Apple acquires music streaming service Lala

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 72
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,756member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post


    "Stay on target!" - from Star Wars A NEW HOPE



    Err, topic!



    It's just "Star Wars."
  • Reply 22 of 72
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,664member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by chronster View Post


    What happens to the current LaLa users? Did Apple just swoop in and destroy some competition? Sounds a bit familiar. Who's that company everyone around here finds it so fashionable to slam... Applesoft? No that aint it...



    LaLa wasn't remotely competition, if that were Apple's game there were any number of more likely acquisition targets. In fact, I believe most stories are citing the fact that LaLa approached Apple after deciding they really couldn't make a go of it.



    Apple was clearly interested in some particular technology, infrastructure or personnel, not snuffing a "competitor."
  • Reply 23 of 72
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleSauce007 View Post


    ... Lala, unlike Apple?s iTunes, lets users play the music they own from the Web ? or in tech industry parlance, from the cloud. If Apple introduces its own cloud-based streaming music service, it would let people skip having to download music they buy or synchronize their music collection between their computers and mobile devices ....



    It's also interesting int the context of re-downloading previously purchased items which has been a rumoured addition to iTunes for a while now.



    Presumably if the services are blended, then everything previously purchased in iTunes would be purchased "for life" with streaming rights added on top. Once I own an album, I can download it anytime I want, put it on any machine I want, and stream it over the web anywhere I want. At least that's the ideal situation even if the reality is somewhat more restricted.



    The sticky bit is the fine line between "streaming" and "performance." Music companies would have you believe (at least in the last few years), that playing a song on your stereo at a party, or a coffee shop owner that turns on the radio is engaging in a "performance," and requires you to send them money. Common sense and hundreds of years of history disagree, but it will be interesting to see how this is defined in the new setup.
  • Reply 24 of 72
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by adamw View Post


    Free Christian Music



    Advertisements in a forum signature are never welcome and violate standard "netiquette."

    Religious promotions can be especially divisive, and are generally insulting to those not steeped in your particular ideology.



    Just sayin.
  • Reply 25 of 72
    djgdjg Posts: 7member
    I have to say how surprised I am that so many people are posting comments without knowing who or what lala.com is.



    The key thing about this acquisition is that it enables Apple to get into the streaming music (discovering new music) space without having to offer a monthly subscription, which has always been Apple's business goal in relation to music. Appe recognised that not that many people were going to pay monthly subscriptions in order to listen to music.



    I have been a Lala member for 6-12 months now and it is fantastic - everything in the overlap between my whole iTunes collection and lala's catalog is there along with about 200-330 songs that I have spent about $15 getting permanent internet access too.



    Also, people should be aware that in almost all cases if you pay the 10c charge to stream forever, you also then get a 10c discount on buying the mp3 file.



    My worry in this deal is that Apple realises that lala can never turn a profit and changes these rather nice prices and terms.
  • Reply 26 of 72
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,664member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by djg View Post


    I have to say how surprised I am that so many people are posting comments without knowing who or what lala.com is.



    The key thing about this acquisition is that it enables Apple to get into the streaming music (discovering new music) space without having to offer a monthly subscription, which has always been Apple's business goal in relation to music. Appe recognised that not that many people were going to pay monthly subscriptions in order to listen to music.



    I have been a Lala member for 6-12 months now and it is fantastic - everything in the overlap between my whole iTunes collection and lala's catalog is there along with about 200-330 songs that I have spent about $15 getting permanent internet access too.



    Also, people should be aware that in almost all cases if you pay the 10c charge to stream forever, you also then get a 10c discount on buying the mp3 file.



    My worry in this deal is that Apple realises that lala can never turn a profit and changes these rather nice prices and terms.



    The NYT article specifies that LaLa's music licensing doesn't carry over to a change in ownership, so Apple isn't just going to start offering the same services, at any cost.



    It does seem likely, though, that they're interested in the hard drive scanning, we replicate your library in the cloud tech.
  • Reply 27 of 72
    Lets hope this is for a Spotify type application. Apple need their own version of Spotify, I feel it's inevitable that Apple release something to counteract it. But I wish they would separate it from iBloat (itunes).
  • Reply 28 of 72
    irelandireland Posts: 17,779member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post


    Lets hope this is for a Spotify type application. Apple need their own version of Spotify, I feel it's inevitable that Apple release something to counteract it. But I wish they would separate it from iBloat (itunes).



    iDon't see Apple making this separate. And iBloat needs an iRewrote.
  • Reply 29 of 72
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    iDon't see Apple making this separate. And iBloat needs an iRewrote.



