Buy.com to Challenge Apple's iTunes Music Store [Archive]

pretentious

Jul 15, 2003, 05:40 AM

From Silicon Valley.com (http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/6306486.htm):
Buy.com will unveil a new music download service next Tuesday with a $40 million promotional campaign and launch celebration in New York's Times Square.
....
Like the iTunes Music Store, Buy.com will sell individual music tracks without collecting an up-front monthly subscription fee; even though it has yet to secure licensed music from all five major record labels, knowledgeable sources say.
....
Buy.com, the first of the mainstream Internet shopping sites, will attempt to beat its longtime rival, Amazon.com, to the punch, selling music downloads to the 97 percent of computer users who don't own a Macintosh and therefore can't use the iTunes Music Store.

It doesn’t say what kind of format the music will be in though, which is odd, since that will be what this service will live or die upon. One thing that I would guarantee that this venture will fail if it’s draconian WMP.

Mr. Anderson

Jul 15, 2003, 06:59 AM

Yeah, this isn't good for Apple....if only they'd get the PC version of iTunes out sooner.....

Once Buy.com gets the licenses to sell the music its going to be huge....now maybe they'll have delays that could give Apple some time.

D

MacRumors

Jul 15, 2003, 10:32 AM

SiliconValley.com (http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/6306486.htm) reports that Buy.com is poised to unveil a new download music service next Tuesday.

The new service is said to offer a similar model as Apple's iTunes Music Store with a non-subscription, pay-per-download model. According to the article, however, Buy.com as not yet secured licensed music from all five major record labels. The buzz surrounding the new service is reported to be quite positive with the attempt " to create an atmosphere where music fans will want to linger."

While the service will be offered to Windows users, it's unclear what Audio format will be used and whether or not Mac owners will be able to use the new service.

gandalf55

Jul 15, 2003, 10:33 AM

crap.

eric_n_dfw

Jul 15, 2003, 10:34 AM

There's obviously money to be made if all these other companies are trying to copy iTMS. Maybe the competition will convince those stuipid artists that won't sell singles to change their "tune". :p

pretentious

Jul 15, 2003, 10:44 AM

What the story dosen't tell us what format the music will be in, the one thing that will make or break this endeaver. If its WMP it will fail.

anothermacfan

Jul 15, 2003, 10:46 AM

hey all...i've known about this for a few weeks, but didn't want to say anything to spoil my source....

But here is an ad pic I have for it...

http://members.fortunecity.com/anothermacfan/images/FinalTommy.jpg

Flowbee

Jul 15, 2003, 10:46 AM

I think the Buy.com service will live or die by its interface and ease of use, as well as its catalog of songs. Hopefully, when the iTMS *is* available to Windows users, the selection of music will be better than its rivals. Even if Apple comes late to the game for Windows, if they offer twice as many songs, I think they'll be more popular. As I see it, that's Apple's main advantage now... the've got a good headstart on building a deep catalog.

I'll also be very interested to see the DRM on these Buy.com tracks.

P-Worm

Jul 15, 2003, 10:48 AM

Try again with the ad.

P-Worm

Abstract

Jul 15, 2003, 10:50 AM

Wow, great pic!!! :eek: (but where is it?)

I think this new service is a good thing. What's bad about having another option? You always think, "Is this good for Apple", and the answer is probably "No", especially if it's released before a PC version is released. However, this is generally a good thing, since it gives people options, and it could lower sales prices. Hopefully it can be available for the Mac as well.

Freg3000

Jul 15, 2003, 11:00 AM

This is so bad for Apple. I hope they don't drop the ball here. They have something so good, they shouldn't let it slip away. I think that the first service into the Windows market will be very hard to dethrone in the future. Even if it is not that easy to use, it will become the standard...for Windows. When the iTMS comes out it may be to late. Hopefully not.

blogo

Jul 15, 2003, 11:09 AM

it says from 99 cent per song, sp maybe they will price other songs higher

hvfsl

Jul 15, 2003, 11:11 AM

This sounds like Microsoft Windows VS Mac OS all over again. Apple was the first but more people had IBMs so they used Windows when it came out, even though it was rubbish until version 4. Lets hope Apple gets something out the door soon.

I am supprised they didn't realise this would happen. If Apple releases for only Mac first, then it gives time to others to make a service that only works on Windows. Apple should have waited until they had the Windows version ready(or nearly ready) until they released the Mac version.

