PDA

View Full Version : Apple to Start Record Label with Jay-Z and Beyonce?




Pages : [1] 2

MacRumors
Jul 15, 2007, 03:23 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Starting in April 2007 (http://www.mediatakeout.com/4655/exclusive_jay_z_leaving_def_jam_to_form_new_label_with_beyonce.html) there were rumors from MediaTakeOut that rapper Jay-Z (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay-Z) was leaving the Def Jam Recordings (http://www.defjam.com/) record label to create a new "super label" with singer Beyonce (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beyoncé_Knowles).
In an exclusive interview, MediaTakeOut.com spoke to a key person involved in creating the new label. And according to that insider, the new label will launch early next year. Tells our insider, "It's a done deal. [Jay Z] already has Beyonce and [Mathew Knowles] on board ... She'll be finishing up her contract [with Sony], and I expect that she'll sign on to the new label shortly afterwards."
Jay-Z is a popular rapper and current president and CEO of Def Jam (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Def_Jam) -- a record label owned by Universal Music.

At the time, Jay-Z was reportedly shopping this new "super label" around with the major record labels "and to Apple - who [was] very interested in doing business".

Now, Moli.com (http://www.moli.com/p/moliview/x/detail/192140/7) is claiming that "an inside industry source" says that its a done deal.
[Jay-Z and Beyonce] will move to Apple to run a new music division. It sounds rather incredible: [Jay-Z's] already got a pretty good job, running Def Jam, and [Steve] Jobs may be too smart to get into the tanking recording business (as others have said). Of course, if it is true, my guess is this would be a new, revamped record biz, one based on digital distribution, not boring old physical products.

Coincidentally, Universal Music recently let their long term contract lapse (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/07/05/universal-confirms-itunes-contract-change/) with Apple for iTunes music distribution and have gone on a short term "at will" distribution deal.

The reliability of these sites is unknown, but published for interest as well as due to the existance of a historical rumor trail.


Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/07/15/apple-to-start-record-label-with-jay-z-and-beyonce/)



koobcamuk
Jul 15, 2007, 03:25 AM
Sounds utterly awful.

Scarlet Fever
Jul 15, 2007, 03:27 AM
please Apple, don't get involved with them. Their 'music' is utter drivel.

Raffles
Jul 15, 2007, 03:30 AM
begins to burst out in laughter and disbelief.

Seriously, people, how could you believe this? MR should'nt've even posted then.

andrewag
Jul 15, 2007, 03:31 AM
Wow, this is the strangest rumour ever! :confused:

kymac
Jul 15, 2007, 03:31 AM
yea.. but theyre really popular.. so making a deal with them would be smart of apple.. because its already known that beyonce and jay z have a large fanbase that is willing to purchase their products. so just because their music isnt appealing to you, doesnt mean its a bad move on apples part.

MidiMonk
Jul 15, 2007, 03:37 AM
Don't mind either artist, but if this were true Apple is proving why there are so many issues lately.No focus on computing, just media/gadget ventures:(

Yixian
Jul 15, 2007, 03:41 AM
I'd rather see Apple in movies or games but it'd be good to see them branch out with a music label. This sort of thing would bring them better access to resources, and financially stabalise them even further so they can continue to try far out products.

But Jay-Z? Man, Def Jam is an institution, with an organic history. If Jay-Z were to leave it I'd rather him create something fresh, raw and true to hip hop.

But I guess now we have Blacksmith.

Chris Bangle
Jul 15, 2007, 03:42 AM
Beyonce and Apple. This better be true. :D:D:D She can be the new face of Apple.

nagromme
Jul 15, 2007, 03:42 AM
Don't mind either artist, but if this were true Apple is proving why there are so many issues lately.No focus on computing, just media/gadget ventures:(

No focus at all, only non-computing stuff! Although... I heard they have a new Mac OS "Leopard" of some kind... and moved their whole computer line to new chips... and just came out with new LED laptops... and are expected to have more new Macs soon...

I'm not sure, though :)

WildPalms
Jul 15, 2007, 03:47 AM
This (if true) could actually be a very canny move on Apple's part. We'll have to wait and see which direction it takes.

ogun7
Jul 15, 2007, 03:50 AM
This would definitely hurt their relationship with other labels in the iTMS, but also explain why Universal started crying and ran home with their toys (music). Since Jay is (or was?) distributed by Universal, this definitely has to be a coup. Jay was already complaining last year about declining sales and many in the Hip-Hop community railed against him on how certain eagerly anticipated albums (Nas - Hip-Hop Is Dead) were pushed back for more commercial releases (Jay-Z - Kingdom Come). This digital label would solve most of that.

bluebomberman
Jul 15, 2007, 03:50 AM
I don't see why Apple would even want to think about having their own music label. And even if they want in on the action, doing so with Jay-Z -- a guy that gloats about his expensive lifestyle -- won't do much to change the image of the big labels as soulless corporate entities that exploit and steal from artists.

If Apple goes through with this, they're going to start looking a lot like Sony.

arn
Jul 15, 2007, 03:51 AM
disregarding whether you believe its true or not... would it really surprise people?

What better way to promote iTunes (and therefore iPod, iPhone) then digital only distribution of popular artists.

Now, it may piss off the record labels (which it may have pissed of Universal already), but do they have a choice but to distribute on iTunes?

And as for choice of artists... it makes sense to have young-demographic users. translation: people who are far more likely to be online.

arn

diotima1212
Jul 15, 2007, 03:52 AM
I don't get why people would rate this "negative". As we just saw with Universal, big Record Labels are not fit for the digital age, and they don't care for the experience of their consumers. To bypass them and offer a deal directly by Apple seems not only what many artists would wish, but rather necessary to get some independence of those dying behemoths.

By the way, FSJ hinted something like this lately, so it must be true....

LoganT
Jul 15, 2007, 03:53 AM
It's the Apple in the building!

http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/1011/jayshoweminsertcopycq7.jpg

rob@robburns.co
Jul 15, 2007, 03:56 AM
The strange thing is that Universal is trying to play hard-ball with Apple, when Apple is the only large music retailer selling music with DRM. Its like they want to shoot themselves in the foot. CD sales would be declining even faster than the already are if they playing field was equalized with respect to DRM (i.e., Apple has to include it while WaMart, Target and Best Buy do not).

As for Def Jam records, I wonder if more and more of these subsidiaries are going to think: "What do I need Universal for?" I could see this just opening the flood gates.

ogun7
Jul 15, 2007, 03:59 AM
I'd rather see Apple in movies or games but it'd be good to see them branch out with a music label. This sort of thing would bring them better access to resources, and financially stabalise them even further so they can continue to try far out products.

But Jay-Z? Man, Def Jam is an institution, with an organic history. If Jay-Z were to leave it I'd rather him create something fresh, raw and true to hip hop.

But I guess now we have Blacksmith.

A new label with a former computer company that makes most of the tools that the artists of your genre and generation use to create and listen to music and that would digitally distribute your wares all over the world is fresh, raw and true to Hip-Hop!

I'm originally from the Bronx and Hip-Hop is about taking all these global cultural influences and forging into new mediums that democratically provide access to art and making art. We didn't have instruments and took our mouths and record players and made music. No paintbrushes or canvas and made all of NYC (and then the world) our art studio. This is just acknowledgment for the marketing force that Hip-Hop is.

By the way, what is Blacksmith?

Squareball
Jul 15, 2007, 04:01 AM
I think that this is an interesting idea. Apple knows a couple of things that the large media companies don't. One of them is that the future of media is digital. From movies to TV shows to music, all of these will be delivered digitally and on demand. iTunes has proven that people want to buy music online. So what's next? Helping people discover new music to further drive sales.

The idea is simple. Apple takes control of the content and sells it and GIVES SOME AWAY FREE to users of iTunes. People on iTunes can jump on every day and see what's new, get free tracks, buy exclusive new tracks and find new bands that are in the same genre as the bands they like.

The difference between an apple label and say BMG is that Apple can cut out the radio stations, MTV, etc and promote their bands through iTunes and any other way they see fit. They have a user base. They don't need MTV or corporate radio which are both failing markets now. Neither of those mediums are about new music anymore. They churn out the same crap every year and people are tired of it. MTV doesn't even play music videos very much anymore. It's a joke. The reason is that people just jump on YouTube now to watch videos, they don't need to watch MTV for 2 hours waiting for that new hot video to come on.

In a short attention span world, Apple can kick the asses of the big studios because they can keep costs low and promote in many ways online.

Just a thought. I don't know about this rumor however but I do think that it at least makes sense on the surface.

ogun7
Jul 15, 2007, 04:05 AM
It's funny. The record labels hate that their retail channels are controlled by just a few companies: Walmart, Apple and the like, but want to limit access to music at the same time.

Chaszmyr
Jul 15, 2007, 04:12 AM
I realize that Apple Inc and Apple Corps settled, but given that settlement would Apple Inc actually be allowed to become/start a record label themselves?

arn
Jul 15, 2007, 04:13 AM
I realize that Apple Inc and Apple Corps settled, but given that settlement would Apple Inc actually be allowed to become/start a record label themselves?

It would seem so
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/02/05apple.html

Under this new agreement, Apple Inc. will own all of the trademarks related to “Apple” and will license certain of those trademarks back to Apple Corps for their continued use.

Seems the trademark is 100% Apple (Computer)'s to use.

arn

T'hain Esh Kelch
Jul 15, 2007, 04:13 AM
Phew... This is gonna have a huge impact on the industry if it goes through... And I certainly believe Apple is gonna make more enemies..

bluebomberman
Jul 15, 2007, 04:20 AM
Question: Won't this bring up anti-trust issues?

Another question: Isn't this selling out?

The big labels obviously will be disgusted, but I can also see a lot of indie labels and indie artists being very unhappy that one of their best outlets for reaching their fans is going the way of The Man. How can they compete against a Jay-Z fronted Apple music label for front page space on the iTunes store?

iris_failsafe
Jul 15, 2007, 04:21 AM
why would Apple do this, it doesn't make sense, Steve must know that having everything hurts Sony a lot as its record label opposes his tech branch all the time...

Eric Lewis
Jul 15, 2007, 04:25 AM
she can model new products


this is better then iPhone rumors....which is good

samh004
Jul 15, 2007, 04:27 AM
I could see it happening, digital-only distribution with Apple not having to go through anyone else, so there's no negotiating problems. They might even be the greenest record company seeing as they wont print/burn CD's...

Would also further diversify their income, so although their heading towards gadgets more these days, they'd be making money on everything.

And I don't agree that Apple will stop making computers. I think Steve Jobs realises he has a nicer OS than Microsoft, and he'll keep at the development so he can continue to enjoy a great digital life (-style). However, through all this iPhone stuff and other deals, the (computer) lines have become a little stagnant lately and I think once everything quietens down, it'll be back to normal (or whatever is close to it for Apple).

Sbrocket
Jul 15, 2007, 04:27 AM
While I doubt the truth of this rumor, such a move if real would be way too much diversification for Apple at this stage of the game...definitely a bad move in my opinion, though I'm certainly no big business expert. It would just mean less focus on the actual computers and more focus on what at least I consider less important markets.

LoganT
Jul 15, 2007, 04:35 AM
A new label with a former computer company that makes most of the tools that the artists of your genre and generation use to create and listen to music and that would digitally distribute your wares all over the world is fresh, raw and true to Hip-Hop!

I'm originally from the Bronx and Hip-Hop is about taking all these global cultural influences and forging into new mediums that democratically provide access to art and making art. We didn't have instruments and took our mouths and record players and made music. No paintbrushes or canvas and made all of NYC (and then the world) our art studio. This is just acknowledgment for the marketing force that Hip-Hop is.

By the way, what is Blacksmith?

Blacksmith is I believe Talib Kweli's record label.

STLSigns
Jul 15, 2007, 04:37 AM
I don't say much but I will say this...GOOD!

If Jay-Z wants to make some sort of "Digital Deal" with Apple that would be great. Digital is the future...face it...we all know it is. Now when it comes to Jay-Z (not just a rapper), he is a savy biz owner and thinker. Don't think that he (president and CEO of Def Jam & Roc-A-Fella Records, co-owns The 40/40 Club, and is co-owner of the New Jersey Nets NBA team) is just some rapper that wants to sell rap music on the internet. There is a bigger picture here some might not know about when it comes to what Jay-Z likes. A good example could be "Collision Course", a CD by Linkin Park and Jay-Z. I hope that the future of Digital Music (ART) will be open to all types of music, artists, audio books, Movies, TV, Short Films, Cartoons, you name the type and I will get behind it. Don't judge artists or partners w/ Apple based on what YOU like, look at the big picture. Let us all enjoy what some like and how WE can help the digital media future move forward rather than be held back. Thanks.

ortuno2k
Jul 15, 2007, 04:42 AM
I just hope these are bad, bad, bored-people rumors.
I'd hate for Apple to get involved in such type of business.
Try to do too much at the same time - won't be good at making Macs anymore. We all know how much that there's been a decline in quality control lately, we don't want it to go worst.
Meh.

steve_hill4
Jul 15, 2007, 04:44 AM
The moment I heard that Apple Corps and Inc settled their differences once and for all, I kind of foresaw Apple Inc getting into music producing more and more, but wasn't sure how. We know they've been doing exclusive deals/releases and "Live from London" etc through the iTunes Store, but to actually try and become a major producer is not something I believed would happen, at least this early on anyway.

Makes sense, but Apple need to ensure it is done correctly. The bigger they get, the more focus they lose. I would argue they perhaps need to split into proper, largely unrelated divisons with some collaboration when needed, but if more devices start to use versions of OS X, you'd only really have computers and devices as one division and music production and distribution as another.

Just don't diversify too much and become as unfocused as other companies like Microsoft. I'm already not entirely convinced Leopard is as big a leap forward as it should/could have been, please don't fall further behind the opposition in other areas. You could start by updating those iMacs next week.

shadowfax
Jul 15, 2007, 04:47 AM
I just hope these are bad, bad, bored-people rumors.
I'd hate for Apple to get involved in such type of business.
Try to do too much at the same time - won't be good at making Macs anymore. We all know how much that there's been a decline in quality control lately, we don't want it to go worst.
Meh.I really doubt this is much to do with that. It's not like they are pulling people out of QC to work on Record Business crap. Apple is expanding, not shifting.

MIDI_EVIL
Jul 15, 2007, 04:52 AM
This has the potential to be huge. Although i'm not a fan of either Jay-Z or Beyonce, I can't think of anyone better for Apple to go in on this with. They're giants of the industry.

I'm sure Jay-Z will be behind the scenes getting this going with Apple, and Beyonce just the pretty face to front the whole sha-bang.

You really have to put your musical tastes aside to understand the potential behind this venture.

HUGE!

Rich.

Abstract
Jul 15, 2007, 05:15 AM
Jay was already complaining last year about declining sales and many in the Hip-Hop community railed against him on how certain eagerly anticipated albums (Nas - Hip-Hop Is Dead) were pushed back for more commercial releases (Jay-Z - Kingdom Come). This digital label would solve most of that.
I thought Nas' album was pushed heavily. Other artists were the ones complaining that Jay-Z was pushing his new friend Nas' heavily while totally ignoring the releases of other artists (eg: The Roots' new album....although that was highly acclaimed anyway, so it got spread by word of mouth and such).


Beyonce and Apple. This better be true. :D:D:D She can be the new face of Apple.

And new body....


why would Apple do this, it doesn't make sense.

Why doesn't it make sense? Jay-Z may bring a lot of artists to his new label, and his label may sell a lot of new music through Apple.

I was wondering when Apple would start signing artists and "seriously" head the digital music age, rather than just selling the iPod and hoping people buy music from the store as well, as the iPod is locked to their online store. That was great as a first step, but still living off the success off the iPod rather than anything special about the iTMS itself other than some exclusive material (also possible due to the iPod's popularity). This new label....now THAT is 2 or 3 steps ahead. Companies are working on their new online stores, but on a digital label? No way.

Spanky Deluxe
Jul 15, 2007, 05:28 AM
Eugh, I would hate this if it were true. Apple should be a reseller not a record label. If it *did* want to go the record label route, it should start out as a record label for new bands who want to sell their stuff on iTunes and then if they're successful, sell them in physical form. NOT get a Shakira-wannabe and Jay-Z on the team because they're 'big'.

Cromulent
Jul 15, 2007, 05:29 AM
Apple have recently released DRM free tracks on iTunes. These rumours (if true) would pave the way for Apple to release tracks DRM free from any artist they please on their label and make enough money off each sale to offer Apple Lossless audio on iTunes.

CD sales are declining and with the conventional music industry in a very defensive stance at the moment they are losing ground to companies like Apple that are looking to the future and trying to innovate in an industry which is quite frankly on the verge.

So assuming these rumours are true, I can see Apple releasing Apple Lossless DRM free music on the iTunes store. Not only that but think of the increased use (and thus increased marketing potential) iTunes and therefore Apple would gain.

iAlan
Jul 15, 2007, 05:34 AM
Jay-Z sets up a 'recording company' which would offer it's artists the option of digital distribution through iTunes and physical CD distribution through an established label.

By not having the established label control both the digital and physical offerings (which is now the case) artists may see additional oppertunities to provide the music they want to provide in the way they want to provide it.

