I could totally see apple do away with the itunes brand altogether (which could include beats music at the same time) - perhaps introduce a new service along the lines of "music" , like what they are doing with "photos" on the Mac
I seems that in general they are starting to move away from labelling everything wth an "i"
Change it from "Beats by Dre" to "Beats" and buy www.beats.com, redirect traffic from www.beatsbydre.com. But for the sake of Apple, keep Beats a separate company with agreed upon goals. Problem solved.
With the story update there is plenty left to speculate on, hooray!
I subscribed to Beats Music just after Apple bought it. I'd already heard really good things about the curation. I tend to prefer a live DJ's set list when listening to music, hence i tend toward college and public radio versus the clearchannel outlets of various genres. I'd always felt let down when sampling the prior streaming services. Never felt they were even close to a real DJ.
Beats Music really changes my mind.
Don't get me wrong, there are rough edges all around Beats Music, but the core concept of strong curation is very compelling to me!
Apple brings lots to the table, not least of which is a license to stream The Beatles. Honestly, it's the only band I can think of off-hand that I've looked for and not found.
Roll it into iTunes, keep the Beats Music branding, doesn't matter to me, though I feel the iTunes brand is losing steam a bit these days. Of course Apple has tied the U2 album givaway to their iTunes brand, really looks like the marketing muscle is pushing iTunes as THE brand right now. The important thing is to keep the core strength of Beats Music around.
…No need for Apple to have iTunes radio and Beats Music app. Might as will combine them into one streaming music service oh and while they're at it give iTunes a proper redesign.
Agreed but why not call it Apple Beats? I think that sounds better than iTunes Radio. Radio is kinda…well…old tech.
Agreed but why not call it Apple Beats? I think that sounds better than iTunes Radio. Radio is kinda…well…old tech. :\
So are Phone, TV and Watch, not to mention Numbers, Pages, Mail and a whole slew of other terms that are technology that have existed for a very long time.
I swear they paid for a successful headphone brand AND a streaming service.
So you think Apple might pull a Google/Motorola?(read your post above)
But oddly, you admitted Beats was synonymous with a headphone brand so dropping the service was no big deal. Which is why I thought you finally saw the light.
I didn't say it was no big deal. I think it's only logical that the streaming music service gets combined with iTunes Radio. Keep the Beats brand for headphones, keep the iTunes brand for music.
Why Apple ever bought Beats still unclear to me? On the surface the deal seems to be an awful mistake.
Well some people think it's just fine because those crappy headphones make a lot of money. Or that somehow Beats headphones being owned by Apple will make these urban teenagers flock to iPhones. I always thought it just reinforced the false narrative that Apple products are overpriced and only sell well because of design/marketing.
Change it from "Beats by Dre" to "Beats" and buy www.beats.com, redirect traffic from www.beatsbydre.com. But for the sake of Apple, keep Beats a separate company with agreed upon goals. Problem solved.
I wonder how long Iovine and Dre will stick around. I have a hard time believing they're working full time for Apple. Ian Rogers and the other Beats employees Apple kept probably are. But Jimmy & Dre no way,
Buying Beats was stupid. Dump the headphones (preferably in a landfill, they're crap), absorb anything useful (I doubt there's much) from the streaming service into iTunes Radio, and write off the loss.
YOu should really change the way you display the "update". Either put it at the bottom of the article, or in bold font, or a line under it or something. It's hard to discern when the update stops and the original story begins. I'm assuming the "update" is only one paragraph in this story?
Well some people think it's just fine because those crappy headphones make a lot of money. Or that somehow Beats headphones being owned by Apple will make these urban teenagers flock to iPhones. I always thought it just reinforced the false narrative that Apple products are overpriced and only sell well because of design/marketing.
Hopefully, Apple will turn crappy headphones into "cool teen" iOS enabled wearables that eventually lead to phone sales.
Comments
“It’s the people, dingus!”
You mean Dr "Dre"? Expensive people indeed.
I seems that in general they are starting to move away from labelling everything wth an "i"
Change it from "Beats by Dre" to "Beats" and buy www.beats.com, redirect traffic from www.beatsbydre.com. But for the sake of Apple, keep Beats a separate company with agreed upon goals. Problem solved.
Then why was Beats Music just added to the Apple TV menu?
As long as they keep it a distinctly different brand that cannot taint Apple, big deal.
With the story update there is plenty left to speculate on, hooray!
I subscribed to Beats Music just after Apple bought it. I'd already heard really good things about the curation. I tend to prefer a live DJ's set list when listening to music, hence i tend toward college and public radio versus the clearchannel outlets of various genres. I'd always felt let down when sampling the prior streaming services. Never felt they were even close to a real DJ.
Beats Music really changes my mind.
Don't get me wrong, there are rough edges all around Beats Music, but the core concept of strong curation is very compelling to me!
Apple brings lots to the table, not least of which is a license to stream The Beatles. Honestly, it's the only band I can think of off-hand that I've looked for and not found.
Roll it into iTunes, keep the Beats Music branding, doesn't matter to me, though I feel the iTunes brand is losing steam a bit these days. Of course Apple has tied the U2 album givaway to their iTunes brand, really looks like the marketing muscle is pushing iTunes as THE brand right now. The important thing is to keep the core strength of Beats Music around.
…No need for Apple to have iTunes radio and Beats Music app. Might as will combine them into one streaming music service oh and while they're at it give iTunes a proper redesign.
Agreed but why not call it Apple Beats? I think that sounds better than iTunes Radio. Radio is kinda…well…old tech.
So are Phone, TV and Watch, not to mention Numbers, Pages, Mail and a whole slew of other terms that are technology that have existed for a very long time.
Why Apple ever bought Beats still unclear to me? On the surface the deal seems to be an awful mistake.
Hello????
Crappy headphone Apple employees wouldn't even recommend. And a subscription service that doesn't include classical, Country, jazz or opera?
Well some people think it's just fine because those crappy headphones make a lot of money. Or that somehow Beats headphones being owned by Apple will make these urban teenagers flock to iPhones. I always thought it just reinforced the false narrative that Apple products are overpriced and only sell well because of design/marketing.
I wonder how long Iovine and Dre will stick around. I have a hard time believing they're working full time for Apple. Ian Rogers and the other Beats employees Apple kept probably are. But Jimmy & Dre no way,
Good.
Buying Beats was stupid. Dump the headphones (preferably in a landfill, they're crap), absorb anything useful (I doubt there's much) from the streaming service into iTunes Radio, and write off the loss.
Well some people think it's just fine because those crappy headphones make a lot of money. Or that somehow Beats headphones being owned by Apple will make these urban teenagers flock to iPhones. I always thought it just reinforced the false narrative that Apple products are overpriced and only sell well because of design/marketing.
Hopefully, Apple will turn crappy headphones into "cool teen" iOS enabled wearables that eventually lead to phone sales.
When history is written I doubt the name Beats will be remembered any more than the product Apple bought to create iTunes.