....What is crazy is that it also includes the Beatles catalog (michael jackson leveraged with Sony) that Apple just promoted insanely around the world. I do not think Apple wants this head ache.......
Jackson, and Sony own part of the publishing on the Beatles material. All distribution and digital rights were negotiated by Apple Corp in England.
If only I could return to the days when Sony saw fit to sell me music on a proprietary technology that would prevent me from copying the music I purchased onto any other storage device or medium and Sony could install a rootkit program on my computer that would ensure that Sony knew more about me than they should, for only then did I feel free. Since iTunes I, too, feel shackled just like the major labels.
But seriously, does anyone remember when Sony attempted to "sell" music online? Courtesy of Wiki:
The major record labels eventually decided to launch their own services, allowing them more direct control over costs. Sony Music Entertainment's service did not do as well as was hoped. Many consumers felt the service was difficult to navigate and use. Sony's pricing of US$3.50 per song track also discouraged many early adopters of the service. Furthermore, as MP3 Newswire pointed out in its review of the service, users were actually only renting the tracks for that $3.50. After a certain point the files expired and could not be played again without repurchase. The service quickly failed.
It only takes one to start the flood. 10 years ago iTunes was it, now things are changing a bit. One leaves, some others may follow. Curious to see how this turns out.
Mmmm, don't think so, Apple could buy sony out at this point their in such bad shape. I'm sure somehow they'll reach a deal.
What you guys don't get is that the music companies are desperate because their business is dying. Music sales in the U.S. are half of their 1999 peak. Citibank just took over an in-default EMI and has put it quickly up for sale in order to beat Warner Music putting themselves up for sale.
There are only four large music companies left (EMI, Sony, Warner Music Group and Universal). If Sony did pull out of iTunes, that would be a big blow for iTunes, no matter how much you guys love Apple and hate Sony.
It's not downloading that's killed the industry as much as the return to an industry based upon sales of singles. There's a lot of blame to be passed around for that, but it doesn't matter - it's killing the music business.
And while I don't think Apple is doing anything wrong "per se" in iTunes, I do think their policies are over-restrictive on the e-book and subscription issues and arrogance is getting the better of them. Giving Apple 30% is not viable for many types of publishing - except for the big "hits", publishing is a very short margin business even in the best of times.
I really resent it when Apple presents a 46-page license agreement whenever they change the terms of downloading applications for the iPhone. I realize it's 46 iPhone-sized pages, but such a license agreement is not what a truly consumer friendly company makes part of their policy.
artists don't own music anymore, the big firms do and with sony taking the hottest content to other distributors (amzon, walmart, spotfy ect.) Apple stands to loose more than they would gain, they are not stupid.
I have to disagree. Let's think this through. Say Sony pulls their content. How much revenue does Apple lose? Even with Sony being a big portion of the iTunes content, it's not like the loss would make much of a difference in Apple's overall revenue stream. Yes, it would frustrate customers who wanted to get their Sony music like they used to, but who would they be pissed at? Sony. Would anyone stop using iTunes for their other content needs just because Sony wasn't there? No. iTunes is the biggest distributer of music. This is like saying that Walmart would be hurt more if GE pulled all their products out than GE would. If GE threatened Walmart they might want to have a conversation about it. But GE would have to really work to make up for the loss of that channel if they actually left.
Sony is blowing smoke. They are trying to get some free publicity for their streaming service. Maybe they can make it work, but I don't want to have to pay a subscription and then have my music held hostage in the cloud so I had to keep subscribing to access it. If it is something where I can purchase it once and then stream it forever I might be interested, but that's not what it sounds like to me that Sony has in the works. iTunes isn't perfect, but it's better than anything else right now, including pirating.
One question, if Apple states they've always enforced the rule, why is the Kindle app still available on iTunes?
The Kindle app does not do in-app purchases. You're taken to Amazon.com in Safari and complete the purchase there. The Kindle app then recognizes that you have new content to download and grabs it.
