This probably hurts Microsoft even more than Apple. Apple and the iPod/iTunes are already quite established (I know I have no desire to repurchase songs just so they're DRM-free. But for an upstart like Zune and the crazy "points" paying system Microsoft employs, Napster's DRM-free songs at a higher bit-rate are going to make the Zune's success even more unlikely (...and customer-fiascos like the MSN Music shutdown only exacerbate the problem) .
How long do you think it will be before we see on the back of a box of Frosted Flakes that you can get a Zune free if you send in 4 box tops and $7.95 for shipping & handling?
hmm nearly $8k to to fill that old iPod, or a mere $15 a month for Napster
Over a year, that $15/month adds up to 2.25% of $8,000.
I doubt that I'd pay even $2,000 (or 9% per annum of $2,000) for the selection of songs on Napster, but I'll never know because their service doesn't work with Safari.
I guess that's funny, if you don't know how to read, or choose to ignore the line that came before it...
No I did read it, and understood it but all I am saying is that they claim they will have the most songs from independent groups/labels. No where does it mention it will have six million songs in addition to the largest collection of independents. I imagine a large majority of their songs are from independents as they have a better chance of securing distribution contracts.
i'm curious how the record companies justify this disparity - allowing napster drm free tracks, but denying them to apple. did any of them go on record (sorry) over that issue?
I think I read one rationalization where a record company guy said something like "we want to
try drm-free music as a small experiment and see what effect it has on piracy". This was
several months ago. It did not pass the laugh test then, and they have made several moves
since that make it clear they are trying to reduce the dominance of the iTunes store.
I think I read one rationalization where a record company guy said something like "we want to
try drm-free music as a small experiment and see what effect it has on piracy". This was
several months ago. It did not pass the laugh test then, and they have made several moves
since that make it clear they are trying to reduce the dominance of the iTunes store.
With the lawyers Apple has on retainer I wouldn't doubt that they didn't start building an anti-trust case the day they heard about the Amazon deal. At least, that is what I would have done. I'd also wait until i get a strong enough case or start seeing my iTunes Store music sales fall before I'd do anything about it. And I'd offer the labels the option of giving Apple the same deal with the threat of filing the case.
Napster would like to work with your iPod, but Apple has chosen to keep both the iPod and iTunes closed off from Napster and every other digital music service. Napster's philosophy is different. A Napster subscription gives you more ways to discover and enjoy music on more players. For a list of Napster-compatible players, click here.
Napster would like to work with your iPod, but Apple has chosen to keep both the iPod and iTunes closed off from Napster and every other digital music service. Napster's philosophy is different. A Napster subscription gives you more ways to discover and enjoy music on more players. For a list of Napster-compatible players, click here.
You're looking at their DRM section... its been around for awhile. This story is about a new DRM-free section on their site that will work with any iPod because its just a standard mp3.
Don't worry class this will actually help Apple...
Apple is probably biding its time for renegotiation with the music labels, then it will say "give us DRM-free tracks", labels say "no" and Apple hits them with a $2 Billion lawsuit for anti-trust and collusion for the restriction of fair competition. It will be a huge event in september. Then Apple can lower every product it sells by $100.
You can quote me on that!
Mad-elph
If Apple wins this hypothetical case, could the other wireless carriers then use it as a precedent in a suit against the iPhone/ATT exclusive deal?
This is all about how much they hate SJ, Apple, and iTunes in particular. The labels do not care about Napster, Amazon, or anyone else. Every deal they make these days has only to do with trying to hurt SJ. Nothing more. SJ asks for DRM free music, they say no, then give their entire catalogues to everyone else. SJ wants to hold the line on pricing. They say no, then allow everyone else to offer $.99 -$9.99 pricing. They do not want to help Napster, they want to hurt Apple, the #1 music seller in the States, if not the world. It is not even that they do not want to see a dominate supplier. I never heard of reports of them treating Wal-Mart like this. It is not even business anymore at this point; its personal. As a Mac user, I take it personally. I feel it is my civic duty to do everything in my power to hurt this industry of thugs, stupid thugs at that. May they continue to suffer the slow, painful death they have so richly, and repeatedly earned!