Yixian
Jul 15, 2007, 05:37 AM
A new label with a former computer company that makes most of the tools that the artists of your genre and generation use to create and listen to music and that would digitally distribute your wares all over the world is fresh, raw and true to Hip-Hop!

I'm originally from the Bronx and Hip-Hop is about taking all these global cultural influences and forging into new mediums that democratically provide access to art and making art. We didn't have instruments and took our mouths and record players and made music. No paintbrushes or canvas and made all of NYC (and then the world) our art studio. This is just acknowledgment for the marketing force that Hip-Hop is.

By the way, what is Blacksmith?

Well, fair enough, I see your point of view. I suppose Apple isn't the sort of company to lean on these guys to influence their music or image or message, so sure. If it were Fox and Jay-Z, I guess it'd be different.


Blacksmith Records is Kweli's new label. It's very new but he's handpicking some of the best independent east coast rappers around. Word is Rakim is next.

Plus it has Jean Grae, making it my default fav. label.

Lone Deranger
Jul 15, 2007, 05:58 AM
If it undermines the power of the big record labels then I guess that can be seen as a good thing. But did they have to go in bussiness with these two?? Champagne coloured, diamond encrusted iMac with a pink fluffy edged keyboard anyone? :eek:

Reading about how my beloved Apple is potentially getting involved with a genre/culture I try very hard to avoid doesn't exactly put a smile on my face.

I'd be less sceptical if there was some kind of indication of a more diverse sampling of musical genres involved in this rumour, rather than just the tripe that is hiphop and rnb. :(

Genghis Khan
Jul 15, 2007, 06:10 AM
ARE YOU ALL NUTS

have we forgotten the trouble apple got into over selling music over iTunes...the Apple recording label in england (ala beatles) has made sure apple computer can never be a label

apple comp may decide to run it under a name other than apple...but that's asking for another law suit from apple england and it wouldn't enhance the apple comp brand

to add to all of this...do you really think apple would use those two as launch artists?

niji
Jul 15, 2007, 06:17 AM
there is content and those who make content.
and there are content providers - those that make available the content.

apple is a content provider.

pixar is a content maker.

but in the end, its all about content. creation of content.

if apple thinks it can do the same within the music world for what it was able to assist pixar to do for the world of animation, i would think this is very difficult and would not want to see them get involved in this.

Project
Jul 15, 2007, 06:33 AM
Reading about how my beloved Apple is potentially getting involved with a genre/culture I try very hard to avoid doesn't exactly put a smile on my face.

:rolleyes:



I can conceive Apple doing this, but not much as a label but more of a distributor that simply gives artists a far higher % of the profits than what they get with a major, and a 'space' in the itunes music store.

ImageWrangler
Jul 15, 2007, 06:37 AM
Wasn't April 1st almost four months ago?

bigandy
Jul 15, 2007, 06:48 AM
ARE YOU ALL NUTS

have we forgotten the trouble apple got into over selling music over iTunes...the Apple recording label in england (ala beatles) has made sure apple computer can never be a label

apple comp may decide to run it under a name other than apple...but that's asking for another law suit from apple england and it wouldn't enhance the apple comp brand

to add to all of this...do you really think apple would use those two as launch artists?
DID YOU NOT READ THE PREVIOUS POSTS?
It would seem so
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/02/05apple.html



Seems the trademark is 100% Apple (Computer)'s to use.

arn



No matter how many people don't like Beyonce or Jay Z, nobody can deny that either haven't done things right. Look at where they are in the music business. Two of the most financially successful musicians on earth, both know how to do their business. Hell, if I was starting a label I certainly would be interested in getting them on board.


Oh, and just for the record, Genghis Khan and Eric Lewis, large text is really unnecessary, and quite annoying. All it does is point out the posters' lack of imagination.

csimmons
Jul 15, 2007, 06:48 AM
In other news, Prince just seriously pissed off British music retailers by giving a copy his latest CD away with every issue of the British tabloid "The Mail On Sunday":

http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/Music/07/13/prince.newspaper.ap/index.html

Now before all the Prince-haters come out of the woodwork, just know that in 2004 doing exactly this sort of thing made him the highest paid artist in the biz (57 million in concert revenues, another 20+ million in merchandising). The industry is changing in ways that the major labels still can't seem to comprehend.

Love him or hate him, Jay-Z has proven to be one of the smartest businessmen in the entertainment industry. If this rumor is true, I say good for him. I guess he'll have to start promoting iPods now (he's a spokesman for Hewlett Packard, I believe):cool:

EagerDragon
Jul 15, 2007, 07:04 AM
I am not sure about creating a label with a RAP twist, but a music label in general maybe a strike of Genious.

Apple would likely return a lot more to the Artists, so they would flock like birsds to sign up.

Most Artist are getting ripoff by the current labels.

slackpacker
Jul 15, 2007, 07:08 AM
Can I again state how unreal this sounds.

I thought Apple (Records) Deal was precluding Apple entering the Music Business. Or did that get tossed out the window when they paid Apple off last year?

SP

rsanuri
Jul 15, 2007, 07:08 AM
Check this out...
It was updated on 14Jul 07
http://reports.internic.net/cgi/whois?whois_nic=applemusic.com&type=domain

Sounds interesting and this domain belongs to apple

tourband
Jul 15, 2007, 07:09 AM
This sounds like a placed PR piece and it's almost as good as the one about Morris Levy and Steve Ross putting together a new deal. Then again, I'm sure there's still a few people stupid enough to forget the past. If beyonce and Jay get the direct association with Apple, great for them; it'll give them entree to a series of new demographics and opportunities; one's they will clearly use for only themselves. However, it'll be bad for everyone else. Actually, bad is the understatement of the year. Hey, let's have another "Hit and Run".

BigPrince
Jul 15, 2007, 07:13 AM
April 1st was a few months ago....

Johnner1999
Jul 15, 2007, 07:16 AM
The moment I heard that Apple Corps and Inc settled their differences once and for all, I kind of foresaw Apple Inc getting into music producing more and more, but wasn't sure how. We know they've been doing exclusive deals/releases and "Live from London" etc through the iTunes Store, but to actually try and become a major producer is not something I believed would happen, at least this early on anyway.

Makes sense, but Apple need to ensure it is done correctly. The bigger they get, the more focus they lose. I would argue they perhaps need to split into proper, largely unrelated divisons with some collaboration when needed, but if more devices start to use versions of OS X, you'd only really have computers and devices as one division and music production and distribution as another.

Just don't diversify too much and become as unfocused as other companies like Microsoft. I'm already not entirely convinced Leopard is as big a leap forward as it should/could have been, please don't fall further behind the opposition in other areas. You could start by updating those iMacs next week.


I agree with what steve_hill is saying it is soooo true! with that being said; when is Apple Inc's new campus schedule to open? And maybe I've fallen a sleep - but what did Apple ever do with that use data/call center they bought a year or more ago (the old building being built for WorldComm)??? makes you wonder a bit -- plus they have a nice amount of rainy day money sitting over in the Orchard

BUT this still seems like a big bite to me.

appledrummer
Jul 15, 2007, 07:21 AM
I hope this is not true. apple should not get involved with rap or hip hop or any of the ******. It's totaly degrading, and should not be promoted by anyone.

Project
Jul 15, 2007, 07:34 AM
I hope this is not true. apple should not get involved with rap or hip hop or any of the ******. It's totaly degrading, and should not be promoted by anyone.

I cant believe some of the stuff i'm reading in this thread.

MrSmith
Jul 15, 2007, 07:37 AM
:confused: I obviously drank more tonight than I thought.

darklyt
Jul 15, 2007, 07:43 AM
Do not stereotype the entire genre of hip-hop/rap because you just listen to radio rap (or in your case(s) don't listen to it). That's the kind of music that the major recording labels force-feed America. Let's please not start rating this as 'Negative' just because you don't listen to rap, and let's not turn this into a thread about musical preferences. Thanks.

c-Row
Jul 15, 2007, 07:47 AM
I cant believe some of the stuff i'm reading in this thread.

Yeah, apparently some people are more concerned about the genre than the idea itself. I wonder what reactions would be if it was all about their favourite artist... ;)

doctor newb
Jul 15, 2007, 07:51 AM
Im willing to bet this will turn into another u2 ipod type thing

theperson
Jul 15, 2007, 07:56 AM
yo, :apple: rapz??

seriously, this is ridiculous.

outlyer
Jul 15, 2007, 07:56 AM
It's not very likely. Apple is not accustomed to high loss/high risk business. They prefer markets where they can make solid, consistently high margins and the music industry is exactly the opposite. Even with star power, music sales are inconsistent, highly risky and low margin.

It could happen, but it would be a serious case of overstretch and would create the kind of stock price fluctuations Apple is trying to avoid.

jayducharme
Jul 15, 2007, 08:01 AM
I'd rather see Apple in movies or games but it'd be good to see them branch out with a music label.

You are seeing Apple in movies. They own Pixar, remember. :) And Jobs is one of Disney's biggest shareholders. So that puts him into games as well, in a tangential sort of way.

It's the nature of all big companies in the U.S. to seek to branch out into other areas. That's diversification. The trick is to diversify into complimentary fields. The Jay-Z deal seems to fit in with Apple's overall direction.

Digitalclips
Jul 15, 2007, 08:02 AM
The strange thing is that Universal is trying to play hard-ball with Apple, when Apple is the only large music retailer selling music with DRM. Its like they want to shoot themselves in the foot. CD sales would be declining even faster than the already are if they playing field was equalized with respect to DRM (i.e., Apple has to include it while WaMart, Target and Best Buy do not).

As for Def Jam records, I wonder if more and more of these subsidiaries are going to think: "What do I need Universal for?" I could see this just opening the flood gates.

My exact thoughts. Yet another paradigm shift in the making due to Thinking Different(ly).

You are seeing Apple in movies. They own Pixar, remember. :) And Jobs is one of Disney's biggest shareholders. So that puts him into games as well, in a tangential sort of way.

It's the nature of all big companies in the U.S. to seek to branch out into other areas. That's diversification. The trick is to diversify into complimentary fields. The Jay-Z deal seems to fit in with Apple's overall direction.

Apple do not and never did own Pixar. Steve owned Pixar and sold it to Disney.

Lone Deranger
Jul 15, 2007, 08:09 AM
it's a done deal... and I expect that she'll sign.... Not to try and be too much of a word smith, but isn't that a bit of an oxymoron? :confused:

Tells our insider, "It's a done deal. [Jay Z] already has Beyonce and [Mathew Knowles] on board ... She'll be finishing up her contract [with Sony], and I expect that she'll sign on to the new label shortly afterwards."

MrSmith
Jul 15, 2007, 08:12 AM
Soon Apple will be making toasters. But that's fine as long as we don't have to use their bread.

thomasfxlt
Jul 15, 2007, 08:19 AM
I don't buy it at all.

steve_hill4
Jul 15, 2007, 08:26 AM
Soon Apple will be making toasters. But that's fine as long as we don't have to use their bread.

They'll call it "iToast" and then Roxio will sue as it confuses it with Toast Titanium. Apple will settle and then take over the cooked bread market with their range of iBagel, MacCroissant and Waffle Pro accessories.

Then they will try to get into the fried breakfast market too and people, such as I, will complain about market dominance and de-focusing away from their core breakfast market.

Don.Key
Jul 15, 2007, 08:28 AM
I hope Apple is not opening its mouth so wide that it will eventually choke on everything (All markets) they try to eat now.

Such endeavors can cost huge money and bring nothing. In fact they can destroy core business as well.

nefarious
Jul 15, 2007, 08:57 AM
It is not important who the artists are, what is important is a Label run by Apple Inc. The reason this is good for the artists is several fold.

It would enable Apple to pay the Artists in a more honest and straightfoward way based on sales and results. Imagine a model where Artists make 80% of all sales, and there success is based on sales of their own efforts.

The current crop of labels get an incentive to keep selling on iTunes as they do not with to lose there artists to Apple directly by seeing how a new age label could operate, would open them up to creating new deals for there artists that are far more fair then the current Label Practices.

Apple gets a new set of music and talent that they can use in future promotions, motion pictures, commercials, etc... creating a better bottom line to Apple while increasing exposure to the artists themselves.

I see no downside at all for Apple doing this in a way only Apple can do, This would be better yet if Apple refuses any ties to the RIAA or Sound Exchange. It would leech the major labels from there current power play and lessen DRM on some A Tier talents (I hate Jay Z and Beyonce but you can't argue with there success rates)

puckhead193
Jul 15, 2007, 08:57 AM
maybe if apple got someone with some talent....
you can't spell crap without rap :D

janstett
Jul 15, 2007, 09:04 AM
It sounds like a dubious move at first glance. But what better way to change the dinosaur recording industry than from the inside. I don't know how long this will hold Jobs' attention, but for the artists (Prince, Courtney Love, et al) who want to change the industry it gives them somewhere to flock to.

maybe if apple got someone with some talent....
you can't spell crap without rap :D

I'm not a big fan of rap music, I don't enjoy much of it especially the Gangsta strain. However, Jay Z is very talented. I was first exposed to him in the Linkin Park mashup "Collision Course". Jay Z's black album has been mashed to various other artists including Metallica (Cheap Cologne) and the Beatles (DJ DangerMouse). Give it a try, open your mind.

I used to hate Run D.M.C. in their day but in retrospect they were pretty good and loved rock too (ignoring "Walk this Way" which was heresy to me, check out the guitar riffs on "King of Rock" and "Rock Box").

mikesown
Jul 15, 2007, 09:25 AM
If done at the right time, this could be a stroke of genius. Jobs has made no secret of hating the record companies(see his open letter), and has made it clear that he does not like the way they think. The record companies are still somewhat in the dark age- they don't want to release DRM-free tracks(with the exception of EMI), and they want to sue anyone who illegally downloads music- something which makes themselves and their artists look bad.

If Jobs was able to engineer a record label at Apple he could solve most(if not all) of these problems. He could make sure his label wouldn't sue people for downloading tracks, make sure that all tracks were available DRM free(maybe even lossless!), and could cut out the distribution of physical media(HUGE waste of materials) promoting Apple as the greenest record label.

The only problem with this would be that Jobs would need a LOT of support. Because if he pulled a record label with just Beyonce and Jay-Z, the record labels would conspire against Apple. They would refuse to sell music until Apple disbanded their record label. However- if Jobs was able to get a lot of major artists on board at the same time without the record labels knowing, then he could significantly weaken the record label's power to negotiate. If Jobs took the label's top earners, then possibly the labels couldn't AFFORD to say no to iTunes sales. It could be genius if done correctly.

janstett
Jul 15, 2007, 09:27 AM
You are seeing Apple in movies. They own Pixar, remember. :)

No, Disney owns Pixar.

While Apple and Pixar share Steve Jobs as CEO, it's pretty clear John Lassetter is the driving force at Pixar and Jobs is a figurehead. I'm sure he spends little or no time there.

ClimbingTheLog
Jul 15, 2007, 09:29 AM
this is better then iPhone rumors...

Hey, lay off on the monster font, dude - your opinion isn't more deserving of screenspace than everybody else's.

But really, this belongs less here than iPhone rumors - even an iPhone is a Mac. A Mac with lousy coverage, but hey.

Jay-Z sets up a 'recording company' which would offer it's artists the option of digital distribution through iTunes and physical CD distribution through an established label.

By not having the established label control both the digital and physical offerings (which is now the case) artists may see additional oppertunities to provide the music they want to provide in the way they want to provide it.

This is brilliant. Jay-Z can use online music sales statistics to know when to press new bands onto CD for distribution. His risks lower, and iTunes becomes the new 'local clubs' circuit. Apple makes money and avoids alienating the other labels, upon which it depends.

tourband
Jul 15, 2007, 09:31 AM
It is not important who the artists are, what is important is a Label run by Apple Inc. The reason this is good for the artists is several fold.

It would enable Apple to pay the Artists in a more honest and straightfoward way based on sales and results. Imagine a model where Artists make 80% of all sales, and there success is based on sales of their own efforts.

The current crop of labels get an incentive to keep selling on iTunes as they do not with to lose there artists to Apple directly by seeing how a new age label could operate, would open them up to creating new deals for there artists that are far more fair then the current Label Practices.

Apple gets a new set of music and talent that they can use in future promotions, motion pictures, commercials, etc... creating a better bottom line to Apple while increasing exposure to the artists themselves.

I see no downside at all for Apple doing this in a way only Apple can do, This would be better yet if Apple refuses any ties to the RIAA or Sound Exchange. It would leech the major labels from there current power play and lessen DRM on some A Tier talents (I hate Jay Z and Beyonce but you can't argue with there success rates)

They don't want the headache. Revenue's by comparison to costs are pale and simply not worth the investment; this is not theory. It's about principles and not personalities (or the cult of). There are simply too many points of failure, conflicts of interest, barriers to entry, etc. You can't be everything to everyone.

thisonechance
Jul 15, 2007, 09:38 AM
Some need to stop worrying about the genre, and start to consider how huge the benefits could be of such a bold venture. If Apple succeeds in this, they will have control of the recording process from ground zero. This could mean lower prices, specialized content (videos from the studio/special live performances), not to mention solidifying Apple's popularity with a younger generation (whether you like that or not).