Sony apparently was doing purchases from their book store in-app - which is against the rules. If they had done the same as Amazon they probably would have been fine.
Sony apparently was doing purchases from their book store in-app - which is against the rules. If they had done the same as Amazon they probably would have been fine.
Sony don't have a web portal for their e-book sales. Clicking purchase on their web site takes you to their app!
Good luck with that. "Hostage"? You've sold a billion more tracks via iTunes than you would have otherwise. Pulling your songs from iTunes would be a moronic business move. I guess it is decisions like this that have been the cause of Sony's fall from grace.
He was very clear that they HOPE, depending on business.
It makes sense and probably has nothing to do with the blown out by the media e-reader thing. Why would Sony stay on iTunes and lose 30% if their service is raking in tons and they get to keep that money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by crustyjusty
I wonder when Sony and Amazon will allow iTunes / iBooks purchases on their e-readers.
It's not their choice. It is Apple's. Those systems were set up to help sell hardware. So it is unlikely the Apple will ever allow their software on other phones/tablets. Same as Mac OS
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gustav
One question, if Apple states they've always enforced the rule, why is the Kindle app still available on iTunes?
They never said that. They said that has been the rule for a while but they were giving leeway to existing apps to make the change. However, they announced a deadline of March 31, at which point we will likely see some pulled apps. Including Amazon if they don't add the option.
I have to disagree. Let's think this through. Say Sony pulls their content. How much revenue does Apple lose? Even with Sony being a big portion of the iTunes content, it's not like the loss would make much of a difference in Apple's overall revenue stream. Yes, it would frustrate customers who wanted to get their Sony music like they used to, but who would they be pissed at? Sony. Would anyone stop using iTunes for their other content needs just because Sony wasn't there? No. iTunes is the biggest distributer of music. This is like saying that Walmart would be hurt more if GE pulled all their products out than GE would. If GE threatened Walmart they might want to have a conversation about it. But GE would have really work to make up for the loss of that channel if they actually left.
Sony is blowing smoke. They are trying to get some free publicity for their streaming service. Maybe they can make it work, but I don't want to have to pay a subscription and then have my music held hostage in the cloud so I had to keep subscribing to access it. If it is something where I can purchase it once and then stream it forever I might be interested, but that's not what it sounds like to me that Sony has in the works. iTunes isn't perfect, but it's better than anything else right now, including pirating.
There is a difference between GE products and Sony content. Content, unlike most consumer electric products is uniquely differentiated. If I want to listent to a particular version of Giant Steps from John Coltrane, pulling down a copy of Giant Steps from Sonny Rollins isn't an adequate substitute. It would be good, but it isn't nearly the same thing. If I am forced to go to say, Amazon to buy my Sony content, I might just buy some of my other content while there, because once I'm plugged into Amazon's or Walmart's infrastructure, I've already learned how to use that ecosystem and the marginal cost of purchasing an additional item from that ecosystem goes down. I know, this to be true, since I now purchase the vast majority of my music from Amazon these days.
Having Sony on Amazon or Walmart and not on Itunes is an amazing selling point for Amazon and Walmart.
I think this battle is far more balanced than people in here believe. Which is why I think it will result in some type of nuanced agreement between the two.
Mmmm, don't think so, Apple could buy sony out at this point their in such bad shape. I'm sure somehow they'll reach a deal.
Regardless of the fact that Sony has been losing money, the market cap on Sony is $35 billion. Apple would have to pay a premium to buy it. Japanese regulations probably wouldn't permit a non-Japanese company to buy it anyway. Why would Apple buy it?
In 2009, Sony had 171,000 employees. Apple has about 37,000 employees. Absorbing Sony would be completely overwhelming to Apple. You can't run a company the size of Sony the way that Apple is run (with a very hands-on executive team). Apple has a relatively few number of products and services. Sony has tens of thousands, if not more.
