Okay, seriously now. I'm not going to pay a cent for a song with digital right management encumbering my fair use. If I can strip that away with no fuss, I might consider buying. So DRM, in my mind, is the first thing that needs to go, irrespective of codec.
Hmmm...how encumbered is your fair usage by the current iTMS DRM usage policy?
Quote:
Next important step is to have choice in portable players.
What do you want in a "choice" of music players?
Quote:
That is easiest to accomplish with a format that is patent- and therefore license-free. Currently that means Ogg Vorbis.
Perhaps what they should be doing is educating consumers as to WHY iTMS and ACC is better.
Let's see, Apple has something like 50-70% of the music player market. Seems that their customers are fairly well educated as to the benefits of iPof, iTunes and iTMS.
Quote:
But in typical Apple style, all their ads are oblique and more focused on style than consumer education of their products.
And yet, amazingly, they appear to be working. Most consumers are not "spec junkies". They see:
- small, white, cool
- $300-$500
- 10,000- 20,000 songs
- sold
or
- smaller, groovy colors, cool
- $250
- 1000 songs
- sold
The "algebra" most consumers do is likely to be exactly that simple.
Quote:
Personally I think TBWA/Chiat/Day (they're still with them aren't they?) needs to get off their asses and produce an EFFECTIVE commercial. Dancing with iPods is cool and all, but says nothing about iTMS or any features of the iPod besides "hey look its a music player".
Apple has sold over 2 million iPods in 2 years, and continue to sell them well. The iPod Mini sold 100,000 pre-orders. I think Apple and Chiat-Day are doing just fine.
That's the real kickaha though, if a company like MS *can* hold out a loss-leading music store for long enough, it could be all they need to seriously mess up apple's market dominance.
And gain the unwanted attention of the U.S. Justice Department.
Quote:
as soon as .wma starts to gain a strong foothold, iTMS will be in trouble.
Perhaps, but so far, it is not gaining a foothold. The game is far from over, but Apple has a GREAT head start and (it appears) and fighting spirit.
It'll definitly being an interesting year or two. WMA hasn't done well yet, but Microsoft hasn't stepped in yet. Apple has to, and has been, selling as many iPods as possible which will help combat MS when they step in and people find out they can't use their music store. iTMS is the most popular, which goes hand-in-hand with iPod sales...which are dependent on iTMS popularity Chicken or the egg? Ok the egg (iPod)
MS has the advantage but every day Apple is growing stronger. I think that in the long run Apple will lose, but it'll be a long slow decay from PC manufacturers shoving Napster in peoples faces or fast depending on how fast MS shoves MSMusicStore in their face.
I'm guessing relatively slow decay just like happened to Apple in the computer market.
The thing I am trying to figure out is who is going to sell WMA for a profit?
This, I think, is the genius in Apple's move. They set the price for music so low that it will be difficult (impossible) for anyone to actually make any money selling the music (except the record companies of course).
Microsoft is only going to get so many dopes to sign up and lose money for it just to make WMA dominant.
So you have to have something else to sell...like hardware for example. So who might that be? Well, Dell, Gateway and HP come to mind. They are (primarily) hardware companies. So okay, start your own music store to sell your hardware. But you have a problem, how do you do that? Well, easy, Microsoft has the whole audio codec, music player and DRM stuff handled for you. Except they are selling it to EVERYONE. So now selling the music is no guarantee anyone will actually buy YOUR hardware, so why go to the trouble.
Microsoft is a possibility here...do like XBox. But they might be cautious for two reasons...pissing off the people they've licensed this stuff to and are now competing directly with, and the Justice Department who might be very curious about Microsoft potentially using one monopoly position to create another.
And yet, amazingly, they appear to be working. Most consumers are not "spec junkies". They see:
- small, white, cool
- $300-$500
- 10,000- 20,000 songs
- sold
[/B]
Actually no, they don't see that. Not on the television commericals anyway. They only see that if the commercial actually gets them to go to the web page or local CompUSA or something.
