The first album was excellent, everything else since has just been going through the motions IMO.
Ummmm You have it the other way around. Bono is a partner of a 39% share. I think he is the one who is owning something and choosing what's in his best interest [non conflict of business]. He's a multi-millionaire outside of music from opportunities he worked hard for as an artist and parlayed that into mad benjamins. Fuckin' boss. You obviously have never attempted anything creatively and/or artistically otherwise you'd understand the leap.
My first thought when reading this was seeing an ad with U2 in concert and the camera pans back and shows a bunch of middle age and older business men/women and executives watching the concert with their blackberries. All wearing suits.
Sorry, but they jumped the shark at "In the Name of Love."
When was the last time they did something that could compare to "I Will Follow", "Gloria", "New Year's Day" or "Sunday Bloody Sunday?"
Thank you! I was starting to wonder if I was the only one who felt that way. Yeah Joshua Tree had a few decent songs, although ironically the best song from the album (The Sweetest Thing) wasn't even on it.
It's a shame that U2's music hasn't kept up with Bono's ego, as the man can really sing when he wants to. Anyone who hasn't heard his duet on Clannad's In A Lifetime is really missing out on some great vocal work.
Listen to the album before you condemn. It's a worn out, irrelevant piece of garbage. U2 is no longer relevant, and Apple is moving away from Top 40 crap.
If you haven't noticed, they have been showcasing a lot of indie bands, unknowns, and innovating bands. Bands with something exciting to say, bands who think different.
U2 is what you listen to if your a soccer mom on your way to Ikea to buy candles on a Sunday afternoon and do your laundry. Why would Apple want to associate with that?
From a marketing standpoint, RIM is going to be saying this:
Blackberry... meh
You are just one example of how Apple "fans" these days are bunch of douchebags. You have no idea what you're talking about and are sorely out of touch. Worst offense, though, you're just not funny.
If I had the money Bono does, I'd give away free iPhones to the first 1000 people that showed up to a warehouse somewhere. Then, I'd box you all up with your stupid phones and ship you off to China. That would be 1000 less obnoxious kiddies demo'ing their beloved iPhones for everyone, as if it validates you somehow. I'm gonna put a beating to the next guy I see doing that, btw.
My first thought when reading this was seeing an ad with U2 in concert and the camera pans back and shows a bunch of middle age and older business men/women and executives watching the concert with their blackberries. All wearing suits.
What's age got to do with it? Just because you still live in your mom's basement, doesn't mean there aren't young people succeeding in business.
And no surprise you don't work in advertising with that stupid idea.
You are just one example of how Apple "fans" these days are bunch of douchebags. You have no idea what you're talking about and are sorely out of touch. Worst offense, though, you're just not funny.
Sounds like somebody is tired of being driven around by their Soccer Mom to ikea...
First of all I'd like to qualify and say that I'm a huge fan of U2 and Apple.
So much so that I even liked the last U2 album (How to Dismantle...), I play guitar and I own a lot of the same music gear that The Edge owns (yes, I have a Korg SDD-3000 digital delay, and I even sold one to The Edge last year).
But imo this new album just doesn't do it for me at all.
And I'm really disappointed in U2. They don't "need" a sponsor for a tour, their net worth is over $5 billion USD and they have never had a sponsor for tours before.
And in the authorize biography "At the End of the World" when they were doing the Achtung Baby tour, they thought of having sponsors but realized they didn't need them and that it went against their ethics.
So now 16 years later has their ethics changed?
imo this is not a good move by U2, it really gives me the impression they're in this for the money, and they mailed in the new album.
As for Apple, it's corporate policy that this company does not do sponsorships at all, and very rarely is it overridden, Steve doesn't like doing them.
Nonetheless, U2 never needed sponsorships for tours before, why now?
U2 has also patrnered with Amazon.com to offer their new album No Line On The Horizon at the drastically reduced price of only $3.99
Why? Because Amazon wants people to experience buying DRM music from them rather than iTunes. U2 gives Amazon the opportunity to introduce tens of thousands of customers to an alternative to iTunes.
It worked on me. This was my first time buying music from MP3s from Amazon and it probably won't be the last.
Of course it's cheaper, it's MPEG1 ! I wouldn't expect to pay the same price for a Blu-ray as a DVD either.
Of course it's cheaper, it's MPEG1 ! I wouldn't expect to pay the same price for a Blu-ray as a DVD either.
MP3 isn't significantly different than AAC when you're using the higher bitrates.
Second, I've never seen codec used as a reason to charge more or less for internet downloads of audio.
Codec is different from resolution. DVD and Blu-Ray have different resolutions, I don't think Internet audio has different sample rates or bit depths, just different codecs. I don't think Blu-Rays with AVC are priced higher than those with VC1 or MPEG2.
Comments
This just shows that U2 can be bought by anyone.
Who cares anyway?
The first album was excellent, everything else since has just been going through the motions IMO.
