And that is why the Beatles are the most illegally downloaded band on the web if everyone already has the music???
wow, there were so many leaps in logic in that one statement to join the point A (premise) and B (conclusion), it should be an olympic sport (what would be a good name for an event takes a conclusion that is compiled of a ridiculous number of factors, yet boils it down to a rudimentary 1:1 factual-esque ratio, and dares you to waste scads of time trying to disprove it?).
Honestly, I personally could care less - my sizable Beatles collection doesn't need the addition of heavily compressed tracks.
The Beatles branded iPod:
If done right, I'd buy it in a second... just give me the classic "The Beatles" logo surrounded by autographs engraved on the back and I'm sold... need to replace my 3rd gen iPod sometime in the near future anyway.
What I really want:
Just give me The Beatles albums on 2-channel 192 KHz DVD-Audio or SACD and I'd be in heaven... if they want to (in addition) experiment with 5.1 mixes, fine, but good old stereo is how it's meant to be heard.
wow, there were so many leaps in logic in that one statement to join the point A (premise) and B (conclusion), it should be an olympic sport (what would be a good name for an event takes a conclusion that is compiled of a ridiculous number of factors, yet boils it down to a rudimentary 1:1 factual-esque ratio, and dares you to waste scads of time trying to disprove it?).
that post alone would take the gold medal.
the point is real..that even though so many Beatles albums and CDs have been sold, there is a very big audience for the music digitally. Granted these are free downloads, and I know everyone would not go purchase the music, but as we have seen with iTunes, many who previously "borrowed" music for free from sites now purchase that music because it is easy and reasonable priced....and fairly good quality.
but getting back on subject, beatles catalog on itunes would be huge. maybe apple corps will get off apple computer's back once they start working together to make money, instead of suing again and again.
apple computer should just have chosen another name. there are plenty of fruits
That was a personal thing for Jobs. If it can be believed, he came up with the name after driving home with Woz after spending a summer working in a apple orchard, or something like that. He's a vegetation.
i have to agree that, if you are a beatles fan, you likely have many of their albums on CD, and by now, if you have an iPod, you've ripped them to your iPod already. And plus, haven't every single studio recording, rarity, etc. already been released as well? so who exactly is left who will buy these tracks?
Probably miost people. The tracks have been remasterd for the purpose of digital downloads, and are likely much better than whatever you have ripped yourself, not to speak of the horrible rips you get from the torrents.
Which Apple? I know this is assumed, but I find it amusing that in a case of Apple v. Apple, I think there's a chance that Apple might win and Apple might lose.
The Beatles iPod would be a good idea but as said before most people who want Beatles stuff already have it!
I rest my case.
BENj
It's a terrible assumption on your part. You might as well say that about all music available on the torrents. Why should anyone buy any music? They can get most all of it from there.
It's a terrible assumption on your part. You might as well say that about all music available on the torrents. Why should anyone buy any music? They can get most all of it from there.
Not really a 'terrible' assumption- a terrible assumption would be something like "Well I assumed I turned the oven off before putting my wife in."
No but really- It's all about the artwork/inlays and physical CDs with Beatles' stuff- sure the very famous songs will be bought off iTMS by people with a glancing interest but, really, are you telling me people are going to buy what they likely already have on CD? I'm playing devil's advocate- it might be one of the best steps ever taken- it may flop... there's only one way we can find out!
I just took out my iPod, and I think I actually have a prototype Beatles iPod! Exact color scheme as "white album" -- all white, with a gray scroll wheel.
Plus, when you look at the chrome back, you can see a reflection that clearly says "The Beatles" (actually looks like "seltaeB ehT") whenever there's Beatles memoribilia behind you.
That was a personal thing for Jobs. If it can be believed, he came up with the name after driving home with Woz after spending a summer working in a apple orchard, or something like that. He's a vegetation.
I once read somewhere (i don't even remember where) that steve thought the apple was the perfect fruit or whatever and that he liked them a lot, and that he liked the beatles too. makes you wonder what's in a name. he probably didn't think he'd be facing legal problems 25 years later for using the word "apple".
instead of beatle ipods with their signature on the back, how about a magical mystery tour ipod, a sgt. peppers ipod, a let it be ipod, an abbey road ipod, a revolver ipod, etc.
i'd get the magical mystery tour ipod or maybe the let it be ipod.
since the next ipod is bound to have a more prominent screen maybe you could just have a bunch of wallpapers in it.
ahh magical mystery tour yellow sounds great for an ipod enclosure though. </rant>
Not really a 'terrible' assumption- a terrible assumption would be something like "Well I assumed I turned the oven off before putting my wife in."
No but really- It's all about the artwork/inlays and physical CDs with Beatles' stuff- sure the very famous songs will be bought off iTMS by people with a glancing interest but, really, are you telling me people are going to buy what they likely already have on CD? I'm playing devil's advocate- it might be one of the best steps ever taken- it may flop... there's only one way we can find out!