Now don't get me wrong, the iPod commericals are engaging, bold and memorable but all they say is "look at me i'm cool" with their visual style, and "iPod + iTunes, Mac or PC, apple.com" in text. I suppose some people may hop up off their couch and run to see what it is but many more don't. How many more might hop up on their couch if the ad was positioned (or at least shown in text) that you can have 10000 songs in your pocket? Or that it has some PDF functions? or that it functions as an external hard drive as well? See what I'm getting at? Right now really all they do is re-enforce whatever word of mouth/media hype the consumer may already have heard.
Case in point, I've been teaching a Flash-based class to Illustration students and when I brought my iPod in and plugged it into the firewire port to transfer stuff they were amazed. They had no idea it could that. These are hip mac using art school kids, quite possibly THE ideal demographic yet they were uninformed of this basic (yet very cool) feature. Stuff like that really helps justify the price since its more than "some fancy new $300 walkman".
I suppose some people may hop up off their couch and run to see what it is but many more don't. How many more might hop up on their couch if the ad was positioned (or at least shown in text) that you can have 10000 songs in your pocket? Or that it has some PDF functions? or that it functions as an external hard drive as well? See what I'm getting at? Right now really all they do is re-enforce whatever word of mouth/media hype the consumer may already have heard.
well there's a lot of word-of-mouth working. last semester at college i only saw a couple other ipods, and no one really knew what they were. now everyone steals a glance, theyre everywhere, and people come up and theyre like "those are so cool...."
and it's not like EVERY SINGLE person is going to buy an ipod. i think what theyre doing now is perfect, and its obviously working.
Actually no, they don't see that. Not on the television commericals anyway.
The question is do they have to? How many commercials do? Not many at all.
Quote:
Now don't get me wrong, the iPod commericals are engaging, bold and memorable but all they say is "look at me i'm cool" with their visual style, and "iPod + iTunes, Mac or PC, apple.com" in text.
And maybe that's all the NEED to say.
Quote:
I suppose some people may hop up off their couch and run to see what it is but many more don't.
Oh? Do you have the break down on this? Is your reasoning simply, "I don't so no one else must" or, better yet, " I just don't think the ads work, so they must not"?
Quote:
How many more might hop up on their couch if the ad was positioned (or at least shown in text) that you can have 10000 songs in your pocket?
I have no idea. Maybe some. Maybe none.
Quote:
Or that it has some PDF functions? or that it functions as an external hard drive as well?
You have 15-30 seconds to sell something. Not much time at all.
Quote:
See what I'm getting at?
Yes, I see exactly what you are getting. I just think you are wrong.
Quote:
Case in point, I've been teaching a Flash-based class to Illustration students and when I brought my iPod in and plugged it into the firewire port to transfer stuff they were amazed. They had no idea it could that. These are hip mac using art school kids, quite possibly THE ideal demographic yet they were uninformed of this basic (yet very cool) feature.
Have any gone out to buy it now? Why? Why not? Did they buy just because of that feature? Seems like a fairly small demographic that is going to buy a $400 portable FireWire drive vs. those that just like music.
Quote:
Stuff like that really helps justify the price since its more than "some fancy new $300 walkman".
My guess? Just a guess. 95% of the people buying iPods bought them and use them exclusively as music players.
Hmmm...how encumbered is your fair usage by the current iTMS DRM usage policy?
What do you want in a "choice" of music players?
(regarding Ogg codec support)
Okay, come back to reality. Not going to happen.
I know iTMS DRM usage policy allows a lot of things, but as far as I know, you don't get to choose the program you play the songs on, nor do you have any other portable player choice than iPod to play your DRM'd songs. It's about the same as in the WMA camp, but the terms are a bit less restrictive, the (only allowed) portable player is better, and (the only allowed) software is fairly good.
Is the word "choice" so hard to understand? If I pay for music I want to be able to play it with a variety of (software or hardware) players. Not just one.
There is Ogg support in iRiver and Rio players.
There are small music stores that sell non-DRM'd Ogg or MP3 (which, though common, is still licensed codec) music. I even saw a music store where you can buy raw CD data and encode as you want (or have them do it for you).
How sure are you when you say, "not going to happen"?
Is the word "choice" so hard to understand? If I pay for music I want to be able to play it with a variety of (software or hardware) players. Not just one.
