
Originally posted by InactionMan
What are those fools at Roxio thinking? Napster 2.0 will apparently be a stand-alone app like iTunes and Napsters previous incarnation and will employ Windows Media Player including all the charming DRM that comes along with it AND it'll be Windows only. Oh! The humanity!
http://www.atnewyork.com/news/article.php/2240801
Do all of iTunes rivals have to use WMA files because other than AAC there is no viable audio format that can incorporate DRM?
expect Apple to try to buy Roxio.
Serious. Napster will be a very tough competitor to compete with no matter what small advantages Apple may offer.
Apple could also benefit from owning their other products and....gasp.... getting rid of Easy CD Creator
"July 23, 2003 - Roxio, Inc. (Nasdaq:ROXI), The Digital Media Company®, announced today the addition of Larry Kenswil to its board of directors. Mr. Kenswil is currently President of eLabs, a division of Vivendi Universal's Universal Music Group ("UMG"). eLabs is UMG's new media and technologies division, and is responsible for overseeing the company's efforts in new formats and e-commerce as well as developing strategies for protecting copyrights in the digital domain.
Mr. Kenswil has led eLabs since its inception in January 1999. Previously, he was UMG's Executive Vice President, Business and Legal Affairs. Mr. Kenswil sits on the Board of Directors of the Recording Industry Association of America (the "RIAA") and, previously, the Board of the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry ("IFPI"). He is active in government affairs on behalf of the music industry, having testified before both congressional and administration committees."
From MacMinute:
USA Today reports that early BuyMusic.com customers have found they can't transfer purchased tracks to their portable digital music players. "The Mac-only iTunes has won raves for ease of use, both in burning CDs and transferring songs to Apple's iPod players. But BuyMusic's tracks have started out as unplayable, even on portables lent to the press in a promotional blitz," notes the publication. "We're working on this," said Buy.com CEO Scott Blum, who says the company will have the glitch fixed today and that customers who have bought tracks will receive free re-downloads. USA Today also notes that BuyMusic will not release its first week's download figures, but "it's not millions," Blum said. As you may recall, the iTunes store sold over one million songs in its first week and 6.5 million since April. BuyMusic blocked access to the site for Macintosh users last Friday.
Link to USA Today Article:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/20...buymusic_x.htm
Originally posted by MCQ
And BuyMusic hits its first snag:
"And it isssss......***sound of falling tree*** DEAD."
The Net retailer made a splash with a 160-foot-high Times Square billboard featuring a near-naked Tommy Lee
Note to future online music retailers: If an artist's most noteworthy work is "soundtracks for third-rate Tony Hawk Pro Skater clones" then you might not want to base a whole multi-million dollar ad campaign around him.
One company releases an innovative, future-thinking product. It is the first to the market, and is widely successful, even though it's not within the range of many consumers to buy.
Another company releases a knock-off, similar product, but buggier, and not so user-friendly. However, this company manages to put itself within the range of every joker and ex-pornstar out there. The product is wildly successful, the original company starts seeing the effect of its success, and, slowly but surely, becomes less and less competitive.
Nah, I can't think of any.
already have a widely used product AND have the patience to see red figures at the bottom line for a couple of years
Originally posted by MCQ
And BuyMusic hits its first snag:
From MacMinute:
Link to USA Today Article:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/20...buymusic_x.htm
I just read the article at it quotes Blum as saying the "songs will be recoded to allow transfers." Does this mean that all songs available on the site need to be re-rippped? And if so, how the hell does he plan on getting this done anytime soon?
Originally posted by InactionMan
I just read the article at it quotes Blum as saying the "songs will be recoded to allow transfers." Does this mean that all songs available on the site need to be re-rippped? And if so, how the hell does he plan on getting this done anytime soon?
Maybe just certain files were encoded or wrapped with the wrong SDMI stuff, causing the transfer problems. I don't know if it's something that affets a large majority of the files offered.
http://www.buymusic.com/searchresult...rtist&skdbg=12
Originally posted by MCQ
Maybe just certain files were encoded or wrapped with the wrong SDMI stuff, causing the transfer problems. I don't know if it's something that affets a large majority of the files offered.
"early customers have found they can't transfer the tunes they buy on BuyMusic.com to digital portables."
"adding that many customers have been calling seeking help."
Sounds like all the songs
Originally posted by Ti Fighter
"early customers have found they can't transfer the tunes they buy on BuyMusic.com to digital portables."
"adding that many customers have been calling seeking help."
Sounds like all the songs
Noone at the company checked this simple feature before they went online?
Yeah. Sure sound like a stable and serious buisness to me.
Soon all their assets (the URL) will be up for sale.
Apple has sold 6.5 million songs since April; BuyMusic won't release figures, but "it's not millions," Blum says.
I thought it was a bit suspicious that Blum didn't immediately start crowing about how many tracks they'd sold in the days after their launch. Didn't Mr. Blum say that he was expecting to sell a million tracks/day? I was a little worried at first, but I think that BuyMusic.com is a non-issue.
As for Napster 2.0, I don't know. There is certainly tons of name recognition, but the underlying product will have changed so much that
its original fans might not be terribly impressed. Plus, as recognized as the Napster trademark is, it's a name that has been dragged through the mud and has really been out of the spotlight for, what, a couple of years now? Seems like Roxio might have an uphill battle to let Joe/Jane Average know that Napster is now a legal alternative.
As for providing competition to iTMS, it may well do that. But, we really know very, very little about it. No pricing has been mentioned and no word on the license rights. Plus, it's not coming out until Christmas, so Apple still has a bit of time. And, if it really is using Windows Media as its codec of choice, then, IMHO, iTMS already has a leg up on N2.0.
No, the real worry, as always, is the beast from Redmond. Notice that MS has been strangely quiet up until last week when Bill finally mused that Microsoft might want to tie a music download service into Windows Media Player? They do that, and iTMS is toast on the Windows platform.
My 2 1/2¢. ;-)
Originally posted by highfalutintodd
No, the real worry, as always, is the beast from Redmond. Notice that MS has been strangely quiet up until last week when Bill finally mused that Microsoft might want to tie a music download service into Windows Media Player?
For third parties to use.