Or maybe the reason why Buy.com has not managed to do a deal with all the companies is because Apple has a contract with some of them not to do any other download music services until iTunes for Windows comes out.

pretentious

Jul 15, 2003, 11:11 AM

Saw the ad...it looks soooo much better than we got from Apple. Lets hope that their DRM flubs it all up.

Vonnie

Jul 15, 2003, 11:22 AM

The obvious problem is WMA versus AAC. On mac you can use your AAC files in any application that uses quicktime. On windows, applications use the windows api. WMA, but no AAC. Will windows people buy AAC files if they can't use it in Powerpoint? Or in WinAmp?

Even if Apple can extend the windows api with aac support using some plugin mechanism, is it extendable enough to have support for Apples DRM system? And will it break during a Windows update from Microsoft?

Apple has bigger worries than wether or not they are the first.

tduality

Jul 15, 2003, 11:27 AM

'....even though it has yet to secure licensed music from all five major record labels, knowledgeable sources say.'

That sounds like important thing to achieve before going online. :D

Let's wait and see.

snahabed

Jul 15, 2003, 11:28 AM

Bad bad bad bad bad.

It does not matter in what ways Buy is worse. Windows users dont care about interface and ease of use.. they use Windows after all! They dont care about rights-crippled WMA... they use WMP after all!

I have said for months that porting iTMS for Windows (or getting all the proper licenses) should have been Priority #1... Yes, number 1, as in higher than a 15" AlBook, higher than Panther, and higher than the G5. Life would go on fine with an extra month or two of G4's and Jaguar. However, you dont introduce something, drop the ball, and let everyone else capitalize. Then again, that IS the apple way.

Please, sweet lords above, let Buy fail :)

robotrenegade

Jul 15, 2003, 11:37 AM

means nothing

kenaustus

Jul 15, 2003, 11:42 AM

Fortunately Apple is the biggest fish in this pond.

There are two major reasons why Apple will be hard to beat. The first is the huge inroads that the iPod has made in the Windows world and the second is that Apple's Music Store move into the Win world will include iTunes and full integration with the iPod.

Another consideration is the work that Apple has done over the past few years with the record companies. They know and trust him and it will be very difficult for others to establish the same relationship with these guys. All they can really do is go in and say "We want to do what Apple is doing." They may add that they will pay them more per song/album but they will probably get a very wary reception.

Read a while back that Apple spent over $10 million developing this integrated package. Buy.com and the other wanna be's aren't going to invest that kind of money. The result will fall short of what Apple will be providing Windows users and it will show, both in the short and long run.

Not a lot to get excited about.

Steamboatwillie

Jul 15, 2003, 11:42 AM

<theory>
Apple is done and ready to launch Windows version of ITMS, they allowed the competition to believe that the launch is months away and just when everyone scrambles to get thier shabby, quick written Windows ITMS clones out to market Apple pulls the rabbit out of the hat with iTunesWin32, slick as snot and bug free! No one saw it coming...
</theory>

I'm dreaming here but it would win the award for business strategy of the millenium if it was true!

... wish, wish, wish

zim

Jul 15, 2003, 11:42 AM

by buy.

i don't think that anything will have the ease of use that iTMS has. So, based on that, anything else that comes along is going to be compared to iTMS, apple has set the pace so it will be difficult for others to keep up, regardless of price. DRM will also be a key factor, would songs from buy.com work with iTMS will DRM dictate what players can use what files? I think that just offering songs for download is not going to cut it, the music industry wants to see management and so far apple has provided the best solution to it, in my opinion.

I think that one of the other issues to come will be this, so what if buy.com provides a better solution that the music industry likes, would they keep providing apple with back catalog? or would they just follow each other like sheep and leave us behind? I still stand by my first statement above, apple has provided the best solution to date, combining ease of use and DRM.

Flowbee

Jul 15, 2003, 12:00 PM

Originally posted by snahabed

It does not matter in what ways Buy is worse. Windows users dont care about interface and ease of use.. they use Windows after all! They dont care about rights-crippled WMA... they use WMP after all!

I think you're wrong. Given the choice, even windows users will pick the better service. Look at how many windows users are buying iPods, despite the number of cheaper competitors on the market.

snahabed

Jul 15, 2003, 12:13 PM

Originally posted by Flowbee
I think you're wrong. Given the choice, even windows users will pick the better service. Look at how many windows users are buying iPods, despite the number of cheaper competitors on the market.

Right, the better service between Buy and .... ..... .... oh yeah, iTunes won't be out for who knows how long?