If the labels or the movie studios wanted to cut their own throats, they'd tick off Wal-Mart. Right now, they can whine about Apple and not face extinction, but their days are numbered. The trend is direct sales to consumers and iTunes will be the way to do it.
Don't worry class this will actually help Apple...
Apple is probably biding its time for renegotiation with the music labels, then it will say "give us DRM-free tracks", labels say "no" and Apple hits them with a $2 Billion lawsuit for anti-trust and collusion for the restriction of fair competition. It will be a huge event in september. Then Apple can lower every product it sells by $100.
You can quote me on that!
Mad-elph
I would agree there is plenty of evidence for collusion and anti-competitive practices by the labels in this case, but it's unlikely that Apple would file suit unless they were harmed in any significant way. So far, they are doing fine despite the music industry's best efforts to kick Apple in the soft spots.
You're looking at their DRM section... its been around for awhile. This story is about a new DRM-free section on their site that will work with any iPod because its just a standard mp3.
"The service, however, is not compatible with Apple's Safari web browser."
They've just lost the game, should one of us tell them?
It works with Firefox for Mac. There seems to be a lot of JS code on the page that isn't completely compatible with Safari. If I change my User Agent and the page will load but it's much slower and there are some errors. With as complex as the source code is and the fact that they inform you to use Firefox for Mac I wouldn't rag on Napster too hard. I think I would have done the same thing.
Comments
How long do you think it will be before we see on the back of a box of Frosted Flakes that you can get a Zune free if you send in 4 box tops and $7.95 for shipping & handling?
/
hmm nearly $8k to to fill that old iPod, or a mere $15 a month for Napster
Over a year, that $15/month adds up to 2.25% of $8,000.
I doubt that I'd pay even $2,000 (or 9% per annum of $2,000) for the selection of songs on Napster, but I'll never know because their service doesn't work with Safari.
Napster...
What's in a name? That which we now call Napster
by any other name would suck as hard.
I guess that's funny, if you don't know how to read, or choose to ignore the line that came before it...
No I did read it, and understood it but all I am saying is that they claim they will have the most songs from independent groups/labels. No where does it mention it will have six million songs in addition to the largest collection of independents. I imagine a large majority of their songs are from independents as they have a better chance of securing distribution contracts.
i'm curious how the record companies justify this disparity - allowing napster drm free tracks, but denying them to apple. did any of them go on record (sorry) over that issue?
I think I read one rationalization where a record company guy said something like "we want to
try drm-free music as a small experiment and see what effect it has on piracy". This was
several months ago. It did not pass the laugh test then, and they have made several moves
since that make it clear they are trying to reduce the dominance of the iTunes store.
I think I read one rationalization where a record company guy said something like "we want to
try drm-free music as a small experiment and see what effect it has on piracy". This was
several months ago. It did not pass the laugh test then, and they have made several moves
since that make it clear they are trying to reduce the dominance of the iTunes store.
With the lawyers Apple has on retainer I wouldn't doubt that they didn't start building an anti-trust case the day they heard about the Amazon deal. At least, that is what I would have done. I'd also wait until i get a strong enough case or start seeing my iTunes Store music sales fall before I'd do anything about it. And I'd offer the labels the option of giving Apple the same deal with the threat of filing the case.
How will Napster Mp3s not work with iPods?
Dunno how but - http://www.napster.co.uk/faq.html
14. Does Napster work with iPod?
Napster would like to work with your iPod, but Apple has chosen to keep both the iPod and iTunes closed off from Napster and every other digital music service. Napster's philosophy is different. A Napster subscription gives you more ways to discover and enjoy music on more players. For a list of Napster-compatible players, click here.
