Apple rivals sing subscription tune

[MacBytes]

Category: Tunes
Link: Apple rivals sing subscription tune (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20050103170656)
Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)

Approved by Mudbug

[Blue Velvet]

With the top-of-the-line iPod, "You can fit 10,000 songs on it," Gorog says. But "to do that would cost you $10,000 if you bought the songs from Apple. With our plan, customers can get 10,000 songs on their device for $180 a year. It's an enormous value."

-- Yes, if you bought the songs from Apple but many don't.
And if I pay for something, then I don't want to keep paying for it year after year...

"The caveat is that Microsoft's copyright plan doesn't work with iPods, or virtually any player now on the market."

-- Heh-heh... still you get a sense of some the big boys starting to mobilise against Apple.

It all comes down to the music industry -- if they pull support from Apple, it could all come down like a pack of cards but I don't think that's going to happen in the forseeable future.

I just don't understand this enthusiasm for the subscription model -- nobody I know wants it. One wonders about the accuracy of their market research...

[TwitchOSX]

I like the quote "We sell hundreds of songs...." ooh.. yea.. no wonder your looking for a different business model.

/Idiot

[Sir_Giggles]

Subscription still a bad idea, even if you could load 10,000 songs on a player. You'll end up only listening to a fraction of them on a regular basis of your favourite tunes. And when the subscription ends? you'll be back to square one.

[bousozoku]

I like the quote "We sell hundreds of songs...." ooh.. yea.. no wonder your looking for a different business model.

/Idiot

Right, not hundreds of thousands or hundreds of millions of songs, but hundreds of songs. That's too funny. Perhaps, they should restate it to say that they rent songs since you can't really keep them.

The subscription services were around prior to the iTunes Music Store and they were barely doing anything, just like those other music players. Apple does it right and they whine that they're doing the right thing. Yeah, uh huh.

[Sir_Giggles]

If they sold 50 millions songs in a quarter, they wouldn't be touting subscription-based music schemes.

[montex]

The subscription model is one of those ideas that greedy corporations love because of the benefits for THEM. They believe that the can make money just by selling electrons, but despite what they telling us, people don't want to rent music.

I remember when I switched from tapes to CD. I did it because I wanted to have a music collection that would last forever, and I have CDs I bought 20 years ago that still sound as good today as they did back then. If I went with the rent model, I'd have to pay more and get less than if I stuck with CDs.

I use iTunes to grab singles, but my library is still based on the CD and will continue to be. But it is fun to watch these guys blow a lot of dough on an idea that is doomed to fail. Go Apple!

[nagromme]

I think most people loading iPods with 10,000+ legal songs got most of if from.... drum roll please... CDs!

Also, .99 is not what you pay at iTunes, it's the maximum! Albums cost less. I calculated that I pay .79 on average, not even counting freebies.

Subscription IS a good idea for a few people (not me). But if and when it becomes necessary, Apple could easily begin to offer that themselves. I don't think that day has come.

[Dahl]

While I do think we might see some subscription based services win out in "the end" (whenever that might be ?). I don't think it will happen for a while and by then, Apple will be more than ready to address that angle with their own version.

The argument is a little similar to what's happening with video.
Blockbuster is having a very hard time right now, since people prefer to buy videos/DVD's instead of renting them. Places like Best Buy is doing very well, since they can sell cheap new releases for the price a 3-4 rentals.

But I think the real reason iTunes is doing so well right now is because they didn't cut corners when they made the store and software. It's elegant and easy, two things that can take you far.

[MoparShaha]

I would like a subscription service. I don't have an iPod, so taking music around with me isn't an issue. Most of the time I'm just sitting at my computer listening to music. It'd be nice to browse the iTunes catalog and listen to new stuff. If anything, it exposes me to new and interesting music I wouldn't otherwise have heard of.

I agree that subscription models don't necessarily benefit consumers, and that for many people it doesn't fit. But, I think people should have an open mind and realize that some would enjoy it.

[spinner]

"We sell hundreds of downloads," Goldberg says. "But we don't make money on them. Subscriptions is a much better business for us."

...and that my friends is why they push the subscription model. Not because its what we, the consumers want, but because its better for THEIR pocketbook. Big surprise. They can keep talking while Apple keeps selling.

[Sir_Giggles]

...and that my friends is why they push the subscription model. Not because its what we, the consumers want, but because its better for THEIR pocketbook. Big surprise. They can keep talking while Apple keeps selling.

No kiddin' they is think us dumb or somethin'.

[shamino]

Isn't this a month-old article? News-leader may have published it two days ago, but I remember the exact same quotes from the same people in another article (New York Times, IIRC) over a month ago.

Regardless, I find the whole thing amusing. What they're really saying is "Apple is making more money than everybody else with their current business model, but it won't last because we're going to re-introduce a business model that the world rejected three years ago."

Good luck. Maybe I'll be able to buy one of their servers from a liquidator when their plan fails the second time around.