I meant that Buy is going to have (likely) months to establish itself before iTunes comes out. They will amass all the brand loyalty. Plus, it very well may be web based. Will Windows users, in 2, 3, 4 or more months take the extra step to download Apple software that does pretty much what Buy has done for them all the while? Moreover, will Windows users prefer WMA, which is supported on their platform and almost all digital music players, or AAC, which is virtually unused outside of the iPod? Windows users dont like change. We are asking them to not only download new APPLE software, not only to adopt a whole NEW music format, not only to give up the service(s) they will have been using for months, but also to completely convert their music jukeboxes from MusicMatch, WMP, etc. to iTunes. That is a HECK of a lot more change than I think most Windows users (read: lemmings, no offense :) ) can handle.

The ONLY thing that would prevent Buy's domination is bad interface or DRM, and my point is that these are not big concerns for Windows users. If they were, then they would have all switched to Mac OS X by now.

Apple needs (needed?) to get iTunes out FIRST, and put behind it more promotional muscle than they have used in years for anything. Print, radio, tv. None of the "typical" "quirky" Mac ads either.

robbents99

Jul 15, 2003, 12:25 PM

Personally, once Buy has all the contracts with the music companies then worry. Or don't worry. I'd worry more about Apple as a whole then one specific part of their company.
It would be nice to have an update on Itunes for Windows maybe just a screenshot...

Java

Jul 15, 2003, 12:27 PM

I'm not so sure the buy.com music store will catch on like the iTMS. After all, Steve Jobs personally invited artists to view the store before it was released and asked artists what they felt about it (including Alanis Morisette and Mick Jagger).

Also, SJ did say he had a one year contract with the five major labels AND the incorporation of many indepedent labels will be coming on board soon.

It took the rock-star status of Steve to convince the big 5, so I am curious to see who buy.com gets.

Who is their CEO, anyway?

Java

Jul 15, 2003, 12:31 PM

nagromme

Jul 15, 2003, 12:33 PM

Competitors are immediately good for Apple in one way: another round of publicity. Granted, some journalists will take pleasure in claiming that Buy.com will be the first to sell music this way, ignoring what Apple did, but most will mention Apple in their articles.

Meanwhile, if iTunes has a better interface, then later on when people try it out it will be an easy switch for them. Let Buy.com build the interest, so Apple can come along and do it right.

Thom_Edwards

Jul 15, 2003, 12:35 PM

this is a HUGE maybe, so bear with me...

what if the buy.com offering is, in fact, the iTunes Music Store for windows? apple has been selling ipods there and plans to have some of their computers there, so apparently apple and best buy have been talking.

we all know a lot of people scoff at macintosh without even knowing the full story. so what if buy.com is just a front so people don't write it off as "some stupid thing from apple that i already don't want just because it's from apple"? then, a few months down the road, WHAM, the cat is let out of the bag. "see guys? look how cool apple's stuff is."

i don't see best buy as a technologically advanced company. sure, they sell technological items, but they don't make any. who better than apple to step in with the brains, while best buy provides the brawn of it's established customer base?

like i said, this is just a "what if" kind of thing. i don't even believe it myself--it's just something i thought of.

carry on, as you were..........

Jerry Spoon

Jul 15, 2003, 12:36 PM

Hey, Steve...Hurry up already!
If for no other reason than it might stop me from seeing another half naked picture of Tommy Lee.

gunb0y

Jul 15, 2003, 12:36 PM

why do you all think the buy.com service will suck compared to itunes. is it out of the realm of possibility that it could be BETTER then itunes?

Jerry Spoon

Jul 15, 2003, 12:38 PM

Originally posted by Abstract
Wow, great pic!!! :eek: (but where is it?)

Yea, I was looking for a half naked picture of Tommy Lee, nipples pierced and all too!!! :eek:

anothermacfan

Jul 15, 2003, 12:42 PM

..and I have more info:

Will be browser based
30 second preview of all songs
128 bit WMA files that are DRM wrapped

so now the battle begins.....iTunes vs. WMP....

Flowbee

Jul 15, 2003, 12:46 PM

Originally posted by gunb0y
why do you all think the buy.com service will suck compared to itunes. is it out of the realm of possibility that it could be BETTER then itunes?