Nothings stopping you from burning a CD and transcoding back to whatever you want. What i'm hearing is defeatism from people. As long as we can burn Redbook you have a backup that can be repurposed. I don't feel like my "investment" in music is limited in that many ways. I like that.
Until there is some sort of Unified Codec we're just going to have to duke it out. This is the fault of the music industry. They could have guided this and avoided "format hell" but once again you have "reactionaries" rather than "visionaries".
Is the word "choice" so hard to understand? If I pay for music I want to be able to play it with a variety of (software or hardware) players. Not just one.
It is not that "choice" is difficult to understand. It's just that many people throw that out as if it is the "holy grail" of...well anything. What I am asking is what you will gain by having a "choice"?
There are three things where you could have a choice that you presently do not:
1. The store you buy from
2. The (desktop) player you use
3. The (portable) device you use
What would be the benefits of choice in any (or all) of these areas?
There are probably three things that I would seek to gain through "choice" (which most people mean to be "more competition"), these are:
1. Price
2. Quality
3. Features
4. Service
Let's examine the store first...
Choice/competition/music portability/compatability would gain you?
Price? They are all the exact same price.
Quality? They all appear to have the exact same quality of music (encoduing, bit-rate, etc.) Arguably iTMS is better here.
Features? iTMS may lose here in terms of not having a "subscribtion" offering as the others do. Music selection? iTMS has more than the others, and likely, over the long run will not have anything different because the source of the music is always the same. iTMS also may have some exclusive content that the others do not.
Service? Hard to say at this point.
Now...the (desktop) player...
Price? iTunes is free. Some of the others are not.
Quality? iTunes is arguably the best here.
Features? I don't know personally, but from what I have read, again iTunes wins this. And it seems unlikely that others will add any new significant features that a) users really want, and b) Apple cannot easily replicate
Services? Again hard to say.
Now the portable device...
1. Price? Well...MAYBE...but here not that much price competition anyway. Apple has products (at prices) that cover what probably 90% of the market wants. This will likely only improve as they drive the price of iPod Mini down.
2. Quality? Not sure here. They all seem pretty equal. Probably an edge to Apple.
3. Features? Again somewhat subjective, but edge probably to Apple for both iPod and Mini.
4. Service? Not sure.
So, you want "choice". That's fine. Nothing wrong with that. But choice without actually having any real differentiators is simply an illusion.
If apple enabled .WMA on the iPod, don't you think they would kill every other digital music player on the market?
If Ipod is the true profit maker, then why not just wipe the competition clean by supporting .wma?
The iPod doesn't need WMA support to be the market leader. On the contrary, Apple needs to lead the charge when it comes to companies breaking their dependence on Microsoft.
If apple enabled .WMA on the iPod, don't you think they would kill every other digital music player on the market?
If Ipod is the true profit maker, then why not just wipe the competition clean by supporting .wma?
Because doing so would kill the iPod. I wish I had time to explain this (yet again). But briefly...Apple is already the market leader...iPod is already killing the competitors...this is a format war (AAC+FairPlay vs. WMA). You don't win wars by forfeiting.
Is Napster gaining steaming or is Napster a steaming pile? A recent news article suggested the latter...Napster is actually losing money. In fact, if they get any more customers, they might have to shut down.
The money spent trying to expand to Europe, the money spent to expand and maintain the servers, the money spent advertising...Napster won't get that kind of money through $10/month memberships.
Napster should be going for profit...because they have no other reasons or motives behind their business, but they're not making any. Apple, on the other hand, isn't going for profit. Apple's trying to sell iPods (which is the moneymaker) and to gain mindshare to help sell Macs.
Apple has the more thought-out and elaborate plan.
exactly. look at microsoft. when they could have settled on common file formats, they settled on their own (.doc comes to mind), and made the industry come back to them. apple will wage a similar war in video compression formats with pixlet, just you wait and see.
exactly. look at microsoft. when they could have settled on common file formats, they settled on their own (.doc comes to mind), and made the industry come back to them. apple will wage a similar war in video compression formats with pixlet, just you wait and see.