It needs to be understood that Jay-Z takes himself a bit more seriously that most of the other hip-hop artists out there. He actually brings some credibility to the genre. Now only if Kanye and Common would jump on board.

I am not even a fan of hip-hop. I just see an opportunity that, if true, will put Apple in a great position to redefine the market.

puuukeey
Jul 15, 2007, 09:38 AM
the ceos of the big four are in a sauna laughing very hard right now


vertical monoply
crappy music
its about COMPUTERS!
would stretch apple way to thin
would dissuade other labels from embracing itunes.
I'm still waiting for the difference in business model.
artist's saccharine-of-rap brand does not match apples bs minimalist elitist zen brand.
yet another non-innovative move from apple
I personally hate this multimedia empire image. it's so little of what computers can do for people.


I could go on.. but well... who cares really.

the only good thing about this is that apple is speeding up the demise of the large record labels. they are now actually in competition again.( a tiny bit)

Cordless_Drill
Jul 15, 2007, 09:53 AM
I realize that Apple Inc and Apple Corps settled, but given that settlement would Apple Inc actually be allowed to become/start a record label themselves?

No way. Apple Corps would fight this tooth and nail, unless Apple Inc's brand had a completely different name. That wouldn't be very Jobs-like at all.

Project
Jul 15, 2007, 09:55 AM
No way. Apple Corps would fight this tooth and nail, unless Apple Inc's brand had a completely different name. That wouldn't be very Jobs-like at all.

they settled and Apple Inc can do as they please in the music industry.

Freelancer
Jul 15, 2007, 09:58 AM
No way. Apple Corps would fight this tooth and nail, unless Apple Inc's brand had a completely different name. That wouldn't be very Jobs-like at all.

i understood that with the settlement, Apple inc owns the name and license it to Apple Corps so...

technicolor
Jul 15, 2007, 10:12 AM
I dont believe this to be true at all.

sky131
Jul 15, 2007, 10:12 AM
Maybe we will see Jay-Z do a "Switcher" ad...

Afterall, he has done ads in the past for HP (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsE0g-8CDQo)...

After watching the ad again, he is using multi-touch... (New Jay-Z multi-touch Powerbook G5 next Tuesday?)

Cleverboy
Jul 15, 2007, 10:15 AM
A lot of haterz around here. I'm not particularly fond of certain types of music, but you don't hear me dismissing its appeal. I don't see how anyone can have anything against Beyonce and R & B. Jay-Z and the world of hard rap, maybe... but to each their own. If Apple made a big deal of making peace with Eminem (enough to use his music in a commercial (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chzdR7K58RI)), I don't see why Jay-Z is much different (unless its not necessarily the style of music that actually bothers you). :rolleyes:

Just like Puff Daddy, Timbaland, or even Dr. Dre, these guys are all business and don't necessarily exist as ONLY artists... but have significant production and networking connections as well. A friend of mine has long said Apple needs to start representing artists, and not simply putting their music out there. Interestingly, outlets like Amazon and Netflix have even gotten involved in Independant movie production. I think Netflix uses the "Red Envelope Entertainment" name. Were this to turn out to be true, I'd see people like Beyonce & Jay-Z coming in alongside people like keynote artist John Legend along with his cousin Kanye West.

It's certainly a HUGE conflict of interest, but nothing says they can't do it. Unless they've somewhere agreed they wouldn't.

~ CB

nemaslov
Jul 15, 2007, 10:18 AM
Of course, if it is true, my guess is this would be a new, revamped record biz, one based on digital distribution, not boring old physical products.

Am I the only who who thinks "old physical product" is FAR more interesting than digital downloads? Quality, packaging, no limitations. Is this person whacked?

4God
Jul 15, 2007, 10:19 AM
It is not important who the artists are, what is important is a Label run by Apple Inc. The reason this is good for the artists is several fold.

It would enable Apple to pay the Artists in a more honest and straightfoward way based on sales and results. Imagine a model where Artists make 80% of all sales, and there success is based on sales of their own efforts.

The current crop of labels get an incentive to keep selling on iTunes as they do not with to lose there artists to Apple directly by seeing how a new age label could operate, would open them up to creating new deals for there artists that are far more fair then the current Label Practices.

Apple gets a new set of music and talent that they can use in future promotions, motion pictures, commercials, etc... creating a better bottom line to Apple while increasing exposure to the artists themselves.

I see no downside at all for Apple doing this in a way only Apple can do, This would be better yet if Apple refuses any ties to the RIAA or Sound Exchange. It would leech the major labels from there current power play and lessen DRM on some A Tier talents (I hate Jay Z and Beyonce but you can't argue with there success rates)


Well said. If this turns out to be true, IMHO this would be Apple's wisest move to date. Period.

Wie Gehts
Jul 15, 2007, 10:23 AM
HA. I've had the strong feeling in the past 6 months that Apple was going to turn itself into a huge media content provider and put the whole pc computer business on the back burner if not jettison it all in the long run.

bigjohn
Jul 15, 2007, 10:34 AM
This could either go really good or really bad, either way I think Apple can afford a loss (they've had winner-winner-winner for a long time now).

What I'd like to see is Apple partner up with leaders from each of the genres and along with enterprising new music and new bands, they can perhaps start to bring over artists from other labels - artists who may be dissatisfied with their label experience.

While it's true that the current model for distribution of recorded material is flawed and open to criticism, the model for earnings from tours has never been stronger and as we all know, that's where the real money is made.

QCassidy352
Jul 15, 2007, 10:36 AM
Just don't diversify too much and become as unfocused as other companies like Microsoft. I'm already not entirely convinced Leopard is as big a leap forward as it should/could have been, please don't fall further behind the opposition in other areas. You could start by updating those iMacs next week.

yup yup. That's the downside of this rumor. Talking about whether you like jay z and beyonce's music is totally missing the point. The point is that apple has already seemingly abandoned its desktop lines (all 10+ months old) and delayed its OS for a phone (which I love, don't get me wrong). More diversification is a bad thing, IMO. Focus on your core business.

slughead
Jul 15, 2007, 10:42 AM
disregarding whether you believe its true or not... would it really surprise people?

What better way to promote iTunes (and therefore iPod, iPhone) then digital only distribution of popular artists.

Not only that, but Apple could theoretically charge less for Apple label tracks on itunes.

They have to watch out though, they have a monopoly on online downloads and if they leverage that against the recording industry, they could be in line for an anti-trust violation.

They'd have to advertise their artists on the itunes pages less than they do ones from other companies, otherwise they'll get their butts sued off.

guzhogi
Jul 15, 2007, 10:44 AM
Don't really care whether Apple starts its own record label. If Apple Corps starts something, Apple Inc. can probably just buy them out and put them into the new label. But I feel Apple needs to get back to its roots: computers. Remember those? They have keyboards and monitors and can do cool things.

nimbuscloud
Jul 15, 2007, 10:45 AM
You guys that are COMPLAINING about this are CRAZY!!!

I'm serious, stop being such "Mac zealots".

If Apple did nothing but make Macs, they wouldn't be the 116 BILLION dollar company that they are right now.

When Apple made the iPod, the same people were scared that "Apple would lose focus on computers"...yet they've still been pushing things. Same thing with ANYTHING that ventures slighting outside of the realm of "Mac".

I guess Google had better quit EVERYTHING that they are doing and just STICK WITH SEARCH. Sony had better stop EVERYTHING that they are doing and just think about a new Walkman and Bravias. Lord knows that the PS1 and PS2 were just TOTAL flops that did NOTHING for the video game industry selling over 100 million units EACH.

Apple is NOT Microsoft. Microsoft "makes" new things to protect Windows and Office, not to do anything well or really innovative.

I hope that Apple gets in the music business. Look at what they did with Pixar! This is great news. For all those that doesn't like it, go home and clutch your Wallstreet PowerBook and pray that they Sun doesn't rise.

Remember, the Apple of today isn't the "old Apple". Hell, the Apple of today is the darn reason why they are so successful. They make products and services and link with everything that they do. Apple IS NOT A SMALL COMPANY. Stop acting like they are a "mom and pop's" shop. They are a $116 billion dollar company that's doing things...and doing them well. They are still innovating, even if you are too blind or scared to see that.

Why would Apple quit making computers? They make a TON of money from it! And do you think that Steve Jobs would really quit making Macs?!! You guys are crazy. Like you're going to see him using a Windows machine for the rest of his life.

GO APPLE!!!

:apple:

ghall
Jul 15, 2007, 10:47 AM
I certainly hope nothing comes of this. I think it will be damaging to Apple. Not because of the crap quality of the artists involved, but because of the big picture here. Apple just entered a new market with the iPhone, it would be dangerous to enter another market so soon. Plus, I'm sure many record labels will not be very pleased over this move. Universal will most certainly pull out of the iTunes Store, and the improving relationship between Apple Inc. and Apple Records will completely tank.

Bad Apple, bad. :mad:

nimbuscloud
Jul 15, 2007, 11:02 AM
I certainly hope nothing comes of this. I think it will be damaging to Apple. Not because of the crap quality of the artists involved, but because of the big picture here. Apple just entered a new market with the iPhone, it would be dangerous to enter another market so soon. Plus, I'm sure many record labels will not be very pleased over this move. Universal will most certainly pull out of the iTunes Store, and the improving relationship between Apple Inc. and Apple Records will completely tank.

Bad Apple, bad. :mad:

You guys are making me laugh.

Sony can do it...have movies, music, video games, music players, PDAs, computers, hand-held consoles, and all kinds of stuff...BUT APPLE IS SPREAD TOO THIN IF THEY DO IT? Apple is worth about twice what Sony is worth.

I think we have two problems on this thread.

1) Too many people still view Apple as the old Wallstreet PowerBook company. I guess it's the older folks here that are scared to realize that Apple is growing and evolving...and they are making others grow and evolve. Too bad that some of the older Apple fans didn't grow and evolve.

2) That the rumor mentions Jay Z and Beyonce. I'm not a huge fan of either, but for some reason, some people have already taken that as negative? WHY? Because they are black? Or because you simply don't like their music? That's a matter of opinion, but you can't deny that they are very popular and sell a lot of music. Maybe if you realize that it's not 1984, you'd be able to take these rumors a bit easier.

Don't take this wrong, but some of you are worse than raving Windows people. At least they support Microsoft when they try something new, even if they fail everytime. Apple tries new things and does a GREAT job, yet you still think it's a bad idea. Need I remind some of you when Apple was launching the iPod and SO many Apple people were mad because it "wasn't a Mac". HAHAHAHA, 6 years later, look how Apple is doing. They have money, leverage, mindshare, and more ideas coming while they help push and innovate EVERY INDUSTRY that they get into.

There's enough "wine" in Italy, don't need it in these forums.

:apple:

BlackLilyNinja
Jul 15, 2007, 11:08 AM
Apple can't have a music label.

Unless they buy out apple records. People have short memories.

nemaslov
Jul 15, 2007, 11:09 AM
I certainly hope nothing comes of this. I think it will be damaging to Apple. Not because of the crap quality of the artists involved, but because of the big picture here.
Bad Apple, bad. :mad:

Such small minded people. Those of you who only like one genre and bad mouth rap or hip hop. Jeeeez, you sound like my parents...And I am 52!!! I grew up with the Beatles and they turned many on to more than just rock and roll. They played country, folk, Indian (sort of introduced World music to the masses) and much more. Avant garde art and so on. Radio rarely only played one genre. Even top 40 played rock, soul, pop, folk, blues and much more.

There was alot of great music in the 60s and 70s and also alot of crap that sort of dissappeared.

Same thing now. Some wonderful rap and crap rap. The same goes for each and every type of music. If Apple did hook up with Jay Z, that would only be a start. Look at McCartney and Starbucks. The old Record distribution system is failing but I still love the psysical format of records-CDs. I love the total artisitic package. Yeah maybe because I am 52! There is room for it all!!!

MrSmith
Jul 15, 2007, 11:09 AM
Isn't rap music an oxymoron? A bit like Apple computers? :D

applekid
Jul 15, 2007, 11:09 AM
I'd welcome Hova with open arms to Apple, but this rumor really makes no sense besides being a stab at Universal.

I hate the ignorance on this board towards hip hop and rap. Sometimes, you Mac users are disgraceful. You like to play on the stereotypes and probably haven't even heard a complete song by any rap artist, yet you're quick to say they're "criminals." Amazing...

Get high and go listen to your trash music from Radiohead, please. Now that's glorified crap you listen to.

nemaslov
Jul 15, 2007, 11:10 AM
Apple can't have a music label.

Unless they buy out apple records. People have short memories.

That basically did. Well not purchase APPLE CORP. but paid them a huge seetlement to use the APPLE Inc name for everything, without limitation. So they are free to do this now.

twoodcc
Jul 15, 2007, 11:13 AM
i'm totally shocked by this rumor, and as others have said, i really don't want to see this happen

Carlos E
Jul 15, 2007, 11:14 AM
Eugh, I would hate this if it were true. Apple should be a reseller not a record label. If it *did* want to go the record label route, it should start out as a record label for new bands who want to sell their stuff on iTunes and then if they're successful, sell them in physical form. NOT get a Shakira-wannabe and Jay-Z on the team because they're 'big'.
Shakira wannabe? lol Beyonce was around LONG before Shakira started singing in English. Shakira was busy singing in Spanish and marketed only to the latin community. Shakira crossed over because she wanted to be a Beyonce. Marketed to the masses not just one group.

uNext
Jul 15, 2007, 11:19 AM
Wow the ignorance level towards hip hop on this thread is at an all time high.
well it is to be expected with some mac users.

It sounds like if green day or some other "white band" where in the title
apple would go from being stupid and dumb move to apple is great i love them so much GREAT MOVE APPLE.

Do i see the ignorance and racism or is it just me?

Theres crap rock and theres crap rap.
period stop being double standerd and accept the truth.

MrSmith
Jul 15, 2007, 11:20 AM
I hate the ignorance on this board towards hip hop and rap. Sometimes, you Mac users are disgraceful. You like to play on the stereotypes and probably haven't even heard a complete song by any rap artist, yet you're quick to say they're "criminals." Amazing...
No, we just think it's crap. ;)

Project
Jul 15, 2007, 11:23 AM
I hate the ignorance on this board towards hip hop and rap. Sometimes, you Mac users are disgraceful. .


It honestly puts me off posting. You don't hear a word from us when John Mayer is performing for the 90th time at a Keynote, or the big skew towards rock music in the silhouette ads (Paul McCartney, U2, the Vines, Dylan, Caesars etc). But whenever Apple associates itself with a rapper, the genre just gets ******* on by many on Mac Rumors. Remember the Kanye West performance? I was embarrassed by a lot of the posts on here.

4God
Jul 15, 2007, 11:25 AM
...<snip>...If Apple gets involved beyond selling this crap to idiot on iTunes, I'll switch to Vista.:mad:

Hmmmm...and use iTunes on Vista instead? :rolleyes:

Dale_Nx26
Jul 15, 2007, 11:28 AM
Is nobody thinking Apple - as in The Beatles Apple?

paja
Jul 15, 2007, 11:30 AM
The old music companies don't get it. Apple & many of the Artists do!

If Sony can do it then so can Apple and the music won't just be Rap or R&B. I can see many Artist joining this new Label. Most musicians use Apple products and like the company.

Apple just sets up a seperate music division. So what's the big deal?

Apple will still make computers, iPods and iPhones. Just as Sony makes Computers, Walkman's and Cell phones.

As a stock holder I say Go Apple!

gwangung
Jul 15, 2007, 11:33 AM
It honestly puts me off posting. You don't hear a word from us when John Mayer is performing for the 90th time at a Keynote, or the big skew towards rock music in the silhouette ads (Paul McCartney, U2, the Vines, Dylan, Caesars etc). But whenever Apple associates itself with a rapper, the genre just gets ******* on by many on Mac Rumors. Remember the Kanye West performance? I was embarrassed by a lot of the posts on here.

Exactly.

A lot of really ignorant crap out there. And especially the guy criticizing people for having "short memories." Um, hello? http://playlistmag.com/news/2007/02/05/applecorps/index.php Settlement, anyone?

Cleverboy
Jul 15, 2007, 11:39 AM
No, we just think it's crap. ;)You do I guess. Way to be divisive! Um, keep it up? :rolleyes:
I agree.Me too. Amazing how articulate Project was, isn't it? He didn't even say "bust a cap" once. Sigh.

~ CB

MacTheSpoon
Jul 15, 2007, 11:39 AM
I don't really believe this rumor. Don't record labels take on all kinds of promotion responsibilities for their artists, and organize tours and recording sessions and things for them? I just don't see Apple doing any of that.

I think it's more likely that somebody in Jay-Z or Beyonce's camp leaked this false rumor to put pressure on Def Jam. They probably want better terms or something.

On the other hand, if Jay-Z and Beyonce decide they're going to form their own label and do digital distribution-only, and if they decide to make iTunes their sole distributor, or maybe their sole distributor for just their first couple albums, I could see that. But I can't see Apple actually becoming a record company.

jsw
Jul 15, 2007, 11:43 AM
Let's please stick to the news item discussion and not a broad discussion on which types of music or musicians suck or rock, OK? That way, there will be fewer off-topic posts to delete and less need to give people time-outs for insulting posts.

