Will Microsoft's player support AAC? If so, will it put DRM into the files when it "imports" them into it's media player? That would be a serious pain in the ass if it did that, especially for people that digitized albums.
So you're saying that you think MS will not only re-purchase iTunes libraries, but that they will also subsidize the player? What would be the point?
I would agree with that. MS had been taking losses on X-box for years just to break into the gaming market. I belive they still are taking losses on the consols for 360.
Does it really matter? iTunes has sold over 1 000 000 000 songs, most users propably haven't bought any tracks from iTunes store, but some have quite many. Probably close to everyone who has iPod uses iTunes to at least fill it with music, yes there are other programs for that as well, but my guess is they are a minority. Then there are also many who just use iTunes as a media library a) because it came with their mac or b) because it's superior to windows media player(>=10)
Well actually it DOES matter: iTMS users are the one targetted by Microsoft, and not the entire iPod community! As so, Microsoft will probably have to spend a LOT of money PER user, just to acquire A SINGLE customer. In other words, it's more an iTMS killer move, than an iPod killer one.
This reminds me of the video showing what the packaging would look like if Microsoft made the iPod. I'm sure lots of you have seen it already, but it's so funny. Enjoy.
The only way Microsoft could make a dent in Apple's MP3 marketshare is if they mailed out millions and millions of their own MP3 player for free to people's homes. And I wouldn't put it past them. I wouldn't be surprised to see a free Microsoft MP3 player included this Christmas with the purchase of Windows Vista, an xBox 360, and any new Dell computer. Buy all three and give two to your friends as gifts. Plus they'll be giving 1 away every ten minutes at every Walmart this shopping season. Microsoft won the Operating System, Browser, and Media Player wars because their shit came installed by default on 9 out of 10 computers sold. The only way they know how to win is by giving you their stuff for free so you don't bother looking at the alternatives.
But in their defense, if it's true that their xBox 360 guys are working on their MP3 player, then they stand a chance of making something remotely usable. I do like the xBox 360. But beating Sony in design and usability is nothing like beating Apple.
Hell if they are giving them away they don't have to be better than iPods. That's the problem for Apple. Better can't compete against free. The thing that worries me is, to what extent is MS willing to go to capture this market?
Just to repeat what has certainly already been said, isn't is amazing how all M$ can do is throw money at the sheep of competitors products and call it 'innovation?' What kind of business model supports buying the contents of the new customers merchandise?
Isn't this like XBOX where they don't really expect to make a profit, just a dent in the competition (not that they offered to buy Playstation titles)?
Shows me they are really just big bullies who can't stand to see anyone else succeed; jump in the game once everything is figured out and call it innovation. Or like they're heros saving users from the awful non-M$/OS integrated experience!
What next, Sony will bring back Betamax and offer to buy my VHS/DVD titles?
The average cost an iPod owner has invested in their iTMS library is $20. (50 million iPods, 1 billion songs sold.) So I can't see the purchased music as much of a barrier.
Of course that math blows up when you consider that many iTMS users have multiple iPods...
Just to repeat what has certainly already been said, isn't is amazing how all M$ can do is throw money at the sheep of competitors products and call it 'innovation?' What kind of business model supports buying the contents of the new customers merchandise?
Isn't this like XBOX where they don't really expect to make a profit, just a dent in the competition (not that they offered to buy Playstation titles)?
Shows me they are really just big bullies who can't stand to see anyone else succeed; jump in the game once everything is figured out and call it innovation. Or like they're heros saving users from the awful non-M$/OS integrated experience!
What next, Sony will bring back Betamax and offer to buy my VHS/DVD titles?
It's a fine business model. This is about customer aquisition. No doubt to have the songs replaced, you will be setting up an account with a credit card with MSN. Aquiring those credit-card secured accounts is worth a lot of money to Microsoft. Remember what a big deal Steve made at MacWorld about similar accounts at iTMS.
I don't really like the direction the rumors show music players going. I don't want a bigger screen, don't think I want wifi. I like the click wheel as is. I don't like the smaller click wheel on the nano. What I do want is a larger hard drive to hold more music. It would also be nice to have bluetooth or some other way to use wireless headphones, but that's not critical. Maybe we're at a point where music players will split from bigger, more video oriented devices.