Yes. Yes it is. :p

jasonbw

Jul 15, 2003, 01:08 PM

Originally posted by Thom_Edwards
this is a HUGE maybe, so bear with me...

what if the buy.com offering is, in fact, the iTunes Music Store for windows? apple has been selling ipods there and plans to have some of their computers there, so apparently apple and best buy have been talking.

buy.com is not bestbuy.com, but i see were you are going with this. They (buy.com) do currently sell ipods and mac software, but apple hasn't said anything about partnering with another company to do the music store for windows.

copperpipe

Jul 15, 2003, 01:09 PM

It looks like Buy.com's biggest competitor is Amazon.com, and Buy.com is looking to trump Amazon by being the first to offer this service. It's a complete departure for them, in terms of logistics and the building of the service. Now, with that in mind, I would be willing to bet that it is a rushed project. They better be careful, they could really screw this up, and in a way be a service to Apple, showing the record companies that doing this kind of stuff isn't as easy as they made it out to be. Who knows, but I think it's more important that Apple gets their product to Windows when it's ready, not a buggy version that could end up building a bad rep in the long run, which could hurt them (or buy.com) IMMENSELY. We shall see!

inkswamp

Jul 15, 2003, 01:31 PM

Vaporware. :o

What is it with companies doing so much talk about things and not really doing them? Talk is cheap. I know lots of people moan about Apple's "keep quiet" approach, but at least when they talk, you know it's ready to go.

whfsdude

Jul 15, 2003, 01:35 PM

I hope the end of the year doesn't mean MWSF :-(

PretendPCuser

Jul 15, 2003, 01:35 PM

Would consumers trust Buy.com? Does anyone even really know it still exists? What is their marketing strategy? Where will they place ads? Will there be media coverage? Page 1? Will anyone care? How many other music "services" are all ready out there but are so lost in the sea of Windows software that consumers are confused by it?

At least Apple has a small advantage there. Since Apple users tend to be more brand loyal, it wasn't difficult to get the word out a little, and let word of mouth continue the advertising. Does Buy.com know the best place to reach potential customers? When to reach them? Will their service be so much different from other Windows only music services that people will want to "linger"? We'll see.

snahabed

Jul 15, 2003, 01:37 PM

Originally posted by anothermacfan
..and I have more info:

Will be browser based
30 second preview of all songs
128 bit WMA files that are DRM wrapped

so now the battle begins.....iTunes vs. WMP....

Ugh I think is so bad.

An advantage of the browser system is that the WIndows user can choose his preferred jukebox. It is just like the old browser wars. Windows users will use what they have, whatever icon is on their desktop, regardless of what is better.

Convincing them to change to iTunes, after competition beats it to the market, will be monumentally tough.

cspace

Jul 15, 2003, 02:07 PM

a little OT, but I found a similar site called FightForRock.com (it's new & doesn't have much content yet) that sells MP3s (no DRM) and it focuses on indie bands (whereas iTMS is all major labels for now).

cspace

Spock

Jul 15, 2003, 02:21 PM

Apple should just pull a Microsoft and buy buy.com they can afford it.

kangaroo

Jul 15, 2003, 02:42 PM

regardless of buy.com's implementation of an iTMS clone, one thing they're doing which apple is not is...

ADVERTISING.

if iTMS enabled you to download gold nuggets it would be meaningless unless you knew about it.

rueyeet

Jul 15, 2003, 02:44 PM

C'mon, we all knew that once Apple had done the hard work with proof-of-concept, everyone and their uncle would want to jump on this bandwagon.

Buy.com's success will depend on a bunch of things: how the DRM allows the downloads to be used, how good the catalog ends up being at launch, and whether it ends up being fundamentally different from the other WMA-based services in anything but the delivery model.

Apple seems to already have them beat on catalogue, and with the indies in on the act, that'll only get better.

And I don't put it past the combination of RIAA and Microsoft to screw up the rest, but we'll see. If this turns out as unrestrictive as FairPlay, then it'll have a definite lead over iTunes for Windows.

Their ads, however need work. I am going to go wash out my burning eyeballs now. :(

DGFan

Jul 15, 2003, 03:09 PM

Originally posted by snahabed

The ONLY thing that would prevent Buy's domination is bad interface or DRM, and my point is that these are not big concerns for Windows users. If they were, then they would have all switched to Mac OS X by now.

I disagree. iPod for Windows is a big seller. All those people are not going to be able to use WMA files sold by the other online music stores. But they will be able to use AAC from ITMS.

Apple needs to be out within a few months of any serious contender. But there is a period where it simply won't matter because of the large installed base of Windows iPod users.