Thanks.

SpaceJello
Jul 15, 2007, 11:46 AM
Couldn't this new label be entirely digital? Instead of record companies controlling the artistic content of the artist, the artist have total control? Or even artist can just directly sale music through iTunes?

This rumor sounds a bit off the left field, but I think if Apple do get involve in the music industry, they may do it in a very very very different way from how we have been getting our music. No more albmns but singles? Who knows...

If anything is needed is a change in the way record companies have been bullying consumers, artists and other distributors.

aux
Jul 15, 2007, 11:48 AM
While Mr. Jay Z was doing commercials for HP:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=fsE0g-8CDQo

MrSmith
Jul 15, 2007, 11:52 AM
While Mr. Jay Z was doing commercials for HP:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=fsE0g-8CDQo
Gotta say: Cool ad.

dpaanlka
Jul 15, 2007, 11:58 AM
If their music is so terrible, why are they so popular. It's not like their songs are cheaper than anyone elses.

Beyonce and Apple. This better be true. :D:D:D She can be the new face of Apple.

Oooh I agree!

50548
Jul 15, 2007, 12:22 PM
I just hope these are bad, bad, bored-people rumors.
I'd hate for Apple to get involved in such type of business.
Try to do too much at the same time - won't be good at making Macs anymore. We all know how much that there's been a decline in quality control lately, we don't want it to go worst.
Meh.

What tires me most is the horrible quality of such music, especially coming from the so-called "African-American" side of things...it's all about rap and hip-hop on MTV and related crappy channels, or about the artificial affirmative action that turns those "humble" artists into ridiculous posh robots driving their white Mercedes.

It will be a pity to see Apple selling such commercially-driven music and moving away from premium computers...alas, that's what the "majority" seems to like anyway...just bad.

Porco
Jul 15, 2007, 12:23 PM
I hope it's true. Online music sellers as agents/distributors for artists. Who needs record companies? They've stifled the industry for years. Apple wants to sell DRM-free music, and artists should be getting a bigger share of the profits, get rid of the music companies. This is the future.

slughead
Jul 15, 2007, 12:26 PM
It honestly puts me off posting. You don't hear a word from us when John Mayer is performing for the 90th time at a Keynote, or the big skew towards rock music in the silhouette ads (Paul McCartney, U2, the Vines, Dylan, Caesars etc). But whenever Apple associates itself with a rapper, the genre just gets ******* on by many on Mac Rumors. Remember the Kanye West performance? I was embarrassed by a lot of the posts on here.

Kanye West is a criminal though.... wait, it's not illegal to be an arrogant, self-obsessed moron who literally compares himself to Jesus Christ and Marvin Gaye?

Well it should be, damn it!

There's nothing ignorant about hating Kanye West.

zoozx
Jul 15, 2007, 12:26 PM
How AWful.
Uhg, more bad music on the way.
Is this like marketing Colt 45 in the getto?

cheese1113
Jul 15, 2007, 12:28 PM
Edit: I stand corrected

nemaslov
Jul 15, 2007, 12:32 PM
What tires me most is the horrible quality of such music, especially coming from the so-called "African-American" side of things...it's all about rap and hip-hop on MTV and related crappy channels, or about the artificial affirmative action that turns those "humble" artists into ridiculous posh robots driving their white Mercedes.

It will be a pity to see Apple selling such commercially-driven music and moving away from premium computers...alas, that's what the "majority" seems to like anyway...just bad.

Again such short sided attitudes. There is a wealth of radio/interent labels...all types of music out there for the picking. It seems there was less racism is music radio (in the sixties than now). Everything is segregated. Rap listeners only hear rap, metal only metal, boomer rock and so on. I miss the stations and outlet who play simply what the DJ feels like at that moment. Yes I love alot of new music but I look back fondly at radio stations like KMPX and KSAN in San Francisco who began the free form movement.

They would play Hendrix, Funkadelic, Bobby Womak, Beethoven , Vivaldi, Wagner Classics and experiemental like Zappa, Ken Nordine, Walter/Wendy Carlos and Coltrane and Miles Davis. Even Marty Robbins and Merle Haggard. Now most listeners stick with one or two genres. Open up your ears!!!! You'll bee surprised.

nemaslov
Jul 15, 2007, 12:33 PM
Just imagine the Apple v. Apple law suits now....

Again. It has been settled APPLE INC can do whatever they want. They paid Apple Corp.

Peace
Jul 15, 2007, 12:37 PM
Most top-selling artists have contracts.They can't simply decide to go to a different label at any moment.They either pay off their current contract or wait however long their contract is then change labels.

If this is true it will be a while before we see top selling artist on Apple Records..That's right.Apple owns the rights to Apple Records and licensed it to the EMI subsidiary after the Apple v. Apple suit.


It would be cool though as long as Apple had more than Jay-Z and beyound (sic)

ariza910
Jul 15, 2007, 12:40 PM
I hope that Apple gets in the music business. Look at what they did with Pixar! This is great news. For all those that doesn't like it, go home and clutch your Wallstreet PowerBook and pray that they Sun doesn't rise.

Why would Apple quit making computers? They make a TON of money from it! And do you think that Steve Jobs would really quit making Macs?!! You guys are crazy. Like you're going to see him using a Windows machine for the rest of his life.

GO APPLE!!!

:apple:


What exactly did Apple do for Pixar?? I believe you should give credit to all the hard working people at Pixar some of those people were at the company long before Jobs bought the company. Pixar didn't even use Apple software of computers to get where they are today.

I think people here are concerned about Apple loosing focus on their computer business, not that Macs are going away but that they are taking a back seat to other, more profitable, businesses such as the iPods and iPhones. Even Steve said that their iPod business now makes just as much as their MAC business and that they hope the iPhone and AppleTV will become the 3rd and 4th leg of their business. In other words Macs would become 1/4 of what Apple is all about. A perfect example of this was the delay of Leopard until October 07 due to the non-mac iPhone release.

Carlos E
Jul 15, 2007, 12:42 PM
What tires me most is the horrible quality of such music, especially coming from the so-called "African-American" side of things...it's all about rap and hip-hop on MTV and related crappy channels, or about the artificial affirmative action that turns those "humble" artists into ridiculous posh robots driving their white Mercedes.

It will be a pity to see Apple selling such commercially-driven music and moving away from premium computers...alas, that's what the "majority" seems to like anyway...just bad.

Replying to the ignorant posts in this thread is not even worth my energy. I'll let you wallow in your own ignorance.

Lone Deranger
Jul 15, 2007, 12:43 PM
Popularity does not always equal quality or means is the right thing to do. MicroSoft products, VHS, cigarettes...... you get the idea. ;)

If their music is so terrible, why are they so popular. It's not like their songs are cheaper than anyone elses.

Project
Jul 15, 2007, 12:47 PM
What tires me most is the horrible quality of such music, especially coming from the so-called "African-American" side of things...it's all about rap and hip-hop on MTV and related crappy channels, or about the artificial affirmative action that turns those "humble" artists into ridiculous posh robots driving their white Mercedes.

It will be a pity to see Apple selling such commercially-driven music and moving away from premium computers...alas, that's what the "majority" seems to like anyway...just bad.

/sigh.

wait, it's not illegal to be an arrogant, self-obsessed moron who literally compares himself to Jesus Christ

You mean like John Lennon did? Come on, its just a persona.

Counter
Jul 15, 2007, 01:04 PM
This would be a mess.

ajhill
Jul 15, 2007, 01:04 PM
Okay folks calm down here. It makes no sense for Apple Inc. to start a record label. They just got through dealing with the real Apple Records and trying to woo the Beatles catalog over to iTunes. The last thing Apple Inc would do is start a record label. Apple Records would have a fit.

Now a new company that entirely distributed their music solely on iTunes and not in the form of CD in B&M stores... Now that would be interesting...

darklyt
Jul 15, 2007, 01:06 PM
Someone should close this thread because apparently people can't be mature enough to keep their opinions of other people to themselves. It's really disgusting and more tasteless than any song you might take offense to. Seeing as the driving forces behind creating and marketing the music you dislike so much are the labels which Apple would be taking a shot at, the idea should be welcome to you.

Project
Jul 15, 2007, 01:07 PM
Apple Records would have a fit.

Now a new company that entirely distributed their music solely on iTunes and not in the form of CD in B&M stores... Now that would be interesting...

Blimey. Why aren't people actually reading the facts? Apple Corps is no longer an issue.

toneloco2881
Jul 15, 2007, 01:11 PM
Wow! I was almost scared to click on the link for the comments, for fear that the thread had devolved into a bout of mudslinging. Sad, truly sad. Maybe it's coincidence but everytime I see some African Amercian of prominence mentioned in being associated with Apple, the threads ALWAYS turn out like this?

BTW, there's much more to rap, than the crap you hear on the radio. These (mostly) idiots make up a very small cross-section of the genre. Perhaps if a certain demographic would stop buying in excess of 70% of the rap records, then the labels wouldn't feel it was profitable; and the no talent losers would cease to exist?

mikesown
Jul 15, 2007, 01:14 PM
Perhaps what will happen is that Jobs will start his own record label. He certainly has the cash from being the biggest shareholder in Disney(12%) and from being a very large(largest?) shareholder in Apple. He started Pixar, and look at what the company has done- it has been very successful and acquired by Disney. Maybe Jobs will revolutionize the music industry by starting his own label. Just a thought.

jay-t
Jul 15, 2007, 01:14 PM
What exactly did Apple do for Pixar?? I believe you should give credit to all the hard working people at Pixar some of those people were at the company long before Jobs bought the company. Pixar didn't even use Apple software of computers to get where they are today.

I think people here are concerned about Apple loosing focus on their computer business, not that Macs are going away but that they are taking a back seat to other, more profitable, businesses such as the iPods and iPhones. Even Steve said that their iPod business now makes just as much as their MAC business and that they hope the iPhone and AppleTV will become the 3rd and 4th leg of their business. In other words Macs would become 1/4 of what Apple is all about. A perfect example of this was the delay of Leopard until October 07 due to the non-mac iPhone release.

You are right. Apple did not much for Pixar; actually I would say Pixar did much for Apple! It´s because of SJ position at Pixar (or now Disney) ;)
SJ = Apple = Pixar but not Apple = Pixar!! :cool:

And if this rumor is true, then I guess it´s again SJ who is involved and necessarely Apple; which of course would help Apple and the ITMS ;)

Project
Jul 15, 2007, 01:17 PM
I also find it funny that people think something like this would affect Macs, as if the OSX engineers and Jonathan Ive's team will jump ship to start promoting music.

dpaanlka
Jul 15, 2007, 01:20 PM
Popularity does not always equal quality or means is the right thing to do.

Well, it usually does mean there is some level of quality or reasonable explanation as to why it is so popular. Nothing is popular for NO reason whatsoever.

MicroSoft products

As opposed to Commodore products? Me defending Microsoft... this is a rare occasion.

VHS

Should we have stuck with the home film projector? And since when is VHS popular anymore anyway?

cigarettes......

Well yeah, this isn't the right thing to do. But Cigarettes do have qualities that people like (flavor, relaxation, addiction appeasement, etc...)

bretm
Jul 15, 2007, 01:31 PM
Don't mind either artist, but if this were true Apple is proving why there are so many issues lately.No focus on computing, just media/gadget ventures:(

Just curious, but what is your perceived problem with Apple's computing? Apple makes premium products, from their gadgets to their computers. Their computers are the best designed and best built. Sure they're slightly more expensive, but arguably not so when compared to similarly equipped high end Dells. And those of course, are running Windows. Apple computers can natively run Windows or OSX. So what's the deal?

e-coli
Jul 15, 2007, 01:31 PM
This would actually be a good move for Apple. They already have their hands in the Film / Television market with their ties to Disney and Pixar. The current consumer model of music is broken and outdated (for both consumers AND artists), so now seems like a perfect time for someone who understands the current marketplace and economics to get in. Apple already makes the tools that render major record labels nearly obsolete, allowing artists to self-publish directly to iTunes. They already have the distribution/publicity infrastructure in place (iTunes), so why not just put all the pieces together.

This makes perfect sense.

It's funny. I had thought to myself when the news about Universal first came out that it would be a "last straw" event, for both consumers and Jobs. He's the last person you want to stir into action.

kitki83
Jul 15, 2007, 01:31 PM
I remember what many articles says about changes in companies and technology. Theres three approaches to the situation,

1. When something new or different happens you jump right in and risk what can happen.

2. You analyze the situation and see whether this new thing is what its hype up to be, then you decide to jump in or not.

3. You hate it because its different from what you know already, its outside your comfort zone.

50548
Jul 15, 2007, 01:32 PM
Replying to the ignorant posts in this thread is not even worth my energy. I'll let you wallow in your own ignorance.

Worry not, I will stick to it.

1 - Hip-hop and rap suck big time, period. It's my opinion, and I won't change it. There is no ignorance or prejudice in this statement, just taste;

2 - Any kind of reverse discrimination or affirmative action IS discrimination and racism, period. Including clips that show ONLY "African-Americans" in a certain setting, as if they were the ones living in a damn bubble of prosperity, or as if others (including caucasians), who have damn NOTHING to do with past racism, did not exist; I am glad this ridiculous practice stays in the US...we don't need any of that in other parts of the globe.

3 - It is natural for Apple to join the club of record companies; I just hope they don't start doing TOO many things at the same time...the late 90s showed them what happened.

corywoolf
Jul 15, 2007, 01:39 PM
I hope this actually happens. It will be so funny seeing all the artists trying to jump ship and leave their current record contracts. You know Apple is going to reinvent the wheel with the recording industry if this happens.

k2k koos
Jul 15, 2007, 01:40 PM
The Music industry needs a shakeup, it is so ridiculously corrupt and set in it's own ways that it would never go forward, with money rolling to numerous deep pockets except the artists, and those that work directly with them to make the product (I.E. the recording engineers).

I think it is good if Apple would get involve, shake things up, give us a new fresh approach and take the music industry forward to a modern , competitive business.

nemaslov
Jul 15, 2007, 01:51 PM
Worry not, I will stick to it.

1 - Hip-hop and rap suck big time, period. It's my opinion, and I won't change it. There is no ignorance or prejudice in this statement, just taste;

.


Yes you can have an opinion but it is wrong!!!!

Hip-hop and rap do not suck big time. You may not like that music at all. That is your opinion and yes you are entitled to it. If

I said Opera or Jazz or Folk or Punk music sucks, I would be wrong. If I said I did not like it, then that would be my opinion and that would be fine.

The truth is I like all of these genres and much much more. But I do not like like EVERY artist or piece of music within those categories. I would be wrong if I said they all suck though. Or I would by simply ignorant:cool:

darklyt
Jul 15, 2007, 01:51 PM
Worry not, I will stick to it.

1 - Hip-hop and rap suck big time, period. It's my opinion, and I won't change it. There is no ignorance or prejudice in this statement, just taste;

2 - Any kind of reverse discrimination or affirmative action IS discrimination and racism, period. Including clips that show ONLY "African-Americans" in a certain setting, as if they were the ones living in a damn bubble of prosperity, or as if others (including caucasians), who have damn NOTHING to do with past racism, did not exist; I am glad this ridiculous practice stays in the US...we don't need any of that in other parts of the globe.

3 - It is natural for Apple to join the club of record companies; I just hope they don't start doing TOO many things at the same time...the late 90s showed them what happened.



1. Then just keep your opinion to yourself please. You can have your tastes, I just don't want to hear about them.

2. Actually, when you start looking at the lists of top 100 eligible bachelors or hottest women, it seems to me that there is a certain white bias there and you're complaining about music videos? All you're proving to me right now is that there is a sense of intolerance of other cultures outside of the US, which is made out to be the only intolerant country out there at times. Again, I want to hear about Apple taking over the world, not your musical tastes and social philosophies.

3. Me too.

reno
Jul 15, 2007, 01:55 PM
i think this totally makes sense. i think you will see Apple will be buying content, one way or another, in the next year or so. and it won't just be limited to music. they might be buying, investing in or starting TV or movie studios as well. they have many great vehicles now for content delivery (iPod, iPhone, AppleTV, FrontRow, etc). the more content they can offer, the better, especially content they can control directly. and they have tons of cash they are sitting on to do this sort of stuff. i'm telling you, it's going to happen sooner or later!

Rot'nApple
Jul 15, 2007, 01:57 PM
This would definitely hurt their relationship with other labels in the iTMS, but also explain why Universal started crying and ran home with their toys (music). Since Jay is (or was?) distributed by Universal, this definitely has to be a coup. Jay was already complaining last year about declining sales and many in the Hip-Hop community railed against him on how certain eagerly anticipated albums (Nas - Hip-Hop Is Dead) were pushed back for more commercial releases (Jay-Z - Kingdom Come). This digital label would solve most of that.


On the other hand...

If Apple were to obtain a deal with JayZ, Beyonce and other artists, with some new "digital" Record Label, maybe, just maybe other record companies will be more agreeable to Apple's long term contracts/pricing/promotions/etc. just so Apple can maintain some stability and some exclusivity of newly released products etc. Otherwise Apple will sick JayZ and Beyonce and others to tell their peer's who's contract with their current record label is nearing it's end and that for those artists in particular, there IS another option then the status quo? Maybe?:cool:

darklyt
Jul 15, 2007, 02:06 PM
On the other hand...