BENj
It is terrible. You don't know what people have, or want. I'll bet that most people under 25 have little Beatles at all. My daughters' friends, all under 17, have almost no Beatles, because they hardly ever buy a CD, and, they don't listen to mine, though I would allow it.
As most downloaded music is being bought by those under 25, there would be a big market for it. Dylan has sold well, as have others. No reason to believe this would be any different.
That was a personal thing for Jobs. If it can be believed, he came up with the name after driving home with Woz after spending a summer working in a apple orchard, or something like that. He's a vegetation.
It's named Apple because of the Fruit of Knowledge (from the garden of Eden). \
I just took out my iPod, and I think I actually have a prototype Beatles iPod! Exact color scheme as "white album" -- all white, with a gray scroll wheel.
Plus, when you look at the chrome back, you can see a reflection that clearly says "The Beatles" (actually looks like "seltaeB ehT") whenever there's Beatles memoribilia behind you.
but don't you have to hold it upside down against a bluish mirror during a full moon to see that the walrus has been transferred and that paul will be killed at the divorce
I once read somewhere (i don't even remember where) that steve thought the apple was the perfect fruit or whatever and that he liked them a lot, and that he liked the beatles too. makes you wonder what's in a name. he probably didn't think he'd be facing legal problems 25 years later for using the word "apple".
Music wasn't really an issue for computers back then. Who would have thought?
One major problem is that Apple gave in that first time. It set them up ever after. This last ruling, if upheld upon appeal, will finally end the problems. If not, well...
My wife, and other lawyers have said that there was no reason why Apple would not have won their case the first time around. But, Apple Computer was much smaller then. Apple Corps. was a big, well known, company, and the Beatles themselves were icons. To fight that back then was something Apple thought unwise. They were wrong.
According to my wife, at least, who has dealt with Apple Computer for some time, Apple has always has dreadful lawyers, often changing an entire team in the middle of negotiations. They hired outside counsel to help with this latest dispute with Apple Corps., and it seems to have helped.
That was a personal thing for Jobs. If it can be believed, he came up with the name after driving home with Woz after spending a summer working in a apple orchard, or something like that. He's a vegetation.
Which Steve is a vegetation? Would he be the first plant to write a book?
Comments
And that is why the Beatles are the most illegally downloaded band on the web if everyone already has the music???
wow, there were so many leaps in logic in that one statement to join the point A (premise) and B (conclusion), it should be an olympic sport (what would be a good name for an event takes a conclusion that is compiled of a ridiculous number of factors, yet boils it down to a rudimentary 1:1 factual-esque ratio, and dares you to waste scads of time trying to disprove it?).
that post alone would take the gold medal.
Honestly, I personally could care less - my sizable Beatles collection doesn't need the addition of heavily compressed tracks.
The Beatles branded iPod:
If done right, I'd buy it in a second... just give me the classic "The Beatles" logo surrounded by autographs engraved on the back and I'm sold... need to replace my 3rd gen iPod sometime in the near future anyway.
What I really want:
Just give me The Beatles albums on 2-channel 192 KHz DVD-Audio or SACD and I'd be in heaven... if they want to (in addition) experiment with 5.1 mixes, fine, but good old stereo is how it's meant to be heard.
wow, there were so many leaps in logic in that one statement to join the point A (premise) and B (conclusion), it should be an olympic sport (what would be a good name for an event takes a conclusion that is compiled of a ridiculous number of factors, yet boils it down to a rudimentary 1:1 factual-esque ratio, and dares you to waste scads of time trying to disprove it?).
that post alone would take the gold medal.
the point is real..that even though so many Beatles albums and CDs have been sold, there is a very big audience for the music digitally. Granted these are free downloads, and I know everyone would not go purchase the music, but as we have seen with iTunes, many who previously "borrowed" music for free from sites now purchase that music because it is easy and reasonable priced....and fairly good quality.
but getting back on subject, beatles catalog on itunes would be huge. maybe apple corps will get off apple computer's back once they start working together to make money, instead of suing again and again.
apple computer should just have chosen another name. there are plenty of fruits
That was a personal thing for Jobs. If it can be believed, he came up with the name after driving home with Woz after spending a summer working in a apple orchard, or something like that. He's a vegetation.
i have to agree that, if you are a beatles fan, you likely have many of their albums on CD, and by now, if you have an iPod, you've ripped them to your iPod already. And plus, haven't every single studio recording, rarity, etc. already been released as well? so who exactly is left who will buy these tracks?
Probably miost people. The tracks have been remasterd for the purpose of digital downloads, and are likely much better than whatever you have ripped yourself, not to speak of the horrible rips you get from the torrents.