Maybe I'm wrong and the hardware sales will actually make this worthwhile, but the offering of free tunes makes me think that MS is more concerned with simply dethroning Apple than actually turning a profit with this project. From what we've seen with the Xbox project (and now possibly this), I'm not sure if MS cares about anything but market share anymore...
It's a fine business model. This is about customer aquisition. No doubt to have the songs replaced, you will be setting up an account with a credit card with MSN. Aquiring those credit-card secured accounts is worth a lot of money to Microsoft. Remember what a big deal Steve made at MacWorld about similar accounts at iTMS.
Right, a fine business model for M$. I doubt Napster and the like are sitting there thinking, "Gee, why didn't we think to buy the iTunes music library?!" More likely, "Gee, too bad we couldn't afford to.... Do you think this might work?" Again, M$ throws money to 'compete' even if it's at a loss to their bottom line. I'm sure there's a class in Business School where they teach this stuff...
Time will tell whether the money M$ gets from all those credit card secured accounts will make up for all the money they give the record labels to buy the iTunes purchased music.
If you re-read the article, you'll see that the record companies didn't give them permission to give out free songs, Microsoft is going to be paying for each of those songs (although probably at a discounted price).
I think it would be funny to install Microsoft's music player, download the free songs, and then not use them, giving Microsoft a gigantic bill for nothing.
I agree, and in theory that would be cool. But knowing Microsoft, installing the software probably will open the system up for viruses, some adware, and other malware, so maybe it isn't even worth the headache of installing and downloading the files....
If you re-read the article, you'll see that the record companies didn't give them permission to give out free songs, Microsoft is going to be paying for each of those songs (although probably at a discounted price).
I think it would be funny to install Microsoft's music player, download the free songs, and then not use them, giving Microsoft a gigantic bill for nothing.
That would be awesome, and extremely damaging to M$. Although, it would give them the statistics they need to negotiate with the labels, and the press would read "Microsoft gets 99% of itunes users as People jump off the sinking ship of Apple!!" \ \
That would be awesome, and extremely damaging to M$. Although, it would give them the statistics they need to negotiate with the labels, and the press would read "Microsoft gets 99% of itunes users as People jump off the sinking ship of Apple!!" \ \
ALTHOUGH........ If practically every ITMS user did install, and then delete the horid M$ software, and made it public they were doing so, M$ would experience a BILLION songs they purchaced for nothing... And the media and the labels would be aware of it so the statistics would mean nothing.. And since M$ is such a hackers haven, then with a little help from our hacker friends, they could figure out a way to drain M$ financially. Also, with all those purchaced song replacements from M$, that were given to all those users, it now allows people to give or sell them to people. Imagine, you spent a total of $20,000 over the last few years on ITMS. Now for the small price of buying a M$ player, and loading with all the replacement songs, you now sell it for $10,000! Or even better yet, buy many of the players and sell them loaded with songs for a few hundred dollars above the cost of the players. The record companies can't say much, since they WERE paid for by M$.
But Ultimately, I think a clever hack would make M$ liable for Billions of dollars to the record industry... For nothing.
There is a multi Billion dollar ipod ecosystem. Many people would have to replace all of those items as well. And vendors would also baulk at the intrusion.
Podcasts. There are even radio stations broadcasting only podcasts. And many companies and individuals alike are using it.
M$ has money. But a loosing venture will come to an abrupt halt if the shareholders have anything to say about it.
Hacks cost the company $ to fix and a bad image. But if M$ exchanges songs for ITMS songs, a simple hack, and misuse of this "Great Idea", in essence, becomes a direct pipeline into Microsoft's wallet. The record companies will not care if a hack created by some one, or many, or the record companies themselves, were to become evident. The songs were still distributed, and M$ has agreed to pay for them. It would, in fact be the largest hack in history. Like tapping into the government or a bank, and bleeding them dry, except it will not ever have the security of a bank or government. With the amount of potential users using M$, in several hours, it could easily make M$ liable for 50 billion dollars before it could be shut down.
Giving away free items to snuff the competition is against the law. M$ has already tried it many times with Windows and office, and other products. It is highly illegal, and believe me they would if they could.