DGFan

Jul 15, 2003, 03:11 PM

Originally posted by Thom_Edwards
this is a HUGE maybe, so bear with me...

what if the buy.com offering is, in fact, the iTunes Music Store for windows? apple has been selling ipods there and plans to have some of their computers there, so apparently apple and best buy have been talking.

best buy is not (to my knowledge) related to buy.com

best buy has their own site (named, amazingly enough, bestbuy.com)

DGFan

Jul 15, 2003, 03:17 PM

Originally posted by gunb0y
why do you all think the buy.com service will suck compared to itunes. is it out of the realm of possibility that it could be BETTER then itunes?

ITMS succeeds because it is compact and includes the player nicely in the package. It also uses a common interface between the song list in the player and the song list in the store. It is elegant because it makes very efficient use of space and is easy to get around.

buy.com won't really be able to integrate the player or the library into their store. Sure, they can use WMP embedded in the page to listen to samples. But it's not likely to be as sleek as the list with a single line per song.

Assuming that the buy.com site will in fact be a website and not a program with a browser built into parts of it I just don't see it being as efficient a tool as iTunes.

ces1965

Jul 15, 2003, 03:18 PM

The ad above already suggests buy.com won't be cheaper, and may even be more money.

Now, the thing is supposed to be browser-based. How is that going to compare with iTMS for Windows, which will be integrated with iTunes, the best jukebox program out there? I use eMusic and the thing I don't like the most about it is the slow, browser-based interface. Nothing like the speed of iTMS.

I guess if they get out there first, they could lock in some people with the format, who then could not switch to iTMS for Windows easily later. Even then, most people are not going to buy a huge number of albums in 5 months (before end of year when iTMS is on Windows). So switching would just involve burning to cd some number of songs and reripping.

Some poor dumb souls are already using WMA to rip CDs so the same "conversion" issue already exists to some degree for some windows users.

MacFan25

Jul 15, 2003, 03:18 PM

Hopefully this music service won't be near as good as iTMS, and when iTMS comes to windows people will realize which is better to buy from.

NavyIntel007

Jul 15, 2003, 03:45 PM

The bad thing is most windows users are stupid. They'll go to buy.com, buy some music and try to play it on their ipod. When it won't play you know who they'll blame? Apple! because they won't understand the difference between WMA and AAC or MP3 because it's all the same to them and because it plays on their piece of crap computer why can't the ipod play it? but I paid $300 for it!!

The good news is, this newly disinfranchised person from the world of digital media is going to return to burning cds of the music (if it's even possible) and will probably never buy an MP3 player again.

I still have some doubts that many of the free p2p traders are going to switch over and go legal. There's way too many options for Windows users and many of the user base for things like kazaa is under 25, doesn't have a credit card, and/or doesn't have a job to pay for music. Does that mean that iTMS or buy.com's services are doomed? Absolutely not. They will appeal to an older market (with credit cards) that enjoy music without the filler and high prices.

I think Apple did their homework on this before they started their service. That's why upon it's first day opening you didn't see the boybands, brittney or Hip Hop. Sure, a lot of it is there now but they emphasized Pink Floyd, Bob Dylan... Apple knew that they needed to appeal to the parents and grandparents first, the ones with the money. Gradually, then parents let their kids pick songs that they want. Although there is a decent catalog for people in their college years to woo us away from file sharing.

Lets face it... buy.com... no record deals (but they got Tommy Lee... um... naked, no one wants to see that), they still haven't learned the "Fair Use" lesson because they're using WMA and honestly, most people have never heard of buy.com. I doubt that it would even be in headlines anywhere tomorrow.

Abstract

Jul 15, 2003, 04:11 PM

Originally posted by DGFan
I disagree. iPod for Windows is a big seller. All those people are not going to be able to use WMA files sold by the other online music stores. But they will be able to use AAC from ITMS.

Apple needs to be out within a few months of any serious contender. But there is a period where it simply won't matter because of the large installed base of Windows iPod users.

Yes, iPod for Windows is popular, but not THAT popular in the grand scheme of things. There are more people who use Winamp than anything else. ;) The "iPod factor" won't make much of a sales difference. ;)

instantypo

Jul 15, 2003, 04:15 PM

To be exact, this Belgian provider Skynet launched a web based WMA music store that has also 200.000 songs with 30 second previews. It's ugly but it's there. It works with points or credits to stream, more credits to download and even more credits to burn.

The Skynet Music Club is not even viewable on a Mac because of it's WMP integration.

