There is no confirmation until one of the two companies (which include their top executives) directly and fully making statements that a sale has been made.
I get that. I'm a little surprised on the silence; how long will this rumour remain a rumour before we hear anything from Apple, a confirmation or denial? It took weeks before Phil came out and said there wasn't going to be an iPhono mini: http://www.uswitch.com/mobiles/news/2013/01/apple_denies_iphone_mini_rumours/
I'm a little surprised on the silence; how long will this rumour remain a rumour before we hear anything from Apple, a confirmation or denial?
Assuming it's true — which I think is quite plausible now given all the presumed accurate information that has come this past weekend — I think we're likely not going to hear anything until WWDC… unless something happens that forces Apple to get out in front of it so it can be the first to announce it. That something might be a signed document or change ownership to get it in iOS 8 beta 1 for developers. That said I think the most likely scenario, if true, will be at WWDC. Apple didn't actually show us the iPhone 4 until that Autumn event. I seem to recall Phil Schiller on stage joking about how we've all already seen it.
Assuming it's true — which I think is quite plausible now given all the presumed accurate information that has come this past weekend — I think we're likely not going to hear anything until WWDC… unless something happens that forces Apple to get out in front of it so it can be the first to announce it. That something might be a signed document or change ownership to get it in iOS 8 beta 1 for developers. That said I think the most likely scenario, if true, will be at WWDC. Apple didn't actually show us the iPhone 4 until that Autumn event. I seem to recall Phil Schiller on stage joking about how we've all already seen it.
Oh my, that's another 3 weeks of rumour mills running on all cilinders. Oh well, easier to read than what analysts think where the stock is going. Or that David Einhorn hedgefund guy suing Apple.
Do you think there might be something useful to find in the next iOS beta? As in Beats Electronics patents? Will developers first start to look into iTunes Radio for this?
Why the need to buy beats? Their headphones are okay (but well below Apple standards). I don't really understand the fuss about their music service either?
This acquisition makes it look like Apple is clueless and they are buying themselves back into a niche?
I don't understand the hype about this acquisition. On paper it looks exciting. I don't see the benefits in real life though.
Do you think there might be something useful to find in the next iOS beta? As in Beats Electronics patents? Will developers first start to look into iTunes Radio for this?
I would doubt iOS 7 would get a major new feature at this point, and any server-side features would likely not be known.
I think ITunes Store music section had it's first decline since opening. That sounds like a model that needs some reworking to continue to grow. There is no need for an extreme of not working before you make changes to a system.
Why the need to buy beats? Their headphones are okay (but well below Apple standards).
Apple's headphones are above Beats headphones? I'm listening...
I don't really understand the fuss about their music service either?
Neither do I as I'm not one who likes to rent music but I would like the algorithm incorporated into ITunes Radio and Genius Playlists in iTunes and the iOS Music app for better auto-generated playlists.
This acquisition makes it look like Apple is clueless and they are buying themselves back into a niche? I don't understand the hype about this acquisition. On paper it looks exciting. I don't see the benefits in real life though.
Based on all the available info now, assuming it's accurate, it seems like it's pretty smart to me.
I'm all out of comments. I've already used them up on all of the previous threads about this subject, and I can't really think of anything else to say about this that I haven't already said.:smokey:
You've managed two sentences and an emoji.
From your post, I would say that your opinion on this matter is...exhausted.
And then again, there are obviously those here on AI that think if they state the same objections over and over ad nauseum, Apple will drop the acquisition due to 'high blog-pressure'.
“Apple buys smaller beats from time to time, that generally doesn't resonate well”
Damn I miss Katie already!
Maybe there is a new biometric device coming from the new partnership that addresses that terrible condition.
Quote: "He noted the appeal of Beats to both young users as well as black Americans, given the strong reputation Beats products carry in those demographics."
I said this very thing in a previous thread about this. Hate to say it and I am sure to get flamed for it but Apple products are viewed as being for upwardly mobile whites. Yes there are more minorities represented more recently in Apple advertisements but for the most part Apple products appear to be targeted to a white market. That's the way of the world (Earth, Wind, and Fire) but time will tell if this really pans out. It is a smart move if that is what Apple is aiming for. Besides, I do like Dre much better than P-Dummy.
The only downwardly mobile whites I've come across have been in my frying pan.