It would never happen and if it did, it would kill Apple. Get real. The only possibility is that Sony decides to get out of the music business, but I doubt U.S. regulators would permit Apple, as the largest distributor of online music, to buy one of the remaining four large music companies. But even if the regulators permitted it, Sony would never sell, if only for face-saving reasons and especially after absorbing most of BMG (RCA).
My bet is that regardless of their cash hoard, there are no big Apple acquisitions while Steve is still CEO and unhealthy.
Interesting the way the tide has turned on this argument. When original story about the banning of the Sony e-book reader came out just nobody would believe that Apple would do such a bad thing. When it turns out they are doing a bad thing - something that reduces the value of your actual iPad and claims that you merely rent it. Well thats ok then.
This is what outsiders see as the Apple Cult. Rightly.
But most people who have an Apple device arent the 1% of cult members. If Kindle and Skype are missing, and Sony e-readers and so on, they will consider an Android Tablet. I still hope Apple win, but I hope they win fairly. And decently.
Quote:
Sony don't have a web portal for their e-book sales. Clicking purchase on their web site takes you to their app!
Yeah, the app downloads the content. The web portal is for purchasing. Same as a Kindle.
Because Kindle opens up your web browser and takes you to an external web site to purchase the ebook. I understand that Sony wanted the customer to purchase their content from within the app itself.
And as a customer, isn't that what you would prefer? Isn't that a better overall experience? Why go to a website when you can buy in place.
Even if they never say it, that's exactly the feeling the convey. If the talk about european publishers and iPad subscriptions is true, they pretty much have the same mindset. "Without our content, iPad is nothing."
Unfortunately for the content heads, a multi-purpose computing device doesn't serve only their ends.
There is a clear difference, of course. Apple stores and downloads the music you buy from Sony. And a Sony track can be downloaded from the web on OS X.
On the iPad Apple does not store the content for e-books. IAP is merely demanding 30% for a credit card purchase which the providers can handle themselves.
Because Kindle opens up your web browser and takes you to an external web site to purchase the ebook. I understand that Sony wanted the customer to purchase their content from within the app itself.
Nope. Sony was doing the same as Kindle. Kindle is on it's way out.
There is a difference between GE products and Sony content. Content, unlike most consumer electric products is uniquely differentiated. If I want to listent to a particular version of Giant Steps from John Coltrane, pulling down a copy of Giant Steps from Sonny Rollins isn't an adequate substitute. It would be good, but it isn't nearly the same thing. If I am forced to go to say, Amazon to buy my Sony content, I might just buy some of my other content while there, because once I'm plugged into Amazon's or Walmart's infrastructure, I've already learned how to use that ecosystem and the marginal cost of purchasing an additional item from that ecosystem goes down. I know, this to be true, since I now purchase the vast majority of my music from Amazon these days.
Having Sony on Amazon or Walmart and not on Itunes is an amazing selling point for Amazon and Walmart.
I think this battle is far more balanced than people in here believe. Which is why I think it will result in some type of nuanced agreement between the two.
I agree that there will be some kind of an agreement because it will be better for both to stay. My main point was a disagreement that it would be worse for Apple if Sony pulled out than it would be for Sony. And therefore Apple would be stupid to not give in.
I also think that many people use iTunes as a way to discover music. You are right that if I am looking for a specific title and can't find it I may go elsewhere, but I might just be interested in cool jazz. So, I browse through and don't even realize that Coltrane isn't there because, uh he isn't there. I find another artist that is also good and download that instead.
It sounds to me like you are also an album buyer (as am I) and a lot of what makes iTunes great for a lot of people is singles downloading. So, if I can't get the song I want because it's Sony and my only choice is to buy the whole album, then I'm likely to head to the bit torrents. But again, I agree, they will work this out.
My "crappy" MP3 player has an FM radio built in, and cost less than half the price of an iPod.
And because it doesn't support Apple's proprietary DRM, I buy my music through the Ubuntu Store or Amazon, where I get DRM-free MP3s that I can use with any player, often for a little less than the iTunes store price.