Look for the store on this URL (you need a winbox):
http://www.skynet.be/index.html?l1=entertainment&l2=music&or=crl_1

How bad is this?

trembleclef

Jul 15, 2003, 04:20 PM

Windows Media DRM is easy to defeat:

http://openp2p.com/pub/wlg/3517

FWIW

joshuajestelle

Jul 15, 2003, 04:38 PM

I think many of you are looking at this the completely wrong way.

Buy.com starting this service is a good thing for *you*. It is a good thing for all consumers. Apple has proven that this type of business model can, and does, work. The more services that pop up like this the lower prices will get for us, the consumers, and the better the services will become. Competition will push Apple to be competitive in negotiating with artists to get new artists, new record labels, and exclusive features. It will also push each service to use the most desirable DRM for the consumer.

I hope Buy.com suceeds, and does quite well, but I also hope Apple does release iTunes for windows soon, and doesn't lose out on a huge market that they deserve to have a piece of.

Josh

Thom_Edwards

Jul 15, 2003, 04:40 PM

Originally posted by DGFan
best buy is not (to my knowledge) related to buy.com

best buy has their own site (named, amazingly enough, bestbuy.com)

whoops... i feel like an idiot... i didn't even know there was such thing as buy.com. i thought it was a typo that left off "best"! thanks for the correction. now i know.

shangodee

Jul 15, 2003, 04:47 PM

This is in no way a bad thing -- what we need in this market is precisely more competition. In fact it's wonderful that the idea has been (obviously) so well received that others are clamoring to catch up. It amazes me to see you guys freak out when competition enters the holy sphere of apple products and services. If anything, competition will create better services and give more options to consumers. It may even prove to the RIAA that changing business models, a thing they seem petrified of, is a lucrative and necessary decision.

jettredmont

Jul 15, 2003, 05:08 PM

Originally posted by Thom_Edwards
this is a HUGE maybe, so bear with me...

what if the buy.com offering is, in fact, the iTunes Music Store for windows? apple has been selling ipods there and plans to have some of their computers there, so apparently apple and best buy have been talking.

buy.com and Best Buy are completely unrelated except by those three common letters in their respective names.

shangodee

Jul 15, 2003, 05:53 PM

Josh:

Nice to read that someone else approaches competition rationally.

Cheers

Originally posted by joshuajestelle
I think many of you are looking at this the completely wrong way.

Buy.com starting this service is a good thing for *you*. It is a good thing for all consumers. Apple has proven that this type of business model can, and does, work. The more services that pop up like this the lower prices will get for us, the consumers, and the better the services will become. Competition will push Apple to be competitive in negotiating with artists to get new artists, new record labels, and exclusive features. It will also push each service to use the most desirable DRM for the consumer.

I hope Buy.com suceeds, and does quite well, but I also hope Apple does release iTunes for windows soon, and doesn't lose out on a huge market that they deserve to have a piece of.

Josh

question fear

Jul 15, 2003, 05:58 PM

buy.com...they have had an iffy track record w/ me...i remember ordering from them once my freshman year of college or something, and the order took so long to process i forgot what it was when i go it.
granted, it was probably only 2-3 weeks, but thats a long time in the span of a college freshman.
i ordered another item from them this year, and they first didnt have it, and so i tried to cancel the order...lo and behold, once i tried to cancel it the item was suddenly available.
amazing.
so, my thinking is that if buy.com music is as iffy as buy.com they might be in for a world of trouble. the major benefit to itunes is that your mp3 is dl'd directly to your library, and you can track it really well....if buy.com wants to emial you your mp3, or wants to send you the link after paymnet, and it fails, how are they going to handle that? or if theres more than one supported format (assumng its not only wma) how iwll they insure someone who legitimately has a problem is on the level?
i vote wait and see...it might just not work due to people's distrust...and lack of reliable name recognition in the face of kazaa et al is a major major obstacle.
--carly

pretentious

Jul 15, 2003, 06:47 PM

Originally posted by NavyIntel007
but they got Tommy Lee... um... naked, no one wants to see that

My Girlfriend does...she'll have it up in her cubicle as soon as she sees in a mag, and I believe a lot of peoples GF will too. They will not however have a pic of some ugly harry guy singing 'My Generation' up next to Tommy, I don't think anybody will.

IMHO I think Apple flubbed on not making iTMS a web based solution;
If I was an artist I could just link you to where I am selling my music, w/ iTunes I can just say "yep, we're on iTMS look us up there", kinda crappy if you ask me.
If I'm at work all the computers will be locked down, so I couldn't even download Win:iTunes and install to even browse the selection, however I go to buy.com it doesn't matter I can see all that they have, and if the music just so happens to be WMP I can still buy music from them w/o any new software.

zim

Jul 15, 2003, 06:55 PM

There is a way to link to iTunes, apple's new music email does. So artist could link you right to the store.