Tactics like these have been used for many years in today's fast moving electronic markets. A company will say they are releasing "something way better" "Soon". This in effect makes a buyer hold back on their purchase, and subconsciously commits them to buying their product later, since it will be that much better. But "Soon" either never comes, or falls way short of what was promised. The company now at least has a chance to sell them their product, since they have not purchased as of yet.
This tactic in essence, slows the bleeding (market dominance), and gives them the much needed time to enter the market before it is too late. This tactic is ripe and makes since in light of M$'s recently formed alliance with other manufacturers such as toshiba, sony, and others that are banding together to unseat Apple's dominance. It may be that M$ will create the system, and license it to others, thus not becoming in direct competition with their allies. (Like Origami)
Sheep (consumers) seem to bite on this every time.
So if you want to see the demise of M$, THIS is the thing that may finally do it. And very quickly.
... sell them loaded with songs for a few hundred dollars above the cost of the players. The record companies can't say much, since they WERE paid for by M$.
That's probably the most interesting thought I've read on this thread; it will probably be a situation in which Microsoft requires you buy the player and submit the serial number before getting the free song replacements.
That said, you're right--if these players cost $249 (which is what they would have to cost to compete with the nano effectively), then anyone with more than $249 in songs (not including tax) could conceivably make a profit from buying the player, downloading the songs, and selling them on eBay--because they technically would own two licenses for the songs. Of course, I'm not sure how many have bought that amount of songs--even though I have bought 230, and I consider myself to be an infrequent buyer (perhaps erroneously).
The other point no one's thought of regards OEMs that already make hardware that works with Microsoft's music store and WMA files... Is Microsoft really going to screw those partners out of sales by giving away free songs like this? Or would MSFT extent the same benefit to partners like Sandisk, so that MSFT would offer Sandisk customers free songs, too? If they did, there would be no hope of profit--that would be just burning money. (Sandisk is #2 behind Apple in the MP3 player market, selling 1 million players during Christmas 2005.)
Of course that math blows up when you consider that many iTMS users have multiple iPods...
It does, I remember Steve Jobs saying at a keynote awhile ago (within the last year) that the average iTunes Music store account has purchased 60 songs on average. That includes the people who go on just to try it out or set up an account to get a free pepsi song.
(Bill Gates calling in to Microsoft from Sub-Saharan Africa after hearing about a billion dollar loss caused by a clever hack in their new iTunes killer software)
Comments
Originally posted by solsun
So you're saying that you think MS will not only re-purchase iTunes libraries, but that they will also subsidize the player? What would be the point?
I would agree with that. MS had been taking losses on X-box for years just to break into the gaming market. I belive they still are taking losses on the consols for 360.
Originally posted by Project2501
Does it really matter? iTunes has sold over 1 000 000 000 songs, most users propably haven't bought any tracks from iTunes store, but some have quite many. Probably close to everyone who has iPod uses iTunes to at least fill it with music, yes there are other programs for that as well, but my guess is they are a minority. Then there are also many who just use iTunes as a media library a) because it came with their mac or b) because it's superior to windows media player(>=10)
Well actually it DOES matter: iTMS users are the one targetted by Microsoft, and not the entire iPod community! As so, Microsoft will probably have to spend a LOT of money PER user, just to acquire A SINGLE customer. In other words, it's more an iTMS killer move, than an iPod killer one.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=aeXAcwriid0
Originally posted by Cory Bauer
The only way Microsoft could make a dent in Apple's MP3 marketshare is if they mailed out millions and millions of their own MP3 player for free to people's homes. And I wouldn't put it past them. I wouldn't be surprised to see a free Microsoft MP3 player included this Christmas with the purchase of Windows Vista, an xBox 360, and any new Dell computer. Buy all three and give two to your friends as gifts. Plus they'll be giving 1 away every ten minutes at every Walmart this shopping season. Microsoft won the Operating System, Browser, and Media Player wars because their shit came installed by default on 9 out of 10 computers sold. The only way they know how to win is by giving you their stuff for free so you don't bother looking at the alternatives.