    No I don't either. I just wish they would. I have little interest in iTunes nowadays, it just irritates me.
  • Reply 30 of 72
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleSauce007 View Post


    From the NY Times...



    "Lala, unlike Apple?s iTunes, lets users play the music they own from the Web ? or in tech industry parlance, from the cloud. If Apple introduces its own cloud-based streaming music service, it would let people skip having to download music they buy or synchronize their music collection between their computers and mobile devices."



    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/05/te...pple.html?_r=3



    Time will tell.



    And when that time comes, we'll be in Lalaland.
  • Reply 31 of 72
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by djg View Post


    The key thing about this acquisition is that it enables Apple to get into the streaming music (discovering new music) space without having to offer a monthly subscription, which has always been Apple's business goal in relation to music. Appe recognised that not that many people were going to pay monthly subscriptions in order to listen to music.



    I agree with this. Whatever Apple is doing I doubt it will be a Zune Pass, monthly charge for unlimited streaming option.



    Addabox?s comment regarding Lala licensing not carrying over to Apple is interesting. Apple obviously could ink their own deal but then why buy Lala if you are going to go to that much trouble. I have to wonder if it really is for the employees. They don?t have any patents on this, do they?
  • Reply 32 of 72
    Does anyone know how much Apple paid? I've seen some rumors but no hard numbers.



    It seems this might be mainly a defensive acquisition. Apple could be less interested in the service or the technology, and more interested in preventing anyone else from acquiring them.
  • Reply 33 of 72
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,664member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    Does anyone know how much Apple paid? I've seen some rumors but no hard numbers.



    It seems this might be mainly a defensive acquisition. Apple could be less interested in the service or the technology, and more interested in preventing anyone else from acquiring them.



    Well, there was mention of LaLa's recent deal with Google to feature free streaming music as a result for song or artist searches, and Goggle has been getting on Apple's nerves lately....
  • Reply 34 of 72
    brucepbrucep Posts: 2,823member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Umm.... why not fold this update into the prior thread (let alone the dramatic red font).



    umm

    be cause apple road to world wide control is one more step closer

    go apple



    no one can touch us now



    aapl 250 soon
  • Reply 35 of 72
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,702member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MsNly View Post


    I personally won't pay a subscription for music but I'm hoping they have better plans.



    I used to think so too, but now I am not so sure. There are different types of music subscription models. When I got sick of my iTunes collection I tried Last.FM. It's more like radio, I guess, but it allows me lots of ways to listen to music that I in all likelihood don't have already, yet is similar to the kind of music I like. When I want to buy from iTunes its a click of a button. I am sure the model is familiar to most and its a great way to discover new music. I would like to see a service similar in function but perhaps better integrated with other itunes (Apple) services.



    ummmm.....
  • Reply 36 of 72
    Does apple still have $31B? Balance sheet from last quarter makes it look like reserves have dropped significantly.



    This type of service could be interesting with an iTablet as well-- easy way to shrink the memory requirement.
  • Reply 37 of 72
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post


    Does apple still have $31B? Balance sheet from last quarter makes it look like reserves have dropped significantly.



    This type of service could be interesting with an iTablet as well-- easy way to shrink the memory requirement.



    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33804993...orld_business/



    http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/10/20...ing-anomalies/



    http://www.boingboing.net/2009/11/12...huge-stea.html



    http://www.poeticportfolios.com/?p=387



    Looks like it's at 34 billion now.
  • Reply 38 of 72
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post


    Advertisements in a forum signature are never welcome and violate standard "netiquette."

    Religious promotions can be especially divisive, and are generally insulting to those not steeped in your particular ideology.



    Just sayin.



    Who gives a rats a** besides you. If the guy has a link to free christian music, so be it. Not everybody's cup of tea is everybody's cup of tea. If it had been a link to free Beatles or someone else, you wouldn't complain.



    Obviously you don't know crap about advertising - a text link is an invitation, if you don't want to accept, then don't click.



    Talk about being off topic........................................ /end rant
  • Reply 39 of 72
    irelandireland Posts: 17,779member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post


    Advertisements in a forum signature are never welcome and violate standard "netiquette."

    Religious promotions can be especially divisive, and are generally insulting to those not steeped in your particular ideology.



    Just sayin.



    You'd know being a member so long. Just leave Britney alone!!
  • Reply 40 of 72
    brucepbrucep Posts: 2,823member
    [Qedits
Sign In or Register to comment.