I am sure if you look at the source from the email, you would be able to figure out how.

Wonder Boy

Jul 15, 2003, 07:36 PM

Good. Serves Apple right after dragging their heals on iTunes for Windows.

I'll feel bad later...maybe. Don't forget Apple brought this on themselves.

Flowbee

Jul 15, 2003, 09:18 PM

Originally posted by Wonder Boy
I'll feel bad later...maybe. Don't forget Apple brought this on themselves.

Brought *what* on themselves? I'm pretty sure Apple expected there would be competition. :confused:

Wonder Boy

Jul 15, 2003, 09:36 PM

Originally posted by Flowbee
Brought *what* on themselves? I'm pretty sure Apple expected there would be competition. :confused:

What i meant by "brought this on themselves" is that by not releasing itunes for windows sooner, they allowed others to creep in on there semi-novel idea. If the only had introduced itunes by now, all these posts would be about how itunes for win is superior instead of the post portraying unbridled fear.

Flowbee

Jul 15, 2003, 09:52 PM

Originally posted by Wonder Boy
What i meant by "brought this on themselves" is that by not releasing itunes for windows sooner, they allowed others to creep in on there semi-novel idea. If the only had introduced itunes by now, all these posts would be about how itunes for win is superior instead of the post portraying unbridled fear.

Once the buy.com music store is online, I suspect that there will be many posts and reviews saying that the iTMS is superior (just a gut instinct). Apple has the advantage of the iTMS being held up as the 'gold standard' to which all others will be compared. All the reviews of the 'new' music services will mention how successful iTMS has been and that it is coming to windows by the end of the year. This can only help fuel the anticipation of windows users.

That being said, I hope apple doesn't really wait until December to release iTMS/Win. The sooner the better.

RayCon

Jul 15, 2003, 10:23 PM

Originally posted by Steamboatwillie
<theory>
Apple is done and ready to launch Windows version of ITMS, they allowed the competition to believe that the launch is months away and just when everyone scrambles to get thier shabby, quick written Windows ITMS clones out to market Apple pulls the rabbit out of the hat with iTunesWin32, slick as snot and bug free! No one saw it coming...
</theory>

Well, you're certainly not the only one who's been dreaming of just such a scenario. While Apple always produces brilliant products and quite aesthetic commercials, sometimes I feel they need to just get "down and dirty" and produce some hard-hitting (read: sly and cunning) marketing as well. They must be quite aware that every time they break new ground as pioneers, the also-rans/wannabees will eventually take over because of the greater Windoze market share. Catching the competition off guard would be just the ticket. Sometimes, the way to succeed in business is to so overwhelm the market, that the competition doesn't stand a chance. And, if they do get a footing, you're already a household name. Apple needs to continue to get it's name out there. The iPod is doing that. But, more is needed.

solvs

Jul 16, 2003, 01:13 AM

My experiances with Buy.com have been very poor. If their music store is anything like it, it will suck too. And WMA is terrible, even without DRM.

Apple wasn't the first to do this, and they won't be the last. Much like the iPod. But they are the best, as mentioned every time a new online music store or mp3 player comes out. They are compared to Apple's.

Seeing as how there is no monthly fee, this may be competitive (even if it gets more "artists" and doesn't suck), but people can still compare when the Windows version comes out, and I think Apple will come out on top.

There will be a glut of these, but only the strong will survive. I place my bet on iTunes. I just hope it comes to Windows soon.

BTW, WinAmp can already play most AAC files.

tazo

Jul 16, 2003, 01:33 AM

Originally posted by Spock
Apple should just pull a Microsoft and buy buy.com they can afford it.

lol a great idea...

i hink apple really needs to get the ball rollling with the windows music store, oherwise they will be the first to really get the idea going, and once again the first to lose a golden opp.