Ok...please stop talking about Pixlet. Pixlet is not for consumers.
Comments
Originally posted by Gon
Okay, seriously now. I'm not going to pay a cent for a song with digital right management encumbering my fair use. If I can strip that away with no fuss, I might consider buying. So DRM, in my mind, is the first thing that needs to go, irrespective of codec.
Hmmm...how encumbered is your fair usage by the current iTMS DRM usage policy?
Next important step is to have choice in portable players.
What do you want in a "choice" of music players?
That is easiest to accomplish with a format that is patent- and therefore license-free. Currently that means Ogg Vorbis.
Okay, come back to reality. Not going to happen.
Originally posted by dviant
Perhaps what they should be doing is educating consumers as to WHY iTMS and ACC is better.
Let's see, Apple has something like 50-70% of the music player market. Seems that their customers are fairly well educated as to the benefits of iPof, iTunes and iTMS.
But in typical Apple style, all their ads are oblique and more focused on style than consumer education of their products.
And yet, amazingly, they appear to be working. Most consumers are not "spec junkies". They see:
- small, white, cool
- $300-$500
- 10,000- 20,000 songs
- sold
or
- smaller, groovy colors, cool
- $250
- 1000 songs
- sold
The "algebra" most consumers do is likely to be exactly that simple.
Personally I think TBWA/Chiat/Day (they're still with them aren't they?) needs to get off their asses and produce an EFFECTIVE commercial. Dancing with iPods is cool and all, but says nothing about iTMS or any features of the iPod besides "hey look its a music player".
Apple has sold over 2 million iPods in 2 years, and continue to sell them well. The iPod Mini sold 100,000 pre-orders. I think Apple and Chiat-Day are doing just fine.
Originally posted by Wrong Robot
That's the real kickaha though, if a company like MS *can* hold out a loss-leading music store for long enough, it could be all they need to seriously mess up apple's market dominance.
And gain the unwanted attention of the U.S. Justice Department.
as soon as .wma starts to gain a strong foothold, iTMS will be in trouble.
Perhaps, but so far, it is not gaining a foothold. The game is far from over, but Apple has a GREAT head start and (it appears) and fighting spirit.
Originally posted by rok
it might ALWAYS work at a loss.
until ipods hit critical mass and 'we' take over the digital world. i say 4th quarter '04 for critical mass.
MS has the advantage but every day Apple is growing stronger. I think that in the long run Apple will lose, but it'll be a long slow decay from PC manufacturers shoving Napster in peoples faces or fast depending on how fast MS shoves MSMusicStore in their face.
I'm guessing relatively slow decay just like happened to Apple in the computer market.
This, I think, is the genius in Apple's move. They set the price for music so low that it will be difficult (impossible) for anyone to actually make any money selling the music (except the record companies of course).
Microsoft is only going to get so many dopes to sign up and lose money for it just to make WMA dominant.
So you have to have something else to sell...like hardware for example. So who might that be? Well, Dell, Gateway and HP come to mind. They are (primarily) hardware companies. So okay, start your own music store to sell your hardware. But you have a problem, how do you do that? Well, easy, Microsoft has the whole audio codec, music player and DRM stuff handled for you. Except they are selling it to EVERYONE. So now selling the music is no guarantee anyone will actually buy YOUR hardware, so why go to the trouble.
Microsoft is a possibility here...do like XBox. But they might be cautious for two reasons...pissing off the people they've licensed this stuff to and are now competing directly with, and the Justice Department who might be very curious about Microsoft potentially using one monopoly position to create another.
And yet, amazingly, they appear to be working. Most consumers are not "spec junkies". They see:
- small, white, cool
- $300-$500
- 10,000- 20,000 songs
- sold
[/B]
Actually no, they don't see that. Not on the television commericals anyway. They only see that if the commercial actually gets them to go to the web page or local CompUSA or something.
Now don't get me wrong, the iPod commericals are engaging, bold and memorable but all they say is "look at me i'm cool" with their visual style, and "iPod + iTunes, Mac or PC, apple.com" in text. I suppose some people may hop up off their couch and run to see what it is but many more don't. How many more might hop up on their couch if the ad was positioned (or at least shown in text) that you can have 10000 songs in your pocket? Or that it has some PDF functions? or that it functions as an external hard drive as well? See what I'm getting at? Right now really all they do is re-enforce whatever word of mouth/media hype the consumer may already have heard.