But in their defense, if it's true that their xBox 360 guys are working on their MP3 player, then they stand a chance of making something remotely usable. I do like the xBox 360. But beating Sony in design and usability is nothing like beating Apple.
Hell if they are giving them away they don't have to be better than iPods. That's the problem for Apple. Better can't compete against free. The thing that worries me is, to what extent is MS willing to go to capture this market?
Isn't this like XBOX where they don't really expect to make a profit, just a dent in the competition (not that they offered to buy Playstation titles)?
Shows me they are really just big bullies who can't stand to see anyone else succeed; jump in the game once everything is figured out and call it innovation. Or like they're heros saving users from the awful non-M$/OS integrated experience!
What next, Sony will bring back Betamax and offer to buy my VHS/DVD titles?
Originally posted by solsun
The average cost an iPod owner has invested in their iTMS library is $20. (50 million iPods, 1 billion songs sold.) So I can't see the purchased music as much of a barrier.
Of course that math blows up when you consider that many iTMS users have multiple iPods...
Originally posted by bmyers2
Just to repeat what has certainly already been said, isn't is amazing how all M$ can do is throw money at the sheep of competitors products and call it 'innovation?' What kind of business model supports buying the contents of the new customers merchandise?
Isn't this like XBOX where they don't really expect to make a profit, just a dent in the competition (not that they offered to buy Playstation titles)?
Shows me they are really just big bullies who can't stand to see anyone else succeed; jump in the game once everything is figured out and call it innovation. Or like they're heros saving users from the awful non-M$/OS integrated experience!
What next, Sony will bring back Betamax and offer to buy my VHS/DVD titles?
It's a fine business model. This is about customer aquisition. No doubt to have the songs replaced, you will be setting up an account with a credit card with MSN. Aquiring those credit-card secured accounts is worth a lot of money to Microsoft. Remember what a big deal Steve made at MacWorld about similar accounts at iTMS.
Originally posted by netdog
It's a fine business model. This is about customer aquisition. No doubt to have the songs replaced, you will be setting up an account with a credit card with MSN. Aquiring those credit-card secured accounts is worth a lot of money to Microsoft. Remember what a big deal Steve made at MacWorld about similar accounts at iTMS.
Right, a fine business model for M$. I doubt Napster and the like are sitting there thinking, "Gee, why didn't we think to buy the iTunes music library?!" More likely, "Gee, too bad we couldn't afford to.... Do you think this might work?" Again, M$ throws money to 'compete' even if it's at a loss to their bottom line. I'm sure there's a class in Business School where they teach this stuff...
Time will tell whether the money M$ gets from all those credit card secured accounts will make up for all the money they give the record labels to buy the iTunes purchased music.
Thanks for the feedback.
Originally posted by xanthohappy
If you re-read the article, you'll see that the record companies didn't give them permission to give out free songs, Microsoft is going to be paying for each of those songs (although probably at a discounted price).
I think it would be funny to install Microsoft's music player, download the free songs, and then not use them, giving Microsoft a gigantic bill for nothing.
I agree, and in theory that would be cool. But knowing Microsoft, installing the software probably will open the system up for viruses, some adware, and other malware, so maybe it isn't even worth the headache of installing and downloading the files....
Originally posted by xanthohappy
If you re-read the article, you'll see that the record companies didn't give them permission to give out free songs, Microsoft is going to be paying for each of those songs (although probably at a discounted price).
I think it would be funny to install Microsoft's music player, download the free songs, and then not use them, giving Microsoft a gigantic bill for nothing.
That would be awesome, and extremely damaging to M$. Although, it would give them the statistics they need to negotiate with the labels, and the press would read "Microsoft gets 99% of itunes users as People jump off the sinking ship of Apple!!"
Originally posted by ReCompile
"Microsoft gets 99% of itunes users as People jump off the sinking ship of Apple!!"
Originally posted by ReCompile
That would be awesome, and extremely damaging to M$. Although, it would give them the statistics they need to negotiate with the labels, and the press would read "Microsoft gets 99% of itunes users as People jump off the sinking ship of Apple!!"
