Poll: How much of a threat is BuyMusic to Apple's iTunes Music Store?

[MacRumors]

Vote: Poll: How much of a threat is BuyMusic to Apple's iTunes Music Store? (http://www.macpolls.com/?poll_id=232&ref=forums.macrumors.com)

[tazo]

none. not after i got screwed.

[Pancake]

I'm pretty sure this has been talked to death in another thread, but hear's is what I think.

It is no threat to iTMS on mac because that isn't thier audience.

It most likly isn't a threat to the futer of iTMS on windows unless people decide they love it's messed upped service(i.e. WMP, price fluxuations, DRM differences, etc.)

[macnews]

Very little threat, the DRM itself will be a killer for the windows market. There are some ligit people in the PC world that would be willing to pay for tunes just like on the mac side. But when you may not even be able to burn the music to a CD? Give me a break! The big question I have is how do they plan on differentiating songs with different DRMs?

[mac15]

Not a big one anyways, Its got a crap UI, piss poor DRM, WMP9 sucks ass and some people prefer version 7 or heh even 6.4 still. The ease of use sucks hard too........ also 0.79 a song is BS, I think like 30 out of 300,000 songs are worth that much. atleast apple is honest with there pricing.
( its funny with windows, people like older versions better but with macs people always use brand new software )

[smegdude]

its threat is dependent on two two major factors:
1. how long it takes for iTMS to get to pc. If it takes too long people will start using buymusic regularly and so won't want to start buying the same music again to get it in a different format.
2. What DRM is used on the pc version of iTMS when its released. If it has the same DRM as the mac version then there is a lower threat, if it has different DRM and there are more strict rules with burning cds etc. then there will be less reason to use iTunes than buymusic.

Hopefully nobody will use buymusic and they will go out of business so apple can get a larger market share :D

[bennetsaysargh]

there is 11 pages of bashing over in another thread. lol.:p
we don't need any more!!lol:p

we all know it wont do good even when iTMS gets to PC.

[Doctor Q]

The danger to the iTunes Music Store is that (a) millions of Windows users will hear about BuyMusic as a result of its big marketing campaign, (b) many will try it and have trouble, dislike the DRM, read bad reviews, etc., and (c) this will give the online music purchasing another black eye, compounding those that preceded the iTunes Music Store. When iTunes Music Store for Windows becomes available, the target audience may be wary, disgusted, uninterested, or otherwise "tuned out" from well-publicized negative aspects of the only service they've previously considered.

I'll be pleased to be wrong about this.

[bluedalmatian]

Steve Jobs said in April when the music store was launched:

"we've got a bit more testing to do on Windows, its a little less predictable"

wouldn't that suggest that the Windows version was almost ready then?

[Pancake]

Originally posted by bluedalmatian
Steve Jobs said in April when the music store was launched:

"we've got a bit more testing to do on Windows, its a little less predictable"

wouldn't that suggest that the Windows version was almost ready then?

I think it was just SJ taking a poke at Windows without actually giving the reason iTMS for Windows is going to take so long.

[ollywilson2003]

Hopefully Buy.crap will crash and burn and Apple & iTMS will