This headline gave me a good chuckle. Spin at its finest. If AI had put up a poll a week or month ago asking members what company/technology Apple should buy/invest in no way would Beats been near the top, or even made the list for that matter. Now that it's a real possibility AI needs to try and put a positive spin on it.
Boy if it turns out there is something none of us knew about and it is a huge success down the line, there is going to be a lot of eating crow around here ... yes we keep records ... The Dvorak Hall of Fame Shame Award could be up for votes.
I think the only eating taking place is going to be of Beatroot.
I would doubt iOS 7 would get a major new feature at this point, and any server-side features would likely not be known.
Quite. It's also way too close to WWDC. Not that they'll release v8, but one may assume, from history, that there's a beta for developers.
I think ITunes Store music section had it's first decline since opening. That sounds like a model that needs some reworking to continue to grow. There is no need for an extreme of not working before you make changes to a system.
iTunes sales are indeed declining, for the first time since its inception on April 28, 2003
quote: (Jan 2014 article)
Digital music sales declined for the first time in 2013 since the iTunes Store opened a decade before, according to new data from Nielsen SoundScan. Billboard reports that sales of tracks declined 5.7 percent, to 1.34 billion units, while album sales fell 0.1 percent, to 117.6 million. The chief culprit, according to executives interviewed by Billboard: streaming services like Spotify and Pandora.
At around $10 a month for unlimited listening, the streaming services are proving to be an attractive alternative to albums that cost $10 apiece. The good news for record labels: so far, revenue from streaming services has offset the decline in sales. And digital sales are falling much more slowly than sales of physical media — CD sales fell 14.5 percent last year.
Apple's headphones are above Beats headphones? I'm listening...
LOL @ I'm listening...
What are the odds of Apple including $79 in-ear earphones with their iPods? And if they do that, will they include them with iPhones as well? Something to tinker on...
No .... It's so Apple can patent wearing a baseball cap backwards, .. $3.2 B ... it's a steal!
[VIDEO]
Think I'll check out on this whole acqui-rumour. Had some laughs, and read insightful views from many posters - for that: thanks. Will Apple buy them: Beats me.
The main issue I have with this merger is that the know-nothings in the tech press will chime on and on about how this "culturally compatible" merger is the ultimate expression of style-over-substance. The problem here is that if the merger goes through, Apple's critics will be half right.
For people who know anything about Apple, the company values style, but prioritizes substance even more. If anything, Apple thinks things through at greater depth than any other consumer electronics company. They are often viewed as shallow overpriced "toys" for the trendy crowd, yet the actual products are anything but.
With Beats' audio products, the company becomes more about style-over-substance the closer you look. To me, that's where Beats is culturally at odds with what Apple actually is (as opposed to how Apple is perceived in certain circles).
To an uneducated observer (or an obtuse tech reviewer trolling for page views), Apple just makes a bunch of overpriced products that prioritize design over performance. Yet, in actual testing and real world usage, Apple's products will outperform the competition and place the highest priority on the user experience. This is the exact opposite of how Beats audio products come out when scrutinizing the overall product quality closer.
Beats is the exact type of company that Apple's critics claim that Apple is. I understand the potential strategic value of the Beats Music service, and in the grand scheme of overpriced Web 2.0 acquisitions, $3.2 billion seems to go right along with those hyperinflated valuations. But, I also see collateral damage to Apple's hard-fought brand image by acquiring a company whose values are closer to the distorted caricature (put forth by the company's enemies) of what Apple represents.
Very good comment.
It's also very strange for Apple to buy a consumer hardware company—if they do indeed buy Beats. On the surface, it's a bit like Microsoft building hardware—the Surface— and trying to compete against its own allies. Why would Apple suddenly want to sell a range of headphones and go head to head against all the others? Clearly, they're not going to. It's part of a much more interesting play whose details we're not yet privy to.
Seems to me that either they'll transform the headphones into something more, or they'll use the streaming service; perhaps both.
Until Apple rereleased the new Mac Pro many were saying that Apple no longer cared about the pro market, and many are still saying it. Comparing Apple earbuds to just abut any other earbuds on the market puts Apple dead last. Don't give us this, Beats quality is below Apple standards crap. Besides, Beats is not claiming to be studio reference headphones. They are marketed as hip and their target market is young people in the street, on the bus, in the mall, etc. It is a fashion accessory not a professional piece of kit.