Case in point, I've been teaching a Flash-based class to Illustration students and when I brought my iPod in and plugged it into the firewire port to transfer stuff they were amazed. They had no idea it could that. These are hip mac using art school kids, quite possibly THE ideal demographic yet they were uninformed of this basic (yet very cool) feature. Stuff like that really helps justify the price since its more than "some fancy new $300 walkman".
Originally posted by dviant
I suppose some people may hop up off their couch and run to see what it is but many more don't. How many more might hop up on their couch if the ad was positioned (or at least shown in text) that you can have 10000 songs in your pocket? Or that it has some PDF functions? or that it functions as an external hard drive as well? See what I'm getting at? Right now really all they do is re-enforce whatever word of mouth/media hype the consumer may already have heard.
well there's a lot of word-of-mouth working. last semester at college i only saw a couple other ipods, and no one really knew what they were. now everyone steals a glance, theyre everywhere, and people come up and theyre like "those are so cool...."
and it's not like EVERY SINGLE person is going to buy an ipod. i think what theyre doing now is perfect, and its obviously working.
Originally posted by dviant
Actually no, they don't see that. Not on the television commericals anyway.
The question is do they have to? How many commercials do? Not many at all.
Now don't get me wrong, the iPod commericals are engaging, bold and memorable but all they say is "look at me i'm cool" with their visual style, and "iPod + iTunes, Mac or PC, apple.com" in text.
And maybe that's all the NEED to say.
I suppose some people may hop up off their couch and run to see what it is but many more don't.
Oh? Do you have the break down on this? Is your reasoning simply, "I don't so no one else must" or, better yet, " I just don't think the ads work, so they must not"?
How many more might hop up on their couch if the ad was positioned (or at least shown in text) that you can have 10000 songs in your pocket?
I have no idea. Maybe some. Maybe none.
Or that it has some PDF functions? or that it functions as an external hard drive as well?
You have 15-30 seconds to sell something. Not much time at all.
See what I'm getting at?
Yes, I see exactly what you are getting. I just think you are wrong.
Case in point, I've been teaching a Flash-based class to Illustration students and when I brought my iPod in and plugged it into the firewire port to transfer stuff they were amazed. They had no idea it could that. These are hip mac using art school kids, quite possibly THE ideal demographic yet they were uninformed of this basic (yet very cool) feature.
Have any gone out to buy it now? Why? Why not? Did they buy just because of that feature? Seems like a fairly small demographic that is going to buy a $400 portable FireWire drive vs. those that just like music.
Stuff like that really helps justify the price since its more than "some fancy new $300 walkman".
My guess? Just a guess. 95% of the people buying iPods bought them and use them exclusively as music players.
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Hmmm...how encumbered is your fair usage by the current iTMS DRM usage policy?
What do you want in a "choice" of music players?
(regarding Ogg codec support)
Okay, come back to reality. Not going to happen.
I know iTMS DRM usage policy allows a lot of things, but as far as I know, you don't get to choose the program you play the songs on, nor do you have any other portable player choice than iPod to play your DRM'd songs. It's about the same as in the WMA camp, but the terms are a bit less restrictive, the (only allowed) portable player is better, and (the only allowed) software is fairly good.
Is the word "choice" so hard to understand? If I pay for music I want to be able to play it with a variety of (software or hardware) players. Not just one.
There is Ogg support in iRiver and Rio players.
There are small music stores that sell non-DRM'd Ogg or MP3 (which, though common, is still licensed codec) music. I even saw a music store where you can buy raw CD data and encode as you want (or have them do it for you).
How sure are you when you say, "not going to happen"?
Is the word "choice" so hard to understand? If I pay for music I want to be able to play it with a variety of (software or hardware) players. Not just one.
Nothings stopping you from burning a CD and transcoding back to whatever you want. What i'm hearing is defeatism from people. As long as we can burn Redbook you have a backup that can be repurposed. I don't feel like my "investment" in music is limited in that many ways. I like that.