I like my MP3 player, and feel it offers a good value.
Use what you enjoy. But don't fall into the trap of believing that anything that doesn't sport an Apple logo is necessarily crap. If you've bought as many Macs as I have you'd know that Apple doesn't make perfect products any more than anyone else in this imperfect world.
DRM is mostly gone, though. To be fair, Apple doesnt really care about DRM. The content providers do.
Comments
....What is crazy is that it also includes the Beatles catalog (michael jackson leveraged with Sony) that Apple just promoted insanely around the world. I do not think Apple wants this head ache.......
Jackson, and Sony own part of the publishing on the Beatles material. All distribution and digital rights were negotiated by Apple Corp in England.
But seriously, does anyone remember when Sony attempted to "sell" music online? Courtesy of Wiki:
The major record labels eventually decided to launch their own services, allowing them more direct control over costs. Sony Music Entertainment's service did not do as well as was hoped. Many consumers felt the service was difficult to navigate and use. Sony's pricing of US$3.50 per song track also discouraged many early adopters of the service. Furthermore, as MP3 Newswire pointed out in its review of the service, users were actually only renting the tracks for that $3.50. After a certain point the files expired and could not be played again without repurchase. The service quickly failed.
Those were the days
It only takes one to start the flood. 10 years ago iTunes was it, now things are changing a bit. One leaves, some others may follow. Curious to see how this turns out.
Mmmm, don't think so, Apple could buy sony out at this point their in such bad shape. I'm sure somehow they'll reach a deal.
There are only four large music companies left (EMI, Sony, Warner Music Group and Universal). If Sony did pull out of iTunes, that would be a big blow for iTunes, no matter how much you guys love Apple and hate Sony.
It's not downloading that's killed the industry as much as the return to an industry based upon sales of singles. There's a lot of blame to be passed around for that, but it doesn't matter - it's killing the music business.
And while I don't think Apple is doing anything wrong "per se" in iTunes, I do think their policies are over-restrictive on the e-book and subscription issues and arrogance is getting the better of them. Giving Apple 30% is not viable for many types of publishing - except for the big "hits", publishing is a very short margin business even in the best of times.
I really resent it when Apple presents a 46-page license agreement whenever they change the terms of downloading applications for the iPhone. I realize it's 46 iPhone-sized pages, but such a license agreement is not what a truly consumer friendly company makes part of their policy.
artists don't own music anymore, the big firms do and with sony taking the hottest content to other distributors (amzon, walmart, spotfy ect.) Apple stands to loose more than they would gain, they are not stupid.
I have to disagree. Let's think this through. Say Sony pulls their content. How much revenue does Apple lose? Even with Sony being a big portion of the iTunes content, it's not like the loss would make much of a difference in Apple's overall revenue stream. Yes, it would frustrate customers who wanted to get their Sony music like they used to, but who would they be pissed at? Sony. Would anyone stop using iTunes for their other content needs just because Sony wasn't there? No. iTunes is the biggest distributer of music. This is like saying that Walmart would be hurt more if GE pulled all their products out than GE would. If GE threatened Walmart they might want to have a conversation about it. But GE would have to really work to make up for the loss of that channel if they actually left.
Sony is blowing smoke. They are trying to get some free publicity for their streaming service. Maybe they can make it work, but I don't want to have to pay a subscription and then have my music held hostage in the cloud so I had to keep subscribing to access it. If it is something where I can purchase it once and then stream it forever I might be interested, but that's not what it sounds like to me that Sony has in the works. iTunes isn't perfect, but it's better than anything else right now, including pirating.
One question, if Apple states they've always enforced the rule, why is the Kindle app still available on iTunes?
The Kindle app does not do in-app purchases. You're taken to Amazon.com in Safari and complete the purchase there. The Kindle app then recognizes that you have new content to download and grabs it.
Sony apparently was doing purchases from their book store in-app - which is against the rules. If they had done the same as Amazon they probably would have been fine.