Read my prior post. My whole point is that Apple at its core is more about substance. Style matters, but your point about the Mac Pro attests to Apple being very much an engineering and innovation-driven company. If anything, the Beats acquisition denigrates Apple's brand image, precisely because Beats exemplifies the very style-over-substance credo that clueless media critics and "analysts" accuse Apple of following. Apple's products are fashion-savvy, but they also have considerable attention to detail and class-leading engineering behind them. That combination is what makes Apple unique and why the company attracts the kind of loyalty that it does.
And before you go on about what Beats claims and doesn't claim, just look at the names for their headphone lineup -- "Studio"; "Mixr" and "Pro". Is that not trading on some image that goes beyond mere fashion and hipness? Or have you not seen the TV ads with Dre in the studio?
Then, let's look at the byline for the Beats "Pro" model -- "The Headphones Used to Mix In Every Major Studio." Are you saying that's "not claiming to be studio reference headphones"?
As I indicated in my prior post, I can see the strategic value of the Beats Music service. In the context of recent social media acquisitions and content deals getting inked in broadcast media, $3.2 billion hardly raises an eyebrow. But, the Beats hardware lineup is something that indeed isn't up to Apple's standards, especially since unlike the earbuds that Apple throws in as a freebie with an iPhone or iPod, Beats charges for their earbuds and headphones, and charges a lot. Apple products aren't cheap either, but they will also typically deliver very high value for the price. Apple's competitors simply don't deliver a comparable or better product for half the price. Can't say the same for Beats products.
I agree. That is also what Jimmy said on AllThingsD. Besides, these headphones must sound better than the iPod/iPhone included earbuds? Haven't used either one myself though...
Then, let's look at the byline for the Beats "Pro" model -- "The Headphones Used to Mix In Every Major Studio." Are you saying that's "not claiming to be studio reference headphones"?
Good catch. Looks like I was incorrect in my assumption that they were not considered professional grade. Oh well…I did read some reviews on the "Pro" now that you mentioned it and they get some decent scores although they still have the overpowered bass response issue.
The ones that they sell in the major electronic retailer outlets are the ones we see on the street and those are certainly not "pro" quality, more like the fashion statement that I was referring to.
Comments
I get that. I'm a little surprised on the silence; how long will this rumour remain a rumour before we hear anything from Apple, a confirmation or denial? It took weeks before Phil came out and said there wasn't going to be an iPhono mini:
http://www.uswitch.com/mobiles/news/2013/01/apple_denies_iphone_mini_rumours/
At least Loewe denied an article from this site the following day:
http://thenextweb.com/apple/2012/05/13/german-tv-maker-loewe-denies-apple-acquisition-rumour-says-report-has-absolutely-nothing-to-it/
But how long for a confirmation? Are there any statistics out there on all Apple acquisition rumours?
Sure they do; when it's bogus they come out and say so. I just can't find any statistics on the timing of their denial on acquisition rumours.
Assuming it's true — which I think is quite plausible now given all the presumed accurate information that has come this past weekend — I think we're likely not going to hear anything until WWDC… unless something happens that forces Apple to get out in front of it so it can be the first to announce it. That something might be a signed document or change ownership to get it in iOS 8 beta 1 for developers. That said I think the most likely scenario, if true, will be at WWDC. Apple didn't actually show us the iPhone 4 until that Autumn event. I seem to recall Phil Schiller on stage joking about how we've all already seen it.
There we go. Proof that Apple has shown to not respond instantly to unfounded rumours.
None that I'm aware of.
Oh my, that's another 3 weeks of rumour mills running on all cilinders. Oh well, easier to read than what analysts think where the stock is going. Or that David Einhorn hedgefund guy suing Apple.
Do you think there might be something useful to find in the next iOS beta? As in Beats Electronics patents? Will developers first start to look into iTunes Radio for this?
I am confused.
Does it mean the iTunes model doesn't work?
Why the need to buy beats? Their headphones are okay (but well below Apple standards). I don't really understand the fuss about their music service either?
This acquisition makes it look like Apple is clueless and they are buying themselves back into a niche?
I don't understand the hype about this acquisition. On paper it looks exciting. I don't see the benefits in real life though.
I would doubt iOS 7 would get a major new feature at this point, and any server-side features would likely not be known.
I think ITunes Store music section had it's first decline since opening. That sounds like a model that needs some reworking to continue to grow. There is no need for an extreme of not working before you make changes to a system.