If Apple were to obtain a deal with JayZ, Beyonce and other artists, with some new "digital" Record Label, maybe, just maybe other record companies will be more agreeable to Apple's long term contracts/pricing/promotions/etc. just so Apple can maintain some stability and some exclusivity of newly released products etc. Otherwise Apple will sick JayZ and Beyonce and others to tell their peer's who's contract with their current record label is nearing it's end and that for those artists in particular, there IS another option then the status quo? Maybe?:cool:


That would be cool. Very cool indeed... You could see a lot more artists going the way of the LOX and fighting to get free of their labels to bring their music to Apple, assuming they would have good control over their own work and presentation. I would just be worried that based on the amount of control that Apple likes to exhibit over its work and development that it wouldn't be that great an alternative to the major labels...

Porchland
Jul 15, 2007, 02:09 PM
Don't mind either artist, but if this were true Apple is proving why there are so many issues lately.No focus on computing, just media/gadget ventures:(

Tell me about it. That damn iPlod or i-whatever it's called keeps pulling Apple away from their core mission of building computers. When will they stop fooling with the music gizmos? Enough is enough!

kitki83
Jul 15, 2007, 02:14 PM
I hope this might shake the music industry to be more open with their business practice and music US has. I think US is the only one that won't really bring foreign music unless the artist has crossover. Basically make access to music more international, not just US. Like this weird band in Japan I want to know more about Ali Project theres no information other than Amazon. I just see outside countries are more open to foreign music, from my personal experience.

natejohnstone@g
Jul 15, 2007, 02:26 PM
iTunes MS better start focusing on video or they'll start loosing marketshare. Microsoft announced that XBOX Live now offers full-length movie downloads in full HD. iTunes has YET to manage to do this. Why? What's even stranger to me is that Microsoft closed this deal with Disney...a big :apple: partner.
It's been shown that people doen't care enough about HD optical media to risk loosing their gamble in a format war, and HD downloaded internet content is the perfect compromise for consumers. Others are doing it, now Microsoft is doing it....when will iTunes get it in gear?

Tell me about it. That damn iPlod or i-whatever it's called keeps pulling Apple away from their core mission of building computers. When will they stop fooling with the music gizmos? Enough is enough!

Look, friend. The fact of the matter is that computers are NO LONGER :apple:s "core mission" as you call it. Sorry, but it's true. Didn't the fact that they changed their name from Apple Computer to just Apple (i.e. intentionally dropping the "computer" from their name) sort of clue you in?

Xplatmedia
Jul 15, 2007, 02:36 PM
Sounds utterly awful.

I'm glad Apple doesn't think 80% of you people they don't see color just good quality people

CalBoy
Jul 15, 2007, 02:41 PM
Look, friend. The fact of the matter is that computers are NO LONGER :apple:s "core mission" as you call it. Sorry, but it's true. Didn't the fact that they changed their name from Apple Computer to just Apple (i.e. intentionally dropping the "computer" from their name) sort of clue you in?

Actually, the iPod and iPhone are still computers. They are just computers with a different purpose and function. In the modern day, the computer is one component of our digital lifestyle. Apple is trying to sell each portion of that digital lifestyle: computer, phone, music player, and tv. Dropping "computer" from its name only shows that Apple sees the writing on the wall. From a business perspective, having cash flow from iPods can allow Apple to put more money into computer R&D, or into other innovative products (like the iPhone). Computers are still Apple's core mission, it's just that they now are enhanced with a lot of other devices as well.

50548
Jul 15, 2007, 02:42 PM
iTunes MS better start focusing on video or they'll start loosing marketshare. Microsoft announced that XBOX Live now offers full-length movie downloads in full HD. iTunes has YET to manage to do this. Why? What's even stranger to me is that Microsoft closed this deal with Disney...a big :apple: partner.
It's been shown that people doen't care enough about HD optical media to risk loosing their gamble in a format war, and HD downloaded internet content is the perfect compromise for consumers. Others are doing it, now Microsoft is doing it....when will iTunes get it in gear?

Putting aside crappy music genres, I have to say that it's kinda worrying to see Apple fording too many rivers at the same time...as I said above, the late 90s showed Apple that a company can't spread itself THAT thin without a clear focus.

I am sure SJ is not anymore the mercurial boy, but nobody is perfect. They hit several homeruns, but now it IS time to sit down and check how things are going.

This means:

1 - Updating Macs as much as the market so requests, without creating a thousand different lines or models; this implies a limited set of updates such as REALLY NEW iMacs and only ONE smaller MBP;

2 - Updating iPods to keep their wide lead in the music player segment; in other words, widescreen iPods à la iPhone and bigger capacity overall;

3 - Sticking to ONE iPhone model for now and ensuring great inroads in the mobile market;

4 - Improving the content quality of the iTMS...many households have access to broadband now, and even my girlfriend (still with an anti-Mac/Apple bias) checks the QuickTime page for movie trailers now; meaning that too many stores have almost THE SAME offers in terms of music content...INVITE more indie/international musicians, PUT HD movies on the store, improve overall quality (bitrate and resolution for movies/shows).

This way Apple will secure its foothold on a big terrain for a while, before prepping new battlefields such as artist sign-ups and the like...I really hope they keep their minds focused on SUSTAINABLE business.

SeaFox
Jul 15, 2007, 02:47 PM
This was an interesting post.

The original user was making historical references and the replier seemed to be trying to change the comparisons to arcane or otherwise incorrect items. I would say the replier was woefully "oblivious" to the topics the original poster was referring to, but it feels like they were actually trying to muddy the conversation rather than address the actual comparison.



Popularity does not always equal quality or means is the right thing to do.
Well, it usually does mean there is some level of quality or reasonable explanation as to why it is so popular. Nothing is popular for NO reason whatsoever.

It's popular in the face of there being no alternative, folks choose the best music the radio has to offer. "The Radio has to offer" is the operative phrase here. If a good band can't get on the radio (due to lack of a major label contract and payola) people most often will not even know they exist, and therefore will choose another band of possible lesser talent instead.



MicroSoft products
As opposed to Commodore products? Me defending Microsoft... this is a rare occasion.

No, Windows versus Mac OS. I could also bring up the internet browsing public's "choice" of IE once Netscape was gone and what's been happening now that Firefox is available.


VHS
Should we have stuck with the home film projector? And since when is VHS popular anymore anyway?

No, VHS verses Betamax. VHS won due to heavier marketing and Beta not allowing porn. But Betamax had a higher quality picture (in the beginning at least).


cigarettes......
Well yeah, this isn't the right thing to do. But Cigarettes do have qualities that people like (flavor, relaxation, addiction appeasement, etc...)

I though that was just a bad example.

Also, using nails instead of screws to build houses can be an example.

darklyt
Jul 15, 2007, 03:01 PM
It's popular in the face of there being no alternative, folks choose the best music the radio has to offer. "The Radio has to offer" is the operative phrase here. If a good band can't get on the radio (due to lack of a major label contract and payola) people most often will not even know they exist, and therefore will choose another band of possible lesser talent instead.


Jay-Z started his own label and didn't get distributed by a major recording label in the beginning, he made himself. "Reasonable Doubt" was distributed by Priority Records, at least according to the copy that I own.

brepublican
Jul 15, 2007, 03:02 PM
I fully expect to catch sight of at least a couple pigs flying as I go out for my usual walk in the park next door.

I mean, honestly. wtf? I dont even know what to say... except that this is utter nonsense! Not only are Beyoné and Jay-Z both god-awful musicians, it just doesnt even begin to make any sense.

Ugh! :mad:

Project
Jul 15, 2007, 03:09 PM
Hardware
iPhone hardware
Server hardware
iPod hardware
Mac hardware
Displays
Apple TV
Peripherals

Operating systems
Mac OS / Apple TV
iPhone OS
iPod OS (soon to become iPhone OS)

Software
Mac
Windows
Mobile

Ops / Web
iTunes
.Mac
Apple.com
Developer Connection

Support
Retail
Marketing
Sales

As you can see, there is a lot of shared resource in this product matrix. Apple arent really stretching themselves too thin. Its all about good management and good recruitment. From a product perspective Apple still has a relatively narrow focus.

applekid
Jul 15, 2007, 03:13 PM
I think a line from Jay-Z applies well to where this thread has been going:

A wise man told me don't argue with fools...

kalisphoenix
Jul 15, 2007, 03:20 PM
This is idiotic. Two of the highest-selling musicians are apparently going to start a music label with Apple, and people do nothing but bitch.

I dislike commercial hip-hop too, but what else would Apple start a label with? Sigur Ros? Brian Eno? Plastikman? The Brian Jonestown Massacre? Sorry, but they don't sell all that many albums these days.

If Apple can change the music label business model, where instead of:

Jay-Z and Beyoncé enabling the existence of lesser-selling (but more subjectively pleasant) artists

we can get:

Jay-Z, Beyoncé, Plastikman, the Dandy Warhols, etc all making money for the label as well as themselves

I would be an extremely happy person.

Digital distribution has the potential to do this. Wal-Mart and physical methods don't have this potential. Right now, if you listen to the RIAA, a tiny percentage of artists are effectively taxed to permit the existence of the otherwise-doomed 90+%. It's unnecessary, senseless, and profoundly symptomatic of a chronically ill business model.

If Jay-Z and Beyoncé can help make it possible for less-profitable artists to receive exposure, distribution, and profit, then I'll be first in line to shake their hands and kiss their cheeks. Ordinarily, I don't care.

Turning this into a thread about the merits of rap is utterly brain-damaged.

50548
Jul 15, 2007, 03:21 PM
I think a line from Jay-Z applies well to where this thread has been going:

So such a line means he is a genius whose ideas can't ever be countered? Go figure...:rolleyes:

netdoc66
Jul 15, 2007, 03:21 PM
It's funny being on these forums in 2007 to think back to 1977 when I was living in the heartland of of racism in the south. In 30 years it seems things are worst online then they ever where growing up. Some of these posters here have so much pent up hatred of Black culture they resort to the negative whenever something involves Black culture. This is on any message board not just this one. STAY ANGRY. Every year we grow bigger and more powerful and you can't stop it. Think Different.:apple:

:D:D:D

netdoc66
Jul 15, 2007, 03:28 PM
Oh yeah I think this is a great idea for Apple. This has world changing implications on how music will be sold and distributed for the next century. When the first iPod came out and the industry was up in arms about the evils of mp3 music i was thinking "it would be so lovely if Apple became the label and stole the majors thunder." I eagerly wait to see if this is true. These are exciting times to live in.

Peace
Jul 15, 2007, 03:31 PM
It's funny being on these forums in 2007 to think back to 1977 when I was living in the heartland of of racism in the south. In 30 years it seems things are worst online then they ever where growing up. Some of these posters here have so much pent up hatred of Black culture they resort to the negative whenever something involves Black culture. This is on any message board not just this one. STAY ANGRY. Every year we grow bigger and more powerful and you can't stop it. Think Different.:apple:

:D:D:D

And this has what to do with Apple starting a label :confused:

tom5304
Jul 15, 2007, 03:32 PM
It's funny being on these forums in 2007 to think back to 1977 when I was living in the heartland of of racism in the south.

Please avoid the use of narrow-minded stereotypes like the ones you used against southerners. It makes you look bigoted. :)

Porchland
Jul 15, 2007, 03:39 PM
Look, friend. The fact of the matter is that computers are NO LONGER :apple:s "core mission" as you call it. Sorry, but it's true. Didn't the fact that they changed their name from Apple Computer to just Apple (i.e. intentionally dropping the "computer" from their name) sort of clue you in?

You missed the sarcasm. The iPod is unquestionably driving the ship.

Peace
Jul 15, 2007, 03:40 PM
I don't like The Dandy Warhols.Does this make me anti-white?
I don't like Beyonce' ( or however it's spelled.sorry) Does this make me bigoted?
I don't like Rap,R&B,,New Wave and a few other genres'.What politically correct label does it make me?

I DO like melodic,well written songs and music that is pleasant to my personal ears.


According to some here I hate everybody except The Beatles and Grateful Dead.
:rolleyes:

Apple can do this right.Get some bands that want a change and voila!! A good label is born.

netdoc66
Jul 15, 2007, 03:41 PM
Please avoid the use of narrow-minded stereotypes like the ones you used against southerners. It makes you look bigoted. :)

I'm from the south. I know you people well.

netdoc66
Jul 15, 2007, 03:45 PM
And this has what to do with Apple starting a label :confused:

Well, that's called making an observation. If you would have looked I followed up by saying "Oh yeah blah blah blah..." because I forgot to include it in the prior post. Calm down I'm not calling you a racist.

Peace
Jul 15, 2007, 03:52 PM
I forgot one..

This really makes me a bigot..

I like Prince.;)


Oh and I forgot..I was born in Louisiana.:)

Badandy
Jul 15, 2007, 03:57 PM
Not only are Beyoné and Jay-Z both god-awful musicians, it just doesnt even begin to make any sense.

Ugh! :mad:


Here's where you should stop talking. Just because Jay-Z's music may not appeal to you doesn't mean he's a god-awful musician. Maybe you don't like rap. Maybe his frequent cussing puts you off to the real things he has to say, but if you actually listened to some of his songs, his lyrical and artistic genius would not be questioned. Point blank, Jay-Z is incredible at what he does.

netdoc66
Jul 15, 2007, 04:00 PM
I forgot one..

This really makes me a bigot..

I like Prince.;)

Fantastic! Prince is a smart dude. By giving away his albums at his concerts he has increased his live performance money ten-fold I believe. However, the label dosen't like it. There are some brilliant "African-American" artist out there.

Peace
Jul 15, 2007, 04:09 PM
Prince is very talented.If Apple Records ( hehe ) could get him that would help because he has a wide demographic audience.

nimbuscloud
Jul 15, 2007, 04:09 PM
Fantastic! Prince is a smart dude. By giving away his albums at his concerts he has increased his live performance money ten-fold I believe. However, the label dosen't like it. There are some brilliant "African-American" artist out there.

Oh, and the rest are stupid? Just kidding.

Let's PLEASE not make this a black and white thing.

Badandy
Jul 15, 2007, 04:16 PM
It shouldn't be made into a black or white thing. But so far, I think a lot of people say they hate Jay-Z and that he's an untalented musician just because he happens to be a rapper. People haven't listened to what he has to say and the skill he has. It's a shame. People passing up a whole genre and arguable the genre's best artist ever just because of the view of rappers as untalented people who just scream obscenities with no real lyrics. Yes, a lot of that is true, but you guys are overlooking one of music's best kept secrets for the amount of talent he has...

Olmecmystic
Jul 15, 2007, 04:18 PM
Long time reader; 1st-time poster. :)

For those who wonder what Jobs himself thinks about the possibility of Apple being or becoming a record label, consider that he already spoke on the subject to Rolling Stone magazine in the 12/8/03 issue. The following is from the very end of the interview:

RS: Do you expect that Apple will start signing musicians - and, in effect, become a record label?

SJ: Well, it would be very easy for us to sign up a musician. It would be very hard for us to sign up a young musician who was successful. Because that's what the record companies do.

We think there are a lot of structural changes that are gonna happen in the record industry, though. We've talked to a large number of artists who don't like their record company, and I was curious about that. The general reason they don't like the record company is because they think they've been really successful, but they've only earned a little bit of money. They feel they've been ripped off. They feel that.

But then again, the music companies aren't making a lot of money right now...so where's the money going? Is it inefficiency? Is somebody going to Argentina with suitcases full of one hundred dollar bills? What's going on?

After talking to a lot of people, this is my conclusion: a young artist gets signed, and he or she gets a big advance - a million dollars, or more. And the theory is that the record company will earn back that advance when the artist is successful.

Except that even though they're really good at picking, only one or two out of the ten that they pick is successful. And so most of the artists never earn back that advance - so the record companies are out that money. Well, who pays for the ones that are the losers?

The winners pay. The winners pay for the losers, and the winners are not seeing rewards commensurate with their success. And they get upset. So what's the remedy?

The remedy is to stop paying advances. The remedy is to go to a gross-revenues deal and tell an artist, "We'll pay you twenty cents on every dollar we get, but we're not gonna pay you an advance. The accounting will be simple: We're gonna pay you not on profits - we're gonna pay you off revenues. It's very simple: the more successful you are, the more you'll earn. But if you're not successful, you will not earn a dime. We'll go ahead and risk some marketing money on you. But if you're not successful, you'll make no money. If you are, you'll make a lot more money." That's the way out. That's the way the rest of the world works.

RS: So you see the recording industry moving in that direction?

SJ: No. I said I think that's the remedy. Whether the patient will swallow the medicine is another question.

From that, it's easy to see that Steve had not only thought about it, but actually investigated it as of 3 1/2 years ago, pre-the Apple vs. Apple settlement.