ALTHOUGH........ If practically every ITMS user did install, and then delete the horid M$ software, and made it public they were doing so, M$ would experience a BILLION songs they purchaced for nothing... And the media and the labels would be aware of it so the statistics would mean nothing.. And since M$ is such a hackers haven, then with a little help from our hacker friends, they could figure out a way to drain M$ financially. Also, with all those purchaced song replacements from M$, that were given to all those users, it now allows people to give or sell them to people. Imagine, you spent a total of $20,000 over the last few years on ITMS. Now for the small price of buying a M$ player, and loading with all the replacement songs, you now sell it for $10,000! Or even better yet, buy many of the players and sell them loaded with songs for a few hundred dollars above the cost of the players. The record companies can't say much, since they WERE paid for by M$.
But Ultimately, I think a clever hack would make M$ liable for Billions of dollars to the record industry... For nothing.
There is a multi Billion dollar ipod ecosystem. Many people would have to replace all of those items as well. And vendors would also baulk at the intrusion.
Podcasts. There are even radio stations broadcasting only podcasts. And many companies and individuals alike are using it.
M$ has money. But a loosing venture will come to an abrupt halt if the shareholders have anything to say about it.
Hacks cost the company $ to fix and a bad image. But if M$ exchanges songs for ITMS songs, a simple hack, and misuse of this "Great Idea", in essence, becomes a direct pipeline into Microsoft's wallet. The record companies will not care if a hack created by some one, or many, or the record companies themselves, were to become evident. The songs were still distributed, and M$ has agreed to pay for them. It would, in fact be the largest hack in history. Like tapping into the government or a bank, and bleeding them dry, except it will not ever have the security of a bank or government. With the amount of potential users using M$, in several hours, it could easily make M$ liable for 50 billion dollars before it could be shut down.
Giving away free items to snuff the competition is against the law. M$ has already tried it many times with Windows and office, and other products. It is highly illegal, and believe me they would if they could.
Tactics like these have been used for many years in today's fast moving electronic markets. A company will say they are releasing "something way better" "Soon". This in effect makes a buyer hold back on their purchase, and subconsciously commits them to buying their product later, since it will be that much better. But "Soon" either never comes, or falls way short of what was promised. The company now at least has a chance to sell them their product, since they have not purchased as of yet.
This tactic in essence, slows the bleeding (market dominance), and gives them the much needed time to enter the market before it is too late. This tactic is ripe and makes since in light of M$'s recently formed alliance with other manufacturers such as toshiba, sony, and others that are banding together to unseat Apple's dominance. It may be that M$ will create the system, and license it to others, thus not becoming in direct competition with their allies. (Like Origami)
Sheep (consumers) seem to bite on this every time.
So if you want to see the demise of M$, THIS is the thing that may finally do it. And very quickly.
Originally posted by ReCompile
... sell them loaded with songs for a few hundred dollars above the cost of the players. The record companies can't say much, since they WERE paid for by M$.
That's probably the most interesting thought I've read on this thread; it will probably be a situation in which Microsoft requires you buy the player and submit the serial number before getting the free song replacements.
That said, you're right--if these players cost $249 (which is what they would have to cost to compete with the nano effectively), then anyone with more than $249 in songs (not including tax) could conceivably make a profit from buying the player, downloading the songs, and selling them on eBay--because they technically would own two licenses for the songs. Of course, I'm not sure how many have bought that amount of songs--even though I have bought 230, and I consider myself to be an infrequent buyer (perhaps erroneously).
The other point no one's thought of regards OEMs that already make hardware that works with Microsoft's music store and WMA files... Is Microsoft really going to screw those partners out of sales by giving away free songs like this? Or would MSFT extent the same benefit to partners like Sandisk, so that MSFT would offer Sandisk customers free songs, too? If they did, there would be no hope of profit--that would be just burning money. (Sandisk is #2 behind Apple in the MP3 player market, selling 1 million players during Christmas 2005.)
Originally posted by Bageljoey
Of course that math blows up when you consider that many iTMS users have multiple iPods...
It does, I remember Steve Jobs saying at a keynote awhile ago (within the last year) that the average iTunes Music store account has purchased 60 songs on average. That includes the people who go on just to try it out or set up an account to get a free pepsi song.
"Baaaaaaaaallmer!"