Apple's headphones are above Beats headphones? I'm listening...
Neither do I as I'm not one who likes to rent music but I would like the algorithm incorporated into ITunes Radio and Genius Playlists in iTunes and the iOS Music app for better auto-generated playlists.
Based on all the available info now, assuming it's accurate, it seems like it's pretty smart to me.
You've managed two sentences and an emoji.
From your post, I would say that your opinion on this matter is...exhausted.
Hey, buddy—just Beat it.
The only downwardly mobile whites I've come across have been in my frying pan.
Like you know that you should—n't.
I think the only eating taking place is going to be of Beatroot.
Shocking. Despicable. Outrageous.
Quite. It's also way too close to WWDC. Not that they'll release v8, but one may assume, from history, that there's a beta for developers.
iTunes sales are indeed declining, for the first time since its inception on April 28, 2003
quote: (Jan 2014 article)
source: http://www.theverge.com/2014/1/3/5271528/music-sales-decline-for-the-first-time-since-the-itunes-store-opened
LOL @ I'm listening...
What are the odds of Apple including $79 in-ear earphones with their iPods? And if they do that, will they include them with iPhones as well? Something to tinker on...
Hey, don't Beat yourself up over it.
Very good comment.
It's also very strange for Apple to buy a consumer hardware company—if they do indeed buy Beats. On the surface, it's a bit like Microsoft building hardware—the Surface— and trying to compete against its own allies. Why would Apple suddenly want to sell a range of headphones and go head to head against all the others? Clearly, they're not going to. It's part of a much more interesting play whose details we're not yet privy to.
Seems to me that either they'll transform the headphones into something more, or they'll use the streaming service; perhaps both.
Until Apple rereleased the new Mac Pro many were saying that Apple no longer cared about the pro market, and many are still saying it. Comparing Apple earbuds to just abut any other earbuds on the market puts Apple dead last. Don't give us this, Beats quality is below Apple standards crap. Besides, Beats is not claiming to be studio reference headphones. They are marketed as hip and their target market is young people in the street, on the bus, in the mall, etc. It is a fashion accessory not a professional piece of kit.
Read my prior post. My whole point is that Apple at its core is more about substance. Style matters, but your point about the Mac Pro attests to Apple being very much an engineering and innovation-driven company. If anything, the Beats acquisition denigrates Apple's brand image, precisely because Beats exemplifies the very style-over-substance credo that clueless media critics and "analysts" accuse Apple of following. Apple's products are fashion-savvy, but they also have considerable attention to detail and class-leading engineering behind them. That combination is what makes Apple unique and why the company attracts the kind of loyalty that it does.
And before you go on about what Beats claims and doesn't claim, just look at the names for their headphone lineup -- "Studio"; "Mixr" and "Pro". Is that not trading on some image that goes beyond mere fashion and hipness? Or have you not seen the TV ads with Dre in the studio?
Then, let's look at the byline for the Beats "Pro" model -- "The Headphones Used to Mix In Every Major Studio." Are you saying that's "not claiming to be studio reference headphones"?
http://www.beatsbydre.com/headphones/
As I indicated in my prior post, I can see the strategic value of the Beats Music service. In the context of recent social media acquisitions and content deals getting inked in broadcast media, $3.2 billion hardly raises an eyebrow. But, the Beats hardware lineup is something that indeed isn't up to Apple's standards, especially since unlike the earbuds that Apple throws in as a freebie with an iPhone or iPod, Beats charges for their earbuds and headphones, and charges a lot. Apple products aren't cheap either, but they will also typically deliver very high value for the price. Apple's competitors simply don't deliver a comparable or better product for half the price. Can't say the same for Beats products.
I agree. That is also what Jimmy said on AllThingsD. Besides, these headphones must sound better than the iPod/iPhone included earbuds? Haven't used either one myself though...
Let's hope -- given that there's already a sub-brand in the current Beats line-up -- that it'll be called iBeats.
Oh I see a problem with that ...
Yeah, and not an easy one to handle delicately...
Good catch. Looks like I was incorrect in my assumption that they were not considered professional grade. Oh well…I did read some reviews on the "Pro" now that you mentioned it and they get some decent scores although they still have the overpowered bass response issue.
The ones that they sell in the major electronic retailer outlets are the ones we see on the street and those are certainly not "pro" quality, more like the fashion statement that I was referring to.