Trimix

Jul 16, 2003, 06:24 AM

i-music store has sold 5 million songs, right ? at 33 cents this amounts to nothing profitwise for apple, BUT it sells their i-pod AND it gives them a lot of publicity.
so whilst i feel the economic model is still sort of shady, apple has profited far beyond the outright 33 cents per song.
it is like giving the flashlight away for free and selling the batteries, only with apple it is the other way around - the i-pod is close to the original walkman in its impact and thus THE money spinner numero uno for apple.
competition if that is what we want to call it is good as it differentiates the superior service of apple from the me-toos.
even if apple opens to the whole ms crowd, and let us assume they would sell songs twenty times as much, that is still nothing profitwise if as an add-on apple can sell another 1 million i-pods at a profit of 100 dollars net. (i am assuming these profit nos, they may be lower or higher ;)
once there is a saturation of i-pods reached then i am sure apple will introduce a new model which will make us go out and buy it too - so then the whole things starts all over again - go apple go - rip me off and make me feel good

Pete_Hoover

Jul 16, 2003, 09:26 AM

Apple needs to hurry up and get out iTMS for windows, or else.....

themadchemist

Jul 16, 2003, 10:32 AM

Originally posted by Abstract
Wow, great pic!!! :eek: (but where is it?)

I think this new service is a good thing. What's bad about having another option? You always think, "Is this good for Apple", and the answer is probably "No", especially if it's released before a PC version is released. However, this is generally a good thing, since it gives people options, and it could lower sales prices. Hopefully it can be available for the Mac as well.

Personally, I really don't care about buying music from iTMS or Buy.com. The only thing that gives me interest is Apple's investment in the whole operation.

It frustrates me to see that Apple initiates not just a product, but a whole market sector and way of selling, and drops the ball half way through.

Buy.com's service is not going to be as good as Apple's...And I think that Apple probably has strong name recognition than Buy.com. But Buy.com is going to be first and they are going to advertise like crazy. In the last several weeks, I have seen an iTMS ad maybe twice. That's not going to be true with Buy.com.

And now we don't even have a PC version in time! Now Apple's service is going to become a niche service as it always does because right at the critical moment, Apple fails.

Whereas Buy.com hasn't secured ALL FIVE major labels, I'm sure it's got at least one or two. It is going to start next week and it is going to advertise like hell.

Apple always thinks that it is so far above the competition that its product speaks for itself. But it doesn't. If a company does not speak for its product, no one will hear about it. Apple has to launch a counter-ad campaign that appears everywhere. Buy.com ads will be seen on every network. Buy.com is going to introduce the concept of purchasing music in this manner to most consumers, and Apple will seem like the one who copied the idea. Apple needs to launch a tremendous ad campaign, but I know it won't. Apple needs to release a Windows version, but I bet that will be too late.

Steve Jobs' arrogance and self-confidence have gotten Apple a lot. But in the critical moment, he has been too arrogant, too self-confident, and too unheeding of his opponents. And that has cost Apple billions.

themadchemist

Jul 16, 2003, 10:41 AM

Originally posted by pretentious
Saw the ad...it looks soooo much better than we got from Apple. Lets hope that their DRM flubs it all up.

Umm, where did you see this ad? And how does it look better than Apple's service?

I checked Buy.com's site, it doesn't mention a word about its upcoming music service. I guess it probably wants to start with a bang even though the cat is out of the bag (wow, two cliches in one sentence, AWESOME!).

solvs

Jul 16, 2003, 10:49 AM

Originally posted by themadchemist
Steve Jobs' arrogance and self-confidence have gotten Apple a lot. But in the critical moment, he has been too arrogant, too self-confident, and too unheeding of his opponents. And that has cost Apple billions.

That's not why iTunes for Windows isn't out yet. It has more to do with licensing and software issues. They started out with OS X Macs, and will work their way in to Windows, just like with the iPod. Then go international (or that first, then Windows). They had to do it on the Mac first.

Could you imagine if they had released it globally, had problems with it, and it failed? (see every other service in a couple of years)

Freg3000

Jul 16, 2003, 07:41 PM

I don't believe it.....

buy.com is going to call their music store iMusic.

iMusic...if that isn't adding insult to injury I don't know what is.

Buy.com confirms "iMusic" Store (http://macminute.com/2003/07/16/buy)

pmcaleer

Jul 17, 2003, 08:09 AM

The name iMusic is awfully... Appleish. Not to be flippant about it, but I wonder if Apple could sue buy.com based on the name of their service. I could have sworn that I've seen the iTMS referred to as "iMusic" before. And, I'm certain there could be confusion on the part of consumers. "iMusic - that's from Apple, right?"

Edit:

A cursory Google search finds multiple news articles and blog entries referring to iTMS as "iMusic".

As a bonus, the ArtistDirect Network already uses http://www.imusic.com/ - interesting. I think it's going to be a juggling act for buy.com to keep the name as is.