My take is don't be surprised if it's true. Per his comments above, Steve would only do this with established artists to begin with...maybe Prince next?:cool: Then you'd be talking about two people :mad: at the record companies who are in a position to do something about it.:D

Peace.
Olmecmystic

gnasher729
Jul 15, 2007, 04:22 PM
ARE YOU ALL NUTS

have we forgotten the trouble apple got into over selling music over iTunes...the Apple recording label in england (ala beatles) has made sure apple computer can never be a label

Ahem I think you missed the settlement in the court case between then Apple Computer Inc and Apple Corps. :D For an undisclosed sum Apple Computer Inc. received _all_ the Apple related trademarks from Apple Corps, with Apple Corps having the right to use the name for their business. There is nothing whatsoever that could stop Apple from doing whatever they like in the music business.

aaarrrgggh
Jul 15, 2007, 04:26 PM
I agree with what steve_hill is saying it is soooo true! with that being said; when is Apple Inc's new campus schedule to open? And maybe I've fallen a sleep - but what did Apple ever do with that use data/call center they bought a year or more ago (the old building being built for WorldComm)??? makes you wonder a bit -- plus they have a nice amount of rainy day money sitting over in the Orchard

BUT this still seems like a big bite to me.

My understanding (from one of their neighbors) is that the Newark site is used for iTunes currently. Don't think it is at full capacity, but it isn't idle by any means. I understood that they bought that facility to replace their old Napa site that Kaiser bought a couple years ago. (It had been idle for a few years already though.)

But, back on topic, if Apple is smart they will try to make moves to encourage independent labels, not be a label unto themselves. They can do a lot on promotion online, but I can't picture them being a big event planner...

gnasher729
Jul 15, 2007, 04:27 PM
Apple can't have a music label.

Unless they buy out apple records. People have short memories.

People don't follow the news properly.

Question: Who is the owner for the "Apple" trademark in the music space?
Answer: Apple Inc.

dpaanlka
Jul 15, 2007, 04:31 PM
The original user was making historical references and the replier seemed to be trying to change the comparisons to arcane or otherwise incorrect items. I would say the replier was woefully "oblivious" to the topics the original poster was referring to, but it feels like they were actually trying to muddy the conversation rather than address the actual comparison.

Arcane? In the late 80s Apple hardware was way more expensive than PC hardware. Well wasn't Apple hardware better? Yes it was, but nobody cared. It was pretty reasonable that the buying public shifted to PCs. Nobody forced them to. You speak of me being "oblivoius" - oblivoius to what? The intense popularity of Jay-Z and Beyoncé? How does this muddy the conversation? People are free to choose whatever music they want - in this case, lots of people choose Jay-Z and Beyoncé.

It's popular in the face of there being no alternative

Oh give me a break. I live in Chicago, where there is surely lots of hip-hop and rap, but its because thats what the public wants. And it isn't hard to find other choices. We have dozens and dozens of radio stations to choose from, covering all genres pretty darn well. Nobody is forced to listen to any particular artist, and new alternative radio stations often fail here. But not by their own choosing. You're complaining that your faovirte artist doesn't get equal air-time to Beyoncé in Chicago. So are you saying you want regulated equal air time to every artist, even if the public doesn't want that? You're not going to change the African-American community's mind because you force them to listen to Garth Brooks. They'll just turn the radio off, and not buy advertiser's products.

"The Radio has to offer" is the operative phrase here. If a good band can't get on the radio (due to lack of a major label contract and payola) people most often will not even know they exist, and therefore will choose another band of possible lesser talent instead.

This is just your opinion of what is good or bad. I personally don't find most hip-hop music very good at all. I think the lyrics are usually terrible and most of it is just copy-cat garbage. But I can understand why lots of people like this stuff, which they do. What would be the alternative here - all the major stations of Chicago switching to whatever genre of music you prefer?

No, Windows versus Mac OS. I could also bring up the internet browsing public's "choice" of IE once Netscape was gone and what's been happening now that Firefox is available.

Well, in the case of Windows versus Mac OS, Apple made some mistakes in the early days of the Macintosh that hindered it's market popularity. People chose not to use Macs, however superior they might have been (and were). In the case of IE vs Netscape... well, people chose to use evil Microsoft software, what else did they expect? And the ability to install Netscape as an alternative was always there anyway.

No, VHS verses Betamax. VHS won due to heavier marketing and Beta not allowing porn. But Betamax had a higher quality picture (in the beginning at least).

Yeah, and? What does this prove? The market chose VHS... they had more options with VHS, cheaper players, better porn, and eventually equal or superior quality (and longer movie lengths). If there was absolutely no reason for the market to choose VHS, they wouldn't have.

wiz7dome
Jul 15, 2007, 04:54 PM
I can't see any truth to this on so many levels. The first of which would be the fact that media takeout is the source.

Project
Jul 15, 2007, 05:08 PM
Long time reader; 1st-time poster. :)

For those who wonder what Jobs himself thinks about the possibility of Apple being or becoming a record label, consider that he already spoke on the subject to Rolling Stone magazine in the 12/8/03 issue. The following is from the very end of the interview:

RS: Do you expect that Apple will start signing musicians - and, in effect, become a record label?

SJ: Well, it would be very easy for us to sign up a musician. It would be very hard for us to sign up a young musician who was successful. Because that's what the record companies do.

We think there are a lot of structural changes that are gonna happen in the record industry, though. We've talked to a large number of artists who don't like their record company, and I was curious about that. The general reason they don't like the record company is because they think they've been really successful, but they've only earned a little bit of money. They feel they've been ripped off. They feel that.

But then again, the music companies aren't making a lot of money right now...so where's the money going? Is it inefficiency? Is somebody going to Argentina with suitcases full of one hundred dollar bills? What's going on?

After talking to a lot of people, this is my conclusion: a young artist gets signed, and he or she gets a big advance - a million dollars, or more. And the theory is that the record company will earn back that advance when the artist is successful.

Except that even though they're really good at picking, only one or two out of the ten that they pick is successful. And so most of the artists never earn back that advance - so the record companies are out that money. Well, who pays for the ones that are the losers?

The winners pay. The winners pay for the losers, and the winners are not seeing rewards commensurate with their success. And they get upset. So what's the remedy?

The remedy is to stop paying advances. The remedy is to go to a gross-revenues deal and tell an artist, "We'll pay you twenty cents on every dollar we get, but we're not gonna pay you an advance. The accounting will be simple: We're gonna pay you not on profits - we're gonna pay you off revenues. It's very simple: the more successful you are, the more you'll earn. But if you're not successful, you will not earn a dime. We'll go ahead and risk some marketing money on you. But if you're not successful, you'll make no money. If you are, you'll make a lot more money." That's the way out. That's the way the rest of the world works.

RS: So you see the recording industry moving in that direction?

SJ: No. I said I think that's the remedy. Whether the patient will swallow the medicine is another question.

From that, it's easy to see that Steve had not only thought about it, but actually investigated it as of 3 1/2 years ago, pre-the Apple vs. Apple settlement.

My take is don't be surprised if it's true. Per his comments above, Steve would only do this with established artists to begin with...maybe Prince next?:cool: Then you'd be talking about two people :mad: at the record companies who are in a position to do something about it.:D

Peace.
Olmecmystic

You know, Steve Jobs has a wonderful way of breaking complex things down and presenting it in a style anybody can digest.

Lone Deranger
Jul 15, 2007, 05:16 PM
Best post of this thread. Thank you for posting this Olmecmystic!

Long time reader; 1st-time poster. :)

For those who wonder what Jobs himself thinks about the possibility of Apple being or becoming a record label, consider that he already spoke on the subject to Rolling Stone magazine in the 12/8/03 issue. The following is from the very end of the interview:

...

Peace.
Olmecmystic

Kid Red
Jul 15, 2007, 05:25 PM
please Apple, don't get involved with them. Their 'music' is utter drivel.

And I would find your taste in music just as dreadful. I find this rumor to be a sweet move for Apple.

ajhill
Jul 15, 2007, 05:32 PM
Hello, think for a second people. Apple's iTunes music store has the potential to drastically limit the importance of the record company. Sure the music execs will say that you can't have a hit record without huge PR campaigns. They'll argue that you need to spend millions on ads, but just look how bad the music is nowadays. No amount of spending will make me buy a Justin Timberlake track.

Somehow the idea of a more direct route of getting the fans money directly into the hands of the band members has a great appeal. Hit songs will be hit songs with or without huge money being spent. Why do you think the guy who runs Facebook TURNED DOWN 1 BILLION DOLLARS. That's because he is holding out for 3 BILLION! Social networks like myspace and facebook is the new marketplace. What better place to find out what is hot than going to the network and seeing what everyone else is linking to.

CD sales are down 20% this year and falling faster each year. Online purchases are up 50% year over year and showing no signs of slowing.

Why would Apple become "A music" company when they are THE MUSIC COMPANY in the fastest growing market.

Apple Inc. becoming a record company would be like General Electric dropping electric locomotives and going back to making steam engines.

Not gonna happen people...

offwidafairies
Jul 15, 2007, 05:39 PM
Don't mind either artist, but if this were true Apple is proving why there are so many issues lately.No focus on computing, just media/gadget ventures:(

sadly, i agree:(

CalBoy
Jul 15, 2007, 05:40 PM
Apple Inc. becoming a record company would be like General Electric dropping electric locomotives and going back to making steam engines.

Doesn't GE still make steam engines for electricity production? Anyways, your analogy doesn't make sense. Apple signing artists would reduce their bottom line, so it is beneficial for Apple to do it.

ErikGrim
Jul 15, 2007, 05:57 PM
Apple can't have a music label.

Unless they buy out apple records. People have short memories.That's true. Especially you. Apple Inc. now owns ALL trademarks related to Apple and is licensing them out TO Apple Corps.

It's as good as a buyout really :rolleyes:

ErikGrim
Jul 15, 2007, 06:00 PM
You mean like John Lennon did? Come on, its just a persona.Oh snap. :D

Badandy
Jul 15, 2007, 06:06 PM
..No amount of spending will make me buy a Justin Timberlake track...




hmmmm. How about a recommendation that his new CD, excepting a couple songs, is actually really good for casual listening?

applekid
Jul 15, 2007, 06:06 PM
So such a line means he is a genius whose ideas can't ever be countered? Go figure...:rolleyes:

Wow. Who said that?

Look, keep adding to the flame. So far your posts have been just pure ignorance and taking people's posts and throwing them way out of proportion. So, I posted a quote and then all of a sudden Jay-Z has an idea that "can't ever be countered?" WTF? I'm sorry. I was unaware that was the meaning of my post.

It's one thing to say you don't like the music genre (which is fine), but it's another thing to tossing around your ************* about "affirmative action" in "African American" music. So, somehow "African American" artists aren't allowed to make money and live like rockstars? Hm. Odd. Sounds like that's what, say, almost all commercialized music artists do these days.

But, who am I to argue with a fool? Go figure... :rolleyes:

gnasher729
Jul 15, 2007, 06:17 PM
AI live in Chicago, where there is surely lots of hip-hop and rap, but its because thats what the public wants.

Actually, the music played is not necessarily what "the public wants".

1. Some people buy more music, some people buy less music. If you see music played on the radio as an advertisement to buy music, then you would expect the station to play not the music that "the public" wants, but the music that "heavy music buyers" want.

2. On the other hand, you could see the music played as a means to attract listeners to a station, so that the station can sell advertisements (and the advertisers sell products). In that situation I have been told customers who are not easily swayed by advertisements are of no value to advertisers. So you wouldn't play music that "the public wants" but music that "people who are easily influenced by advertisements like".

Badandy
Jul 15, 2007, 06:21 PM
People who just disregard hip-hop are uninformed in my opinion. I only wish they could see that behind the facade that gets all the plays on the radio station, it's an art form that relies on skillfull flows and powerful lyrics. Of course, you can always just dismiss rap as "drivel" if you are ignorant and close-minded enough...

toneloco2881
Jul 15, 2007, 06:41 PM
People who just disregard hip-hop are uninformed in my opinion. I only wish they could see that behind the facade that gets all the plays on the radio station, it's an art form that relies on skillfull flows and powerful lyrics. Of course, you can always just dismiss rap as "drivel" if you are ignorant and close-minded enough...

Unfortunately, mainstream Hip-Hop has become representative of the art form as a whole. Casual listeners think to themselves that the garbage on the radio(pre-dominantly) speaks for every hip-hop artist out there. The paradox of the situation is that when an artist comes along, and starts to speak on progressive, thought provoking topics, he/she gets shunned by mainstream record labels/radio.

So, obviously the majority of people purchasing the music must not care for that message. Surprisingly, numerous studies have found that the majority of "purchased" hip-hop is by suburban white kids. I suspect they must want to live vicariously through these people; most of whom are just projecting a lifestyle intended to get them accepted by the mainstream. Perhaps all these people who rail against hip-hop, and all the "ills" associated with it, should talk to their kids about why they love such music? Or even better, why they find a Black artist speaking on positive topics, uninteresting??

CalBoy
Jul 15, 2007, 06:43 PM
People who just disregard hip-hop are uninformed in my opinion. I only wish they could see that behind the facade that gets all the plays on the radio station, it's an art form that relies on skillfull flows and powerful lyrics. Of course, you can always just dismiss rap as "drivel" if you are ignorant and close-minded enough...

Personally, I don't care for it. However, I have to ask you, what type of music isn't art that relies on skillful flows? Seems to me all music relies on this. I can disregard it because I find many of the lyrics to be offensive. It has nothing to do with ignorance.

nemaslov
Jul 15, 2007, 06:48 PM
Fantastic! Prince is a smart dude. By giving away his albums at his concerts he has increased his live performance money ten-fold I believe. However, the label dosen't like it. There are some brilliant "African-American" artist out there.

He didn't give them away, they were "worked into" the ticket prices so everyone at the shows actually bought his album. It is actually a great idea and made his albums "chart" again after a long hiatus as a big seller.

kalisphoenix
Jul 15, 2007, 07:00 PM
Personally, I don't care for it. However, I have to ask you, what type of music isn't art that relies on skillful flows? Seems to me all music relies on this.

The vocal functions in hip-hop are different than they are in other music.

I can disregard it because I find many of the lyrics to be offensive. It has nothing to do with ignorance.

I agree totally. That's why I don't listen to reggae -- a hotbed of homophobia and religious fanaticism. Country music is ****ing disgusting to me -- nothing but alcoholism, infidelity, and sexism (not to mention the snide jokes on rural dwellers). Modern rock is all puerile nonsense. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the only music whose lyrics I don't hate is from the Baroque period ;)

CalBoy
Jul 15, 2007, 07:04 PM
In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the only music whose lyrics I don't hate is from the Baroque period ;)

What'd you mean? I could have sworn Beethoven was writing his 5th Symphony in tribute to wife-beating:p

DaBrain
Jul 15, 2007, 07:06 PM
Do not stereotype the entire genre of hip-hop/rap because you just listen to radio rap (or in your case(s) don't listen to it). That's the kind of music that the major recording labels force-feed America. Let's please not start rating this as 'Negative' just because you don't listen to rap, and let's not turn this into a thread about musical preferences. Thanks.

I think the idea is great, but RAP is CRAP in my opinion! :D

Project
Jul 15, 2007, 07:16 PM
The vocal functions in hip-hop are different than they are in other music.



I agree totally. That's why I don't listen to reggae -- a hotbed of homophobia and religious fanaticism. Country music is ****ing disgusting to me -- nothing but alcoholism, infidelity, and sexism (not to mention the snide jokes on rural dwellers). Modern rock is all puerile nonsense. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the only music whose lyrics I don't hate is from the Baroque period ;)

There is also an amazing amount of inspirational, positive lyricists who are reggae artists.

failsafe1
Jul 15, 2007, 07:24 PM
Never mind that I think the artists are horrible. I can't see Apple getting into a recording deal that would involve a physical product related to the songs themselves. Now a digital download music label might make sense.

addicted44
Jul 15, 2007, 07:49 PM
yup yup. That's the downside of this rumor. Talking about whether you like jay z and beyonce's music is totally missing the point. The point is that apple has already seemingly abandoned its desktop lines (all 10+ months old) and delayed its OS for a phone (which I love, don't get me wrong). More diversification is a bad thing, IMO. Focus on your core business.

Well, making a new music label is not going to distract from the mac business like creating the best iPod ever did (although, I am not sure if it really distracted. Thats a debate for another day though). After all, they will not be shipping their Mac OS X engineers to Atlanta to help Jay-Z fix the sound on his newest album which is nearing its release date!

While Apple may have delayed the release of their latest mac products due to the iphone, fact is they are still head and shoulders ahead of their competitors. Vista will be months, if not years before it is usable. And besides processor speed, none of Dell, HP, Sony etc can catch up with Apple in terms of design and ease of use. Even if they do, they are still encumbered by a low quality OS. That allows Apple to take a little more time to fine tune their newest products without falling behind.

Also, if this rumor is true (which I doubt), it is all about protecting their iTunes eco-system, which arguably has made the mac revolution possible. There is no way Apple would have gone for the Intel deal if it was not for the massive reputation boost they got from the ipod/itunes system. Every publication in the world would have been telling people to not buy the computers, because it would be only a matter of time before Mac OS X went the way of the dodo. They still tried, but it was not as believable, because OS X had a far better rep than Windows, a rep which was significantly helped by the ipod.

shinji
Jul 15, 2007, 08:19 PM
Stupidest rumor ever...