Until there is some sort of Unified Codec we're just going to have to duke it out. This is the fault of the music industry. They could have guided this and avoided "format hell" but once again you have "reactionaries" rather than "visionaries".
Originally posted by Gon
Is the word "choice" so hard to understand? If I pay for music I want to be able to play it with a variety of (software or hardware) players. Not just one.
It is not that "choice" is difficult to understand. It's just that many people throw that out as if it is the "holy grail" of...well anything. What I am asking is what you will gain by having a "choice"?
There are three things where you could have a choice that you presently do not:
1. The store you buy from
2. The (desktop) player you use
3. The (portable) device you use
What would be the benefits of choice in any (or all) of these areas?
There are probably three things that I would seek to gain through "choice" (which most people mean to be "more competition"), these are:
1. Price
2. Quality
3. Features
4. Service
Let's examine the store first...
Choice/competition/music portability/compatability would gain you?
Price? They are all the exact same price.
Quality? They all appear to have the exact same quality of music (encoduing, bit-rate, etc.) Arguably iTMS is better here.
Features? iTMS may lose here in terms of not having a "subscribtion" offering as the others do. Music selection? iTMS has more than the others, and likely, over the long run will not have anything different because the source of the music is always the same. iTMS also may have some exclusive content that the others do not.
Service? Hard to say at this point.
Now...the (desktop) player...
Price? iTunes is free. Some of the others are not.
Quality? iTunes is arguably the best here.
Features? I don't know personally, but from what I have read, again iTunes wins this. And it seems unlikely that others will add any new significant features that a) users really want, and b) Apple cannot easily replicate
Services? Again hard to say.
Now the portable device...
1. Price? Well...MAYBE...but here not that much price competition anyway. Apple has products (at prices) that cover what probably 90% of the market wants. This will likely only improve as they drive the price of iPod Mini down.
2. Quality? Not sure here. They all seem pretty equal. Probably an edge to Apple.
3. Features? Again somewhat subjective, but edge probably to Apple for both iPod and Mini.
4. Service? Not sure.
So, you want "choice". That's fine. Nothing wrong with that. But choice without actually having any real differentiators is simply an illusion.
If Ipod is the true profit maker, then why not just wipe the competition clean by supporting .wma?
Originally posted by Jamil
If apple enabled .WMA on the iPod, don't you think they would kill every other digital music player on the market?
If Ipod is the true profit maker, then why not just wipe the competition clean by supporting .wma?
The iPod doesn't need WMA support to be the market leader. On the contrary, Apple needs to lead the charge when it comes to companies breaking their dependence on Microsoft.
Originally posted by Jamil
If apple enabled .WMA on the iPod, don't you think they would kill every other digital music player on the market?
If Ipod is the true profit maker, then why not just wipe the competition clean by supporting .wma?
Because doing so would kill the iPod. I wish I had time to explain this (yet again). But briefly...Apple is already the market leader...iPod is already killing the competitors...this is a format war (AAC+FairPlay vs. WMA). You don't win wars by forfeiting.
The money spent trying to expand to Europe, the money spent to expand and maintain the servers, the money spent advertising...Napster won't get that kind of money through $10/month memberships.
Napster should be going for profit...because they have no other reasons or motives behind their business, but they're not making any. Apple, on the other hand, isn't going for profit. Apple's trying to sell iPods (which is the moneymaker) and to gain mindshare to help sell Macs.
Apple has the more thought-out and elaborate plan.
Originally posted by KANE
Windows is choice.
As long as it's Microsft's.
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
You don't win wars by forfeiting.
exactly. look at microsoft. when they could have settled on common file formats, they settled on their own (.doc comes to mind), and made the industry come back to them. apple will wage a similar war in video compression formats with pixlet, just you wait and see.
Originally posted by rok
exactly. look at microsoft. when they could have settled on common file formats, they settled on their own (.doc comes to mind), and made the industry come back to them. apple will wage a similar war in video compression formats with pixlet, just you wait and see.
Ok...please stop talking about Pixlet. Pixlet is not for consumers.