Sony apparently was doing purchases from their book store in-app - which is against the rules. If they had done the same as Amazon they probably would have been fine.
Sony don't have a web portal for their e-book sales. Clicking purchase on their web site takes you to their app!
C.
Good luck with that. "Hostage"? You've sold a billion more tracks via iTunes than you would have otherwise. Pulling your songs from iTunes would be a moronic business move. I guess it is decisions like this that have been the cause of Sony's fall from grace.
He was very clear that they HOPE, depending on business.
It makes sense and probably has nothing to do with the blown out by the media e-reader thing. Why would Sony stay on iTunes and lose 30% if their service is raking in tons and they get to keep that money.
I wonder when Sony and Amazon will allow iTunes / iBooks purchases on their e-readers.
It's not their choice. It is Apple's. Those systems were set up to help sell hardware. So it is unlikely the Apple will ever allow their software on other phones/tablets. Same as Mac OS
One question, if Apple states they've always enforced the rule, why is the Kindle app still available on iTunes?
They never said that. They said that has been the rule for a while but they were giving leeway to existing apps to make the change. However, they announced a deadline of March 31, at which point we will likely see some pulled apps. Including Amazon if they don't add the option.
I have to disagree. Let's think this through. Say Sony pulls their content. How much revenue does Apple lose? Even with Sony being a big portion of the iTunes content, it's not like the loss would make much of a difference in Apple's overall revenue stream. Yes, it would frustrate customers who wanted to get their Sony music like they used to, but who would they be pissed at? Sony. Would anyone stop using iTunes for their other content needs just because Sony wasn't there? No. iTunes is the biggest distributer of music. This is like saying that Walmart would be hurt more if GE pulled all their products out than GE would. If GE threatened Walmart they might want to have a conversation about it. But GE would have really work to make up for the loss of that channel if they actually left.
Sony is blowing smoke. They are trying to get some free publicity for their streaming service. Maybe they can make it work, but I don't want to have to pay a subscription and then have my music held hostage in the cloud so I had to keep subscribing to access it. If it is something where I can purchase it once and then stream it forever I might be interested, but that's not what it sounds like to me that Sony has in the works. iTunes isn't perfect, but it's better than anything else right now, including pirating.
There is a difference between GE products and Sony content. Content, unlike most consumer electric products is uniquely differentiated. If I want to listent to a particular version of Giant Steps from John Coltrane, pulling down a copy of Giant Steps from Sonny Rollins isn't an adequate substitute. It would be good, but it isn't nearly the same thing. If I am forced to go to say, Amazon to buy my Sony content, I might just buy some of my other content while there, because once I'm plugged into Amazon's or Walmart's infrastructure, I've already learned how to use that ecosystem and the marginal cost of purchasing an additional item from that ecosystem goes down. I know, this to be true, since I now purchase the vast majority of my music from Amazon these days.
Having Sony on Amazon or Walmart and not on Itunes is an amazing selling point for Amazon and Walmart.
I think this battle is far more balanced than people in here believe. Which is why I think it will result in some type of nuanced agreement between the two.
Mmmm, don't think so, Apple could buy sony out at this point their in such bad shape. I'm sure somehow they'll reach a deal.
Regardless of the fact that Sony has been losing money, the market cap on Sony is $35 billion. Apple would have to pay a premium to buy it. Japanese regulations probably wouldn't permit a non-Japanese company to buy it anyway. Why would Apple buy it?
In 2009, Sony had 171,000 employees. Apple has about 37,000 employees. Absorbing Sony would be completely overwhelming to Apple. You can't run a company the size of Sony the way that Apple is run (with a very hands-on executive team). Apple has a relatively few number of products and services. Sony has tens of thousands, if not more.
It would never happen and if it did, it would kill Apple. Get real. The only possibility is that Sony decides to get out of the music business, but I doubt U.S. regulators would permit Apple, as the largest distributor of online music, to buy one of the remaining four large music companies. But even if the regulators permitted it, Sony would never sell, if only for face-saving reasons and especially after absorbing most of BMG (RCA).