Phormic
Jul 15, 2007, 09:00 PM
yup yup. That's the downside of this rumor. Talking about whether you like jay z and beyonce's music is totally missing the point. The point is that apple has already seemingly abandoned its desktop lines (all 10+ months old) and delayed its OS for a phone (which I love, don't get me wrong). More diversification is a bad thing, IMO. Focus on your core business.

I think you would have to agree that diversification is the exact thing that has sent Apple's stock price soaring into the stratosphere and left the company in a far, far healthier state than it even was three or four years ago.

When your core business is something that has essentially not changed much in a quarter of a century and whose future is by no means certain, why wouldn't you diversify? Why do you think that Microsoft is flailing around wildly to move in a direction, any direction, that doesn't leave them dependant on Office and Windows as their primary sources of revenue?

To wish for the "old" Apple, a cute but unimportant little company that does small incremental improvements in computer software and computer hardware for all eternity, is dooming the company to eventual technical irrelevance.

john7jr
Jul 15, 2007, 09:18 PM
I would love to see this happen.


Apple makes new label, gets two big name artists on board to launch the thing.
Perhaps Apple Corps and Apple, Inc create Apple Music together? Bring the Beatles in?
Artists line up around the block waiting to sign up for the latest "iPhone" of the music world, at least, as soon as their current contracts are up. Apple Music would be a huge success. Balmer would have his doubts.
Apple is hot... this is the time to move.
The Mac nerds who only want computers and, as usual, think Apple's latest idea will 'certainly fail' will be proved wrong. Again.
Apple will still make computers. Computers will continue to change. Get used to it.
Change is inevitable. Embrace the wave, it's moving wether you sit on the board or not.


Just my $0.02. Oh, and I'm a reasonable white guy who like music for what it is, regardless of it's genre or stereotype. Like every artist, they both have their good and bad songs. I own tracks from both Beyoncé and Jay-Z. And the majority of my personal music collection is far from Rap, hell, I mostly can't stand country music for the most part, but I own tracks from some country artists too. (Little Texas, Shania Twain, just to name a few.)

Music isn't about choosing genres, it's about the music itself.

=)

Badandy
Jul 15, 2007, 09:18 PM
hmmm Failsafe. I can't help but wonder if you've actually listened to a good Jay-Z song?

NiteWaves77
Jul 15, 2007, 09:26 PM
yea.. but theyre really popular.. so making a deal with them would be smart of apple.. because its already known that beyonce and jay z have a large fanbase that is willing to purchase their products. so just because their music isnt appealing to you, doesnt mean its a bad move on apples part.

Precisely. All that matters is if it's good business strategy for Apple, which no one in this board has the credentials to say.

zwilliams07
Jul 15, 2007, 09:42 PM
I just threw-up a little in my mouth.

nimbuscloud
Jul 15, 2007, 09:43 PM
I would love to see this happen.


Apple makes new label, gets two big name artists on board to launch the thing.
Perhaps Apple Corps and Apple, Inc create Apple Music together? Bring the Beatles in?
Artists line up around the block waiting to sign up for the latest "iPhone" of the music world, at least, as soon as their current contracts are up. Apple Music would be a huge success. Balmer would have his doubts.
Apple is hot... this is the time to move.
The Mac nerds who only want computers and, as usual, think Apple's latest idea will 'certainly fail' will be proved wrong. Again.
Apple will still make computers. Computers will continue to change. Get used to it.
Change is inevitable. Embrace the wave, it's moving wether you sit on the board or not.


Just my $0.02. Oh, and I'm a reasonable white guy who like music for what it is, regardless of it's genre or stereotype. Like every artist, they both have their good and bad songs. I own tracks from both Beyoncé and Jay-Z. And the majority of my personal music collection is far from Rap, hell, I mostly can't stand country music for the most part, but I own tracks from some country artists too. (Little Texas, Shania Twain, just to name a few.)

Music isn't about choosing genres, it's about the music itself.

=)

The internet need more people like you, my friend.

Very good post, very good indeed. :cool:

:apple:

gwangung
Jul 15, 2007, 10:10 PM
Precisely. All that matters is if it's good business strategy for Apple, which no one in this board has the credentials to say.

If I was a businessman, I'd do the EXACT OPPOSITE of what some people are saying....guarunteed to make me a fortune...:D

netdoc66
Jul 15, 2007, 10:15 PM
He didn't give them away, they were "worked into" the ticket prices so everyone at the shows actually bought his album. It is actually a great idea and made his albums "chart" again after a long hiatus as a big seller.

Umm, yeah what he said,..:apple:

JGowan
Jul 15, 2007, 10:16 PM
ARE YOU ALL NUTS

have we forgotten the trouble apple got into over selling music over iTunes...the Apple recording label in england (ala beatles) has made sure apple computer can never be a labelAhem I think you missed the settlement in the court case between then Apple Computer Inc and Apple Corps. :D For an undisclosed sum Apple Computer Inc. received _all_ the Apple related trademarks from Apple Corps, with Apple Corps having the right to use the name for their business. There is nothing whatsoever that could stop Apple from doing whatever they like in the music business.Gnasher, you are correct, sir. In fact, I'd like to add (see source link below) that Apple, Inc. now completely OWNS the name "Apple" and when the needs arrise that The Beatles needs to use the brand, they will have to license it from Steve Jobs & Company.

Irony at its absolute best.:D

Apple Inc. announced Monday it has settled its decades-long trademark dispute with the Beatles' record company, Apple Corps. Under this new agreement, Apple Inc. will own all Apple trademarks and will license some to Apple Corps, and will continue to use its name and logo on its iTunes music service.

This new settlement replaces the 1991 agreement between the two companies, which defined the context in which the two companies could use the Apple trademark.

"We love the Beatles, and it has been painful being at odds with them over these trademarks," said Apple Inc. CEO Steve Jobs. "It feels great to resolve this in a positive manner, and in a way that should remove the potential of further disagreements in the future."

"The years ahead are going to be very exciting times for us," said Neil Aspinall, manager of Apple Corps. "We wish Apple Inc. every success and look forward to many years of peaceful co-operation with them."
It was not disclosed whether the Beatles' music catalog was part of the deal.

LINK (http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Apple_Inc.,_Apple_Corps_resolve_trademark_dispute)

Zillatron
Jul 15, 2007, 10:30 PM
Just my uninformed ramble, but:

I think there is a real chance this could be 'real. but probally not in the way people are thinking, by that I mean, Apple would be less of a 'record company' and more of a way for artists to do what they do and get their music out there.

Once Apple 'own' the music they would almost certinaly have the right to distribute it globally, avoiding the problem they have now with some stores only having some music.
It would also alow more of the money to goto the artist, where it belongs. Apple can negotiate directly with the artist, instead of a pig-headed record company.

Apple 'Think Different', to use one of Steve Jobs favorite sayings about shaking to where the puck is going to be - Where the puck is now: Artists and consumers held to ransom by greedy, silly record companies. CD sales diving because people dont want to buy stuff at crazy prices...just becasue.

Where the puck is going: Artists free to create whatever music they like, distribute faster and more efficently though iTunes. Consumers get what they want, and at a fair price. Artists get more of what is theirs to begin with. Apple cleans house by being the first 'record company' that isnt.

Digital distribution with fixed pricing and fair (or no) DRM clearly works. You cannot dispute the success of the iTunes store, it is the where the puck is headed. And it looks like the big record companies might have missed their chance to 'get on' if Apple do go it alone. Apple isnt the kind of comapny to wallow in not being able to find a partner that will play ball, if they can't find someone do play the game, they re-invent it.

Z

nostaws
Jul 15, 2007, 10:31 PM
this is like page 10 so I know no one will read it.

However, I think what is more likely to happen is that JayZ and Beyonce create their own label, and contract with Apple to be their distributer/marketer. Specialization - artists know about making music - apple knows how to sell/market it to the masses.

Frobozz
Jul 15, 2007, 10:41 PM
This is a great idea. Not only is it a critical demographic (young influencers) but it's a very smart choice with Jay-Z. You can't pick a more savvy urban producer IMHO.

I like how Apple has branched out to try to rule the world (in a good way.)

brepublican
Jul 15, 2007, 11:11 PM
Here's where you should stop talking. Just because Jay-Z's music may not appeal to you doesn't mean he's a god-awful musician. Maybe you don't like rap. Maybe his frequent cussing puts you off to the real things he has to say, but if you actually listened to some of his songs, his lyrical and artistic genius would not be questioned. Point blank, Jay-Z is incredible at what he does.

Nay, contrary to what you may think, I like hip hop/rap. Scratch that: Love hip hop/rap. One of my fav artists is Common. Another is Nas. Now he has something to say. Unlike Jay-Z. He is truly god-awful. True that he's good at whatever it is that he does, but that doesnt change anything. But also, as a caveat, this is ofcourse just my opinion :rolleyes:

And I still think Apple starting a music label, or whatever with Jay-Z and Beyoncé is a bad idea. But then again, I'm not Steve Jobs. He's the guy who might know a thing or two about business, and I'm sure he has a lot of very knowlegeable people at his disposal who can analyse such things.

But then again, this is just a rumor. A wild one at that :apple:

Badandy
Jul 15, 2007, 11:17 PM
Nas and Common? Both very good. I don't know how you can say Jay-Z is awful if you like both those two. That doesn't really make any sense unless you once sided with Nas in their whole beef and never got over that...
Maybe Jay-Z isn't your favorite, but to deny him that he's even average? He's in the top 5 of almost every hip hop list ever assembled. Along with NaS of course.

brepublican
Jul 15, 2007, 11:21 PM
People who just disregard hip-hop are uninformed in my opinion. I only wish they could see that behind the facade that gets all the plays on the radio station, it's an art form that relies on skillfull flows and powerful lyrics. Of course, you can always just dismiss rap as "drivel" if you are ignorant and close-minded enough...

I think you're equating Hip Hop to Jay-Z and maybe you should look in the mirror, cos you're the one who may just be -- just maybe -- uninformed. If you know as much about Hip Hop as you're leading us to believe, you should know that its people like Jay-Z (main stream "rap" "artists") who give Hip Hip a bad name with all their commercialised *********.

princealfie
Jul 15, 2007, 11:24 PM
Wow, good one if it really happened. I prefer underground rap myself but it's awesome to see where this goes. Of course, then I would want a black mac mini :D

brepublican
Jul 15, 2007, 11:26 PM
Nas and Common? Both very good. I don't know how you can say Jay-Z is awful if you like both those two. That doesn't really make any sense unless you once sided with Nas in their whole beef and never got over that...
Maybe Jay-Z isn't your favorite, but to deny him that he's even average? He's in the top 5 of almost every hip hop list ever assembled. Along with NaS of course.

I'll confess that I have a problem with Jay-Z's particular brand of souped up garbage. But not because of some beef with Nas. Since Reasonable Doubt, the man has really had nothing to say, really nothing to offer the youth of America, no message whatsoever. Listen to Nas' Illmatic, and the difference is remarkable. Them two havent changed a bit since.

He's [Jay-Z] good at what he does, I'll give him that. But Hip Hop isnt Jay-Z. It couldnt be further from it IMO.

EDIT: Hip Hop still lives on. Thru the like of Immortal Technique (who 'cusses' a lot), Talib Kweli, Mighty Mos 'Black Dante', Common Market, etc

Badandy
Jul 15, 2007, 11:34 PM
Immortal Technique is an absolute idiot who subscribes to whatever conspiracy theories indict the most government officials...

Besides that, I'm a fan of Common and Nas, but did you listen to the Blueprint or The Black Album? Those are both classics, of course along with Reasonable Doubt, which in my opinion is as good as Illmatic. Jay-Z is so good because he's successful at still being an amazing lyricist (forget his singles like Show Me Whatcha Got and Big Pimpin') while still being a commercial success. You're saying he lyrically is not that good? I don't like pop rap, almost any rap on the radio I hate, but Jay-Z is a different story...

Cleverboy
Jul 15, 2007, 11:40 PM
And I still think Apple starting a music label, or whatever with Jay-Z and Beyoncé is a bad idea. But then again, I'm not Steve Jobs. He's the guy who might know a thing or two about business, and I'm sure he has a lot of very knowlegeable people at his disposal who can analyse such things. I'll only say it this once, but even though its JUST a rumor, I think people are being naive, who think this would be about Apple launching a label USING Jay-Z and Beyonce's actual music. It's like hearing that Robert Deniro was seeking to start a movie studio with Apple, and assuming that every movie that Robert Deniro has appeared in would come over, and/or every NEW movie that Deniro does will be at Apple... or even that all Deniro has to offer is his acting. I wish people would wise-up a bit on this point.

There is a purely BUSINESS aspect to this that has NOTHING to do with the status of these players as simply performance artists, but business people who know how to produce. Whether you like their music is irrelevant. It's wether you think they have any ability with reguards to getting something like this moving. I believe Jay-Z is more than qualified. Beyonce, I've no idea, but she has made a number of solid decisions in her career.

I'll just sit that out there conspicuously in the middle of the room. Best I can do.

~ CB

buddhagoth
Jul 15, 2007, 11:59 PM
Apple promised the labels when they started the iTMS that "we don't want to be a record label...that's not our business." That's a quote from Steve Jobs.

I'd hope this was a rumor. Apple has already started to slowly welch on its earlier promises that iTMS would "be all about the music." If they decide to become content gateway managers & artist "developers" they won't end up being much different from the major labels, which is to say increasingly irrelevant to the music world.

Apple: Make the gadgets to make the music, make the gizmos to play it on, set up the store to buy it all in but please don't start making the music itself.

--BG

ajhill
Jul 16, 2007, 12:02 AM
This is just far fetched enough to be true. With the internet and social networking sites as a proxy for Big record companies PR machines it just might work. I'm sure the iTunes music store would accidentally feature the Apple Music artists on their homepage when the 250 million of so users log in each time. With numbers like that who needs to spend money on PR. And Apple can offer their artists a bigger cut of the profits. What artist wouldn't like that?

It's just crazy enough to be true. Think different and all that! Here's to the crazy ones:

Here's to the crazy ones.

The misfits.

The rebels.

The troublemakers.

The round pegs in the square holes.

The ones who see things differently.

They're not fond of rules and they have no respect for the status quo.

You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them.

About the only thing you can't do is ignore them.

Because they change things.

They push the human race forward.

And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius.

It is the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do.



GO STEVE GO!

mahonmeister
Jul 16, 2007, 12:20 AM
I cant believe some of the stuff i'm reading in this thread.QFT!

Instead of going from artist -> record label -> iTunes, they go directly to iTunes. How is this not good for both the artists and Apple? Digital distribution is already in place and just needs to be used in this manner.

You fan-boys/gals are so blind and ignorant. Just once would you please open your eyes beyond Apple and look at the bigger picture right in front of your face?

puuukeey
Jul 16, 2007, 12:26 AM
I would love to see this happen.


Apple makes new label, gets two big name artists on board to launch the thing.
Perhaps Apple Corps and Apple, Inc create Apple Music together? Bring the Beatles in?
Artists line up around the block waiting to sign up for the latest "iPhone" of the music world, at least, as soon as their current contracts are up. Apple Music would be a huge success. Balmer would have his doubts.
Apple is hot... this is the time to move.
The Mac nerds who only want computers and, as usual, think Apple's latest idea will 'certainly fail' will be proved wrong. Again.
Apple will still make computers. Computers will continue to change. Get used to it.
Change is inevitable. Embrace the wave, it's moving wether you sit on the board or not.


Just my $0.02. Oh, and I'm a reasonable white guy who like music for what it is, regardless of it's genre or stereotype. Like every artist, they both have their good and bad songs. I own tracks from both Beyoncé and Jay-Z. And the majority of my personal music collection is far from Rap, hell, I mostly can't stand country music for the most part, but I own tracks from some country artists too. (Little Texas, Shania Twain, just to name a few.)

Music isn't about choosing genres, it's about the music itself.

=)

this appears to be a parody of my post so I'll respond.

I have little doubt that if apple takes a plunge it will succeed. and I'm aware that computers will continue to change. I'm also down for putting computers in new form factors like the iPod, iPhone. or appleTV. These products are nice. That's obviously where things are going.

What I'm not down for is apple using its closed-off system to make strong arm business decisions. I feel that building your own music distribution business just to support your mp3 player is the wrong decision. And building your own music factory (record label) takes the idea of a "proprietary ecosystem" to absurdity. A company which prides itself on closed systems can not maintain a vertical monopoly. Especially with an art form which is quickly becoming something anyone can create, distribute, and listen to.

Thats like starting a business to manufacture, distribute and deliver paper,pencils, and tic-tac-toe rules. Even if you start with a monopoly on tic-tac-toe, you wont keep it for long. Being ahead of the curve is not enough.

synth3tik
Jul 16, 2007, 12:32 AM
Totally the stupidest thing I have heard. If it becomes fact that will be all the respect I had for Apple.

nimbuscloud
Jul 16, 2007, 12:52 AM
Totally the stupidest thing I have heard. If it becomes fact that will be all the respect I had for Apple.

Who cares, you'll still buy their products.

Please get off your high horse, the weather's finer down here.