Ummmm You have it the other way around. Bono is a partner of a 39% share. I think he is the one who is owning something and choosing what's in his best interest [non conflict of business]. He's a multi-millionaire outside of music from opportunities he worked hard for as an artist and parlayed that into mad benjamins. Fuckin' boss. You obviously have never attempted anything creatively and/or artistically otherwise you'd understand the leap.
Sorry, but they jumped the shark at "In the Name of Love."
When was the last time they did something that could compare to "I Will Follow", "Gloria", "New Year's Day" or "Sunday Bloody Sunday?"
Thank you! I was starting to wonder if I was the only one who felt that way. Yeah Joshua Tree had a few decent songs, although ironically the best song from the album (The Sweetest Thing) wasn't even on it.
It's a shame that U2's music hasn't kept up with Bono's ego, as the man can really sing when he wants to. Anyone who hasn't heard his duet on Clannad's In A Lifetime is really missing out on some great vocal work.
Listen to the album before you condemn. It's a worn out, irrelevant piece of garbage. U2 is no longer relevant, and Apple is moving away from Top 40 crap.
If you haven't noticed, they have been showcasing a lot of indie bands, unknowns, and innovating bands. Bands with something exciting to say, bands who think different.
U2 is what you listen to if your a soccer mom on your way to Ikea to buy candles on a Sunday afternoon and do your laundry. Why would Apple want to associate with that?
From a marketing standpoint, RIM is going to be saying this:
Blackberry... meh
You are just one example of how Apple "fans" these days are bunch of douchebags. You have no idea what you're talking about and are sorely out of touch. Worst offense, though, you're just not funny.
If I had the money Bono does, I'd give away free iPhones to the first 1000 people that showed up to a warehouse somewhere. Then, I'd box you all up with your stupid phones and ship you off to China. That would be 1000 less obnoxious kiddies demo'ing their beloved iPhones for everyone, as if it validates you somehow. I'm gonna put a beating to the next guy I see doing that, btw.
Losers.
My first thought when reading this was seeing an ad with U2 in concert and the camera pans back and shows a bunch of middle age and older business men/women and executives watching the concert with their blackberries. All wearing suits.
What's age got to do with it? Just because you still live in your mom's basement, doesn't mean there aren't young people succeeding in business.
And no surprise you don't work in advertising with that stupid idea.
Worst offense, though, you're just not funny.
I dunno. I thought it was pretty funny.
You are just one example of how Apple "fans" these days are bunch of douchebags. You have no idea what you're talking about and are sorely out of touch. Worst offense, though, you're just not funny.
Sounds like somebody is tired of being driven around by their Soccer Mom to ikea...
So much so that I even liked the last U2 album (How to Dismantle...), I play guitar and I own a lot of the same music gear that The Edge owns (yes, I have a Korg SDD-3000 digital delay, and I even sold one to The Edge last year).
But imo this new album just doesn't do it for me at all.
And I'm really disappointed in U2. They don't "need" a sponsor for a tour, their net worth is over $5 billion USD and they have never had a sponsor for tours before.
And in the authorize biography "At the End of the World" when they were doing the Achtung Baby tour, they thought of having sponsors but realized they didn't need them and that it went against their ethics.
So now 16 years later has their ethics changed?
imo this is not a good move by U2, it really gives me the impression they're in this for the money, and they mailed in the new album.
As for Apple, it's corporate policy that this company does not do sponsorships at all, and very rarely is it overridden, Steve doesn't like doing them.
Nonetheless, U2 never needed sponsorships for tours before, why now?
U2 has also patrnered with Amazon.com to offer their new album No Line On The Horizon at the drastically reduced price of only $3.99
Why? Because Amazon wants people to experience buying DRM music from them rather than iTunes. U2 gives Amazon the opportunity to introduce tens of thousands of customers to an alternative to iTunes.
It worked on me. This was my first time buying music from MP3s from Amazon and it probably won't be the last.
Of course it's cheaper, it's MPEG1 ! I wouldn't expect to pay the same price for a Blu-ray as a DVD either.
McD
Of course it's cheaper, it's MPEG1 ! I wouldn't expect to pay the same price for a Blu-ray as a DVD either.
McD
You missed the point. The whole album has been discounted more the 50%.
Most digital download albums on Amazon are $8.99
No Line on the Horizon is only $3.99
New releases aren't typically discounted, they are jacked up to maximize profit.
Amazon is slashing the price to draw customers away from iTunes.
Of course it's cheaper, it's MPEG1 ! I wouldn't expect to pay the same price for a Blu-ray as a DVD either.
MP3 isn't significantly different than AAC when you're using the higher bitrates.
Second, I've never seen codec used as a reason to charge more or less for internet downloads of audio.
Codec is different from resolution. DVD and Blu-Ray have different resolutions, I don't think Internet audio has different sample rates or bit depths, just different codecs. I don't think Blu-Rays with AVC are priced higher than those with VC1 or MPEG2.