My bet is that regardless of their cash hoard, there are no big Apple acquisitions while Steve is still CEO and unhealthy.
This is what outsiders see as the Apple Cult. Rightly.
But most people who have an Apple device arent the 1% of cult members. If Kindle and Skype are missing, and Sony e-readers and so on, they will consider an Android Tablet. I still hope Apple win, but I hope they win fairly. And decently.
Sony don't have a web portal for their e-book sales. Clicking purchase on their web site takes you to their app!
Yeah, the app downloads the content. The web portal is for purchasing. Same as a Kindle.
Because Kindle opens up your web browser and takes you to an external web site to purchase the ebook. I understand that Sony wanted the customer to purchase their content from within the app itself.
And as a customer, isn't that what you would prefer? Isn't that a better overall experience? Why go to a website when you can buy in place.
Even if they never say it, that's exactly the feeling the convey. If the talk about european publishers and iPad subscriptions is true, they pretty much have the same mindset. "Without our content, iPad is nothing."
Unfortunately for the content heads, a multi-purpose computing device doesn't serve only their ends.
There is a clear difference, of course. Apple stores and downloads the music you buy from Sony. And a Sony track can be downloaded from the web on OS X.
On the iPad Apple does not store the content for e-books. IAP is merely demanding 30% for a credit card purchase which the providers can handle themselves.
But be careful when you download any song from their store... root *cough* kit *cough*
Because Kindle opens up your web browser and takes you to an external web site to purchase the ebook. I understand that Sony wanted the customer to purchase their content from within the app itself.
Nope. Sony was doing the same as Kindle. Kindle is on it's way out.
There is a difference between GE products and Sony content. Content, unlike most consumer electric products is uniquely differentiated. If I want to listent to a particular version of Giant Steps from John Coltrane, pulling down a copy of Giant Steps from Sonny Rollins isn't an adequate substitute. It would be good, but it isn't nearly the same thing. If I am forced to go to say, Amazon to buy my Sony content, I might just buy some of my other content while there, because once I'm plugged into Amazon's or Walmart's infrastructure, I've already learned how to use that ecosystem and the marginal cost of purchasing an additional item from that ecosystem goes down. I know, this to be true, since I now purchase the vast majority of my music from Amazon these days.
Having Sony on Amazon or Walmart and not on Itunes is an amazing selling point for Amazon and Walmart.
I think this battle is far more balanced than people in here believe. Which is why I think it will result in some type of nuanced agreement between the two.
I agree that there will be some kind of an agreement because it will be better for both to stay. My main point was a disagreement that it would be worse for Apple if Sony pulled out than it would be for Sony. And therefore Apple would be stupid to not give in.
I also think that many people use iTunes as a way to discover music. You are right that if I am looking for a specific title and can't find it I may go elsewhere, but I might just be interested in cool jazz. So, I browse through and don't even realize that Coltrane isn't there because, uh he isn't there. I find another artist that is also good and download that instead.
It sounds to me like you are also an album buyer (as am I) and a lot of what makes iTunes great for a lot of people is singles downloading. So, if I can't get the song I want because it's Sony and my only choice is to buy the whole album, then I'm likely to head to the bit torrents. But again, I agree, they will work this out.
My "crappy" MP3 player has an FM radio built in, and cost less than half the price of an iPod.
And because it doesn't support Apple's proprietary DRM, I buy my music through the Ubuntu Store or Amazon, where I get DRM-free MP3s that I can use with any player, often for a little less than the iTunes store price.
I like my MP3 player, and feel it offers a good value.
Use what you enjoy. But don't fall into the trap of believing that anything that doesn't sport an Apple logo is necessarily crap. If you've bought as many Macs as I have you'd know that Apple doesn't make perfect products any more than anyone else in this imperfect world.
DRM is mostly gone, though. To be fair, Apple doesnt really care about DRM. The content providers do.