:apple:

Fwink!
Jul 16, 2007, 12:56 AM
This kind of move would surprise me, as it really doesn't fit Apple's core demographic - as I understand it.
I'd like to see Apple enable independent artists to enter the arena on a level playing field. This partnership sounds like the antithesis of that idea, and a sad sort of selling out to what is a current popular music trend, that has sales sliding because it has reached it's peak, warts and all.

Hey Apple, I like Rock & Roll. I have never been the least bit interested in the latest rap "song" or R&B warbling. That's my taste in music and my 2¢.

WildPalms
Jul 16, 2007, 01:00 AM
I cant believe some of the stuff i'm reading in this thread.

Agreed. Seems like a lot of the people posting here just dont get it. Still thinking small and 90's business. Think bigger people and stop concentrating on which artist may be the first on board....sheesh.

briand05
Jul 16, 2007, 01:05 AM
please Apple, don't get involved with them. Their 'music' is utter drivel.


According to you :rolleyes:, a lot of people like that kind of music.

Xplatmedia
Jul 16, 2007, 01:15 AM
If this was a death metal band you guys would be okay but since it is rap all of you white raciest has a problem. Why don't people get over rap is here to stay and that will never change. I didn't think many kkk members bought Macs or were on this web page. This proves that 93% of whites are raciest that is a fact.

Marresc
Jul 16, 2007, 01:18 AM
Excuse me?

Bunzi2k4
Jul 16, 2007, 01:30 AM
If this was a death metal band you guys would be okay but since it is rap all of you white raciest has a problem. Why don't people get over rap is here to stay and that will never change. I didn't think many kkk members bought Macs or were on this web page. This proves that 93% of whites are raciest that is a fact.

I lol'd at this one. First off buddy, I don't care who's rapping, whether its 50 cent, vanilla ice, eminem... it's all garbage to me. No, hating rap has nothing to do with racism. In fact, I'm a huge Jazz fan. Do you know where Jazz came from? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jazz

If I took offense every time I heard or read anything the least bit negative that could possibly be linked with Israel... >_>

Back to topic, could apple really make their own record label? And if they did, wouldn't they be sued by... lets say... the other Apple?

puuukeey
Jul 16, 2007, 01:35 AM
If this was a death metal band you guys would be okay but since it is rap all of you white raciest has a problem. Why don't people get over rap is here to stay and that will never change. I didn't think many kkk members bought Macs or were on this web page. This proves that 93% of whites are raciest that is a fact.

first of all, you assume everyone here is white. (you racist)

second of all
See this video? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uAPICL0edY)
see the guy in the first frame? thats me
see the guy spitting the verse? yeah I've given him and his crew some serious breaks on recording time. They are decent nice good people. straight from the streets into my home.


Jay Z is still commercial watered down corporate crap!

CalBoy
Jul 16, 2007, 02:17 AM
If this was a death metal band you guys would be okay but since it is rap all of you white raciest has a problem. Why don't people get over rap is here to stay and that will never change. I didn't think many kkk members bought Macs or were on this web page. This proves that 93% of whites are raciest that is a fact.

WTF? Death metal? KKK? 93%:confused::confused::confused: I think it's ironic how we're supposed to like rap in order to not be racist, but it's perfectly ok for you to be uninformed and make sweeping generalizations. I'm not white and I don't like rap. Taste is color blind;)

dpaanlka
Jul 16, 2007, 02:32 AM
If this was a death metal band you guys would be okay but since it is rap all of you white raciest has a problem. Why don't people get over rap is here to stay and that will never change. I didn't think many kkk members bought Macs or were on this web page. This proves that 93% of whites are raciest that is a fact.

Hmm very intriguing...

Project
Jul 16, 2007, 02:34 AM
Jay Z is still commercial watered down corporate crap!


He made Reasonable Doubt and the Blueprint. He can do whatever he wants :D

kymac
Jul 16, 2007, 02:54 AM
to everyone who complains about everything here:

i wanted to not post because of everyones arrogance and ideas that their musical taste is far superior than anyone who enjoys hip/hop music, but i gave in. The music that hip/hop artists create is indeed music. for something to be a song, singing isnt a requirement. rapping is an art. and these people are artists. so if you dont like it.. dont buy it. move on.

would it make sense for me to go to a street market.. and tell them to stop selling carrots.. becuase im not fond of carrots.. NO. but i dont see how this stuation is different from your opinions and remarks on apples rumored music label with jay z and beyonce. think about it. and dont be stupid.

sj27
Jul 16, 2007, 03:33 AM
Be careful about accusations of racism; even Quincy Jones slammed rap back in the early 1990s. That said, rap in the late 1980s was, even at the relatively mainstream level (Run DMC, Public Enemy, NWA), incredibly refreshing, the most energetic injection to pop music I had experienced since first hearing the Sex Pistols and Ramones several years earlier. That rap and hip-hop are still popular---even if not necessarily for the better all the time---prove that it was not a superfluous fad.

I switched to Apple in fall 2004 after Windows XP SP2 killed my Dell…I use a computer extensively for work, recreation, and editing RAW photos, and I do not own a cell phone---always hated them, they're like insidious little needy children. So yes, viscerally, I share the concerns of some other members that Apple might be overextending its capabilities (regardless of this rumor), at least to the degree where quality and innovation will still be very good but failing to reach their full potential. On the other hand, taking a more cognitive approach, frankly, it doesn't matter what Apple does as long as they can continue to supply reliable, functional, and elegant software and hardware.

Furthermore, and I am only making an assumption, what appears as diversification is perhaps integration in Job's head; that, as some people have mentioned here, digitalization of whatever product, particularly in the distribution scheme, is inevitable, and Apple is just trying to amalgamate the process.

Yet, as I digress, I have to quickly note, as a former audiophile geek---too old to give too much of a crap now---compressed music is anathema. If music is available at up to 24-bit/192 kHz on a disc, which I believe it is with DVD-Audio, than I should have up to that quality available as a downloadable option. At a minimum, up to 16-bit/44.1 KHz, as archaic as it is….and for all you folks who have your whole audio/video collection on just one hard drive, God bless you…

SeaFox
Jul 16, 2007, 03:40 AM
You speak of me being "oblivoius" - oblivoius to what? The intense popularity of Jay-Z and Beyoncé?
The original comparisons the Lone Deranger was making. He cites a few fairly famous examples of products and rather than reply to the actual comparisons he made, you changed the topic of each and laughed them off. He mentions the popularity of Microsoft products (referring to their quality verses Apple's), and you bring up Microsoft vs. Commodore.
As opposed to Commodore products? Me defending Microsoft... this is a rare occasion.
Commodore wasn't the topic of the comparison, but changing means you can dodge replying to the point.

Then again when Deranger mentioned VHS...
Should we have stuck with the home film projector? And since when is VHS popular anymore anyway?
It was fairly obvious Deranger was referring to VHS vs. Betamax, as it's a marketing example cited on these forums often. Yet, why did you bring up film projectors? To distract us. Then you mention DVD having supplanted VHS at this point in time. Once again -- not relevant to the conversation.

How does this muddy the conversation?
It takes the thread into a tangent rather than focusing on his point? :rolleyes:

People are free to choose whatever music they want - in this case, lots of people choose Jay-Z and Beyoncé.
Yes, and they might have chosen a different hip-hop/R&B artist had they not been lost in the flood of hype surrounding those two. You missing my point, consumer choice is directly influenced by consumer information, in the absence of knowledge, and public will choose from what they believe there is.

Oh give me a break. I live in Chicago, where there is surely lots of hip-hop and rap, but its because thats what the public wants. And it isn't hard to find other choices. We have dozens and dozens of radio stations to choose from, covering all genres pretty darn well. Nobody is forced to listen to any particular artist, and new alternative radio stations often fail here. But not by their own choosing. You're complaining that your faovirte artist doesn't get equal air-time to Beyoncé in Chicago.
Uh, do you have anything to back up this statement, cause you don't know where I am or what music I listen to. I have yet to state an opinion on this type of music in this thread.

So are you saying you want regulated equal air time to every artist, even if the public doesn't want that?
No, I have not stated any wishes in this regard, but thanks for putting words in my mouth.

You're not going to change the African-American community's mind because you force them to listen to Garth Brooks. They'll just turn the radio off, and not buy advertiser's products.
Wow, more gross generalization about me. Hope you're not a fortune teller for your day job.

This is just your opinion of what is good or bad.
You posted this in reply to this passage of my post.
"The Radio has to offer" is the operative phrase here. If a good band can't get on the radio (due to lack of a major label contract and payola) people most often will not even know they exist, and therefore will choose another band of possible lesser talent instead.
Since I don't state an opinion in this passage, I'm not sure how you can relate this to my musical taste.

What would be the alternative here - all the major stations of Chicago switching to whatever genre of music you prefer?
No, I suggest the stations play a wide range of music that their listeners want, have people bring in CD's and play something no ones ever heard before, perhaps guest DJ's, ect. Rather than stick to a corporate and soft-money fueled playlist that limits public exposure to an anointed few.

This is how many college stations operate.

In the case of IE vs Netscape... well, people chose to use evil Microsoft software, what else did they expect? And the ability to install Netscape as an alternative was always there anyway.
You were oblivious.

People chose IE because it was already there. It shipped on their PC. Had they needed to get a web browser first thing, many would have made a different choice. At the time when IE started shipping with Windows, Netscape was the market leading browser. Why did IE suddenly start to gain marketshare? It was already there. People were new to the internet, didn't know what choices they had. Hey, IE is here and it works well enough, let's just use this.

Also, note that Netscape was not free. You had to pay for it. Microsoft's response to this threat of another company was to ship a competitor to their product for free. It doesn't matter if Microsoft loses money on a web browser they're developing but have no revenue from if they have dollars pouring in from the Windows/Office juggernaut. But Netscape only had a couple products, Navigator not getting sales put them out of business. And once Netscape was gone, Microsoft stopped developing IE. They didn't need to. The dragon was dead: England prevails. Note: when a company does what Microsoft did with actual products (as opposed to software) it's called dumping, and it's illegal.

The market chose VHS... they had more options with VHS, cheaper players, better porn, and eventually equal or superior quality (and longer movie lengths). If there was absolutely no reason for the market to choose VHS, they wouldn't have.
I never said the was "no reason" to choose VHS. The fact that VHS one is more than the "quality" of the product was Lone Deranger's point.

I've had to go all the way back to the beginning of this thread of conversation to get back on track now that you've taken us so far off with your baseless attacks.

If their music is so terrible, why are they so popular. It's not like their songs are cheaper than anyone elses.
Popularity does not always equal quality or means is the right thing to do. MicroSoft products, VHS, cigarettes...... you get the idea.

The Lone Deranger was pointing our a fallacy in your logic. You have equated popularity with the quality of the musical group. You completely ignore all fundamentals of marketing. He then illustrates it with several examples of products that were popular despite poor quality and/or better alternatives being available.

People choose Microsoft, that doesn't mean Windows is a quality product.
People chose VHS, despite a better format being available.
People choose to smoke, and spend a lot of money doing so on a product that probably costs manufacturers pennies to produce. (This was a bad example because people don't purchase cigarettes because of a value intrinsic to the tangible product. It's the psychological value, the chemical dependency that gives cigarettes their worth.)
People build houses with nails generally, but using screws will create a house that is much more resilient to severe weather.
People will buy music that is poor quality, rather than buy none at all.

psycho bob
Jul 16, 2007, 05:23 AM
If this was a death metal band you guys would be okay but since it is rap all of you white raciest has a problem. Why don't people get over rap is here to stay and that will never change. I didn't think many kkk members bought Macs or were on this web page. This proves that 93% of whites are raciest that is a fact.

I'm glad Apple doesn't think 80% of you people they don't see color just good quality people

Have we really ended up in a state where nothing can be criticised because every comment is deemed to be racially motivated. I know black people who don't like rap are they going to be accused of being race traitors. I find your comments offensive and unnecessary.

I don't like Indian food am I now being racist :rolleyes: Is Eminem black? The colours on my TV must be funny if he is! I don't like rap fullstop regardless of who the artist is. As somebody pointed out earlier, I also like Jazz and Blues both predominantly black originated music. Gospel and Soul are also hugely influential.

The point of many is if Apple were setting up a record level this is a very Microsoft way of doing it. Where is the support for smaller artists, this isn't 'Thinking Different' all they are doing is grabbing 2 high profile artists that don't cover 1% of musical genres out there.

Heck I never thought Steve liked rap!

BKKbill
Jul 16, 2007, 06:15 AM
It's hard to believe but all this falderal makes me pine for iPhone rumors.

ImAlwaysRight
Jul 16, 2007, 06:33 AM
I want Apple to market their own brand of toothpaste. I would buy that. Little Apple symbol on the tube. That would look cool. They could have two types, white or aluminum toothpaste. It would be AWESOME.

gifford
Jul 16, 2007, 06:39 AM
If this was a death metal band you guys would be okay but since it is rap all of you white raciest has a problem. Why don't people get over rap is here to stay and that will never change. I didn't think many kkk members bought Macs or were on this web page. This proves that 93% of whites are raciest that is a fact.


OMG this sort of comment is enough to make a non racist man (or woman) racist!
I hate death metal, I hate rap, and i particularly hate 'Politically Correct' idiots like yourself, that cause more harm in race relations than good.

Back to the topic of Mac, I'm a bit unsure about this one. What I would have preferred to see is an outlet for independents rather than a couple of shoddy mainstream acts at the end of their careers.

appledrummer
Jul 16, 2007, 07:10 AM
I cant believe some of the stuff i'm reading in this thread.

What I mean is that a company as prestigous as apple should not get mixed up in the worst "genre" of music to possibly ever come around.

appledrummer
Jul 16, 2007, 07:13 AM
OMG this sort of comment is enough to make a non racist man (or woman) racist!
I hate death metal, I hate rap, and i particularly hate 'Politically Correct' idiots like yourself, that cause more harm in race relations than good.

Back to the topic of Mac, I'm a bit unsure about this one. What I would have preferred to see is an outlet for independents rather than a couple of shoddy mainstream acts at the end of their careers.

took the words right out of my mouth. Politically correct people should just shut up. I'm so sick of them. MY whole school is so PC that if I hear any of it out of school I flip out. No, i'm not racist, just one of the world's biggest rap/hip-hop despisers. Do you guys even listen to the lyrics, they are quite disturbing.

xterratop
Jul 16, 2007, 07:18 AM
Ok, isn't Jay-Z the rapper who did that commercial for HP? And now he wants to tap into Apple. Well, I like the fact that he might be a 'switcher' but it is kind of weird for someone who did that HP commercial for HP. This is the same campaign commercials that also shows Vera Wang and some supermodel. Weird!

appledrummer
Jul 16, 2007, 07:20 AM
to everyone who complains about everything here:

i wanted to not post because of everyones arrogance and ideas that their musical taste is far superior than anyone who enjoys hip/hop music, but i gave in. The music that hip/hop artists create is indeed music. for something to be a song, singing isnt a requirement. rapping is an art. and these people are artists. so if you dont like it.. dont buy it. move on.

would it make sense for me to go to a street market.. and tell them to stop selling carrots.. becuase im not fond of carrots.. NO. but i dont see how this stuation is different from your opinions and remarks on apples rumored music label with jay z and beyonce. think about it. and dont be stupid.

yes, but carrots are NOT degrading to our culture. Rap and hip hop has made people respect gang members. Do you want someone that is proud of murdering and raping people to be your idol? I don't! Rck sure had it's downfalls like drugs, but at the time there was little info about how bad drugs were for you.

Additionally the song Down by The River by Neil Young has a lyric in it that is "Down by the river, I shot my baby." This is sung with grief not with pride like it is in rap.

BKKbill
Jul 16, 2007, 07:47 AM
I want Apple to market their own brand of toothpaste. I would buy that. Little Apple symbol on the tube. That would look cool. They could have two types, white or aluminum toothpaste. It would be AWESOME.

I want some too. When do you think the release date will be. November?

bbyrdhouse
Jul 16, 2007, 07:55 AM
"nough said.

dernhelm
Jul 16, 2007, 08:12 AM
why would Apple do this, it doesn't make sense, Steve must know that having everything hurts Sony a lot as its record label opposes his tech branch all the time...

Normally I would agree - at the face of it, this sounds really stupid. Apple is a tech company - what would they be doing starting up a music label? But as you noted, it isn't without precedent. The only other reason I could see this working is simply because the music industry is so COMPLETELY broken.

In comes a company that can charge bottom dollar, and pay the artists fair wages. All without any appreciable increase in costs over what they are already incurring. It'd be a bit weird not to be able to buy their artists music in stores, but if they could reduce costs significantly (to say - $0.50 a song), I'd be interested. And if they can do that and still pay the artists what they are worth - there would be a signup list of new artists miles long.

But I fear it is only a pipe dream. I'm sure the billions that the music distribution industry controls will be able to buy them some amount of protection from forward thinking companies.

Counter
Jul 16, 2007, 08:16 AM
I don't think Apple would do this. I don't think they would want to have any hip-hop image attached to their brand permanently. I'd think they may do it if the label starts off with a broad range of artists, not just Jay-Z and Beyonce. People in other genres.