In May, the court ruled in favor of Apple,
Which Apple? I know this is assumed, but I find it amusing that in a case of Apple v. Apple, I think there's a chance that Apple might win and Apple might lose.
My impression!
The Beatles iPod would be a good idea but as said before most people who want Beatles stuff already have it!
I rest my case.
BENj
A psychedelic ipod me thinks???
My impression!
The Beatles iPod would be a good idea but as said before most people who want Beatles stuff already have it!
I rest my case.
BENj
It's a terrible assumption on your part. You might as well say that about all music available on the torrents. Why should anyone buy any music? They can get most all of it from there.
It's a terrible assumption on your part. You might as well say that about all music available on the torrents. Why should anyone buy any music? They can get most all of it from there.
Not really a 'terrible' assumption- a terrible assumption would be something like "Well I assumed I turned the oven off before putting my wife in."
No but really- It's all about the artwork/inlays and physical CDs with Beatles' stuff- sure the very famous songs will be bought off iTMS by people with a glancing interest but, really, are you telling me people are going to buy what they likely already have on CD? I'm playing devil's advocate- it might be one of the best steps ever taken- it may flop... there's only one way we can find out!
BENj
Plus, when you look at the chrome back, you can see a reflection that clearly says "The Beatles" (actually looks like "seltaeB ehT") whenever there's Beatles memoribilia behind you.
That was a personal thing for Jobs. If it can be believed, he came up with the name after driving home with Woz after spending a summer working in a apple orchard, or something like that. He's a vegetation.
I once read somewhere (i don't even remember where) that steve thought the apple was the perfect fruit or whatever and that he liked them a lot, and that he liked the beatles too. makes you wonder what's in a name. he probably didn't think he'd be facing legal problems 25 years later for using the word "apple".
i'd get the magical mystery tour ipod or maybe the let it be ipod.
since the next ipod is bound to have a more prominent screen maybe you could just have a bunch of wallpapers in it.
ahh magical mystery tour yellow sounds great for an ipod enclosure though. </rant>
Not really a 'terrible' assumption- a terrible assumption would be something like "Well I assumed I turned the oven off before putting my wife in."
No but really- It's all about the artwork/inlays and physical CDs with Beatles' stuff- sure the very famous songs will be bought off iTMS by people with a glancing interest but, really, are you telling me people are going to buy what they likely already have on CD? I'm playing devil's advocate- it might be one of the best steps ever taken- it may flop... there's only one way we can find out!
BENj
It is terrible. You don't know what people have, or want. I'll bet that most people under 25 have little Beatles at all. My daughters' friends, all under 17, have almost no Beatles, because they hardly ever buy a CD, and, they don't listen to mine, though I would allow it.
As most downloaded music is being bought by those under 25, there would be a big market for it. Dylan has sold well, as have others. No reason to believe this would be any different.
That was a personal thing for Jobs. If it can be believed, he came up with the name after driving home with Woz after spending a summer working in a apple orchard, or something like that. He's a vegetation.
It's named Apple because of the Fruit of Knowledge (from the garden of Eden).
I just took out my iPod, and I think I actually have a prototype Beatles iPod! Exact color scheme as "white album" -- all white, with a gray scroll wheel.
Plus, when you look at the chrome back, you can see a reflection that clearly says "The Beatles" (actually looks like "seltaeB ehT") whenever there's Beatles memoribilia behind you.
but don't you have to hold it upside down against a bluish mirror during a full moon to see that the walrus has been transferred and that paul will be killed at the divorce
I once read somewhere (i don't even remember where) that steve thought the apple was the perfect fruit or whatever and that he liked them a lot, and that he liked the beatles too. makes you wonder what's in a name. he probably didn't think he'd be facing legal problems 25 years later for using the word "apple".
Music wasn't really an issue for computers back then. Who would have thought?
One major problem is that Apple gave in that first time. It set them up ever after. This last ruling, if upheld upon appeal, will finally end the problems. If not, well...
My wife, and other lawyers have said that there was no reason why Apple would not have won their case the first time around. But, Apple Computer was much smaller then. Apple Corps. was a big, well known, company, and the Beatles themselves were icons. To fight that back then was something Apple thought unwise. They were wrong.
According to my wife, at least, who has dealt with Apple Computer for some time, Apple has always has dreadful lawyers, often changing an entire team in the middle of negotiations. They hired outside counsel to help with this latest dispute with Apple Corps., and it seems to have helped.
It's named Apple because of the Fruit of Knowledge (from the garden of Eden).
I'm just repeating what Woz has said several times. That's in the record.
That was a personal thing for Jobs. If it can be believed, he came up with the name after driving home with Woz after spending a summer working in a apple orchard, or something like that. He's a vegetation.
Which Steve is a vegetation? Would he be the first plant to write a book?