Dunno how but - http://www.napster.co.uk/faq.html
14. Does Napster work with iPod?
Napster would like to work with your iPod, but Apple has chosen to keep both the iPod and iTunes closed off from Napster and every other digital music service. Napster's philosophy is different. A Napster subscription gives you more ways to discover and enjoy music on more players. For a list of Napster-compatible players, click here.
You're looking at their DRM section... its been around for awhile. This story is about a new DRM-free section on their site that will work with any iPod because its just a standard mp3.
Don't worry class this will actually help Apple...
Apple is probably biding its time for renegotiation with the music labels, then it will say "give us DRM-free tracks", labels say "no" and Apple hits them with a $2 Billion lawsuit for anti-trust and collusion for the restriction of fair competition. It will be a huge event in september. Then Apple can lower every product it sells by $100.
You can quote me on that!
Mad-elph
If Apple wins this hypothetical case, could the other wireless carriers then use it as a precedent in a suit against the iPhone/ATT exclusive deal?
This is all about how much they hate SJ, Apple, and iTunes in particular. The labels do not care about Napster, Amazon, or anyone else. Every deal they make these days has only to do with trying to hurt SJ. Nothing more. SJ asks for DRM free music, they say no, then give their entire catalogues to everyone else. SJ wants to hold the line on pricing. They say no, then allow everyone else to offer $.99 -$9.99 pricing. They do not want to help Napster, they want to hurt Apple, the #1 music seller in the States, if not the world. It is not even that they do not want to see a dominate supplier. I never heard of reports of them treating Wal-Mart like this. It is not even business anymore at this point; its personal. As a Mac user, I take it personally. I feel it is my civic duty to do everything in my power to hurt this industry of thugs, stupid thugs at that. May they continue to suffer the slow, painful death they have so richly, and repeatedly earned!
If the labels or the movie studios wanted to cut their own throats, they'd tick off Wal-Mart. Right now, they can whine about Apple and not face extinction, but their days are numbered. The trend is direct sales to consumers and iTunes will be the way to do it.
Don't worry class this will actually help Apple...
Apple is probably biding its time for renegotiation with the music labels, then it will say "give us DRM-free tracks", labels say "no" and Apple hits them with a $2 Billion lawsuit for anti-trust and collusion for the restriction of fair competition. It will be a huge event in september. Then Apple can lower every product it sells by $100.
You can quote me on that!
Mad-elph
I would agree there is plenty of evidence for collusion and anti-competitive practices by the labels in this case, but it's unlikely that Apple would file suit unless they were harmed in any significant way. So far, they are doing fine despite the music industry's best efforts to kick Apple in the soft spots.
I'm please to announce the launch of the world's largest dfiler's audio tracks store. *
(* Service unavailable worldwide and some operating systems not supported)
You're looking at their DRM section... its been around for awhile. This story is about a new DRM-free section on their site that will work with any iPod because its just a standard mp3.
Oh, I see! My apologies
They've just lost the game, should one of us tell them?
"The service, however, is not compatible with Apple's Safari web browser."
They've just lost the game, should one of us tell them?
It works with Firefox for Mac. There seems to be a lot of JS code on the page that isn't completely compatible with Safari. If I change my User Agent and the page will load but it's much slower and there are some errors. With as complex as the source code is and the fact that they inform you to use Firefox for Mac I wouldn't rag on Napster too hard. I think I would have done the same thing.
If Apple wins this hypothetical case, could the other wireless carriers then use it as a precedent in a suit against the iPhone/ATT exclusive deal?
Not really. Now if Apple dealed will ATT, Verison, and Sprint but refused to deal with T-Mobil, T-Mobil might have a case.
I wouldn't rag on Napster too hard. I think I would have done the same thing.
Nah, you would have used one of the many free javascript libraries that work with nearly all browsers already.
Napster has always had some neat ideas and has always had abysmal business sense.
Napster has always had some neat ideas and has always had abysmal business sense.
Ain't that the truth. Now it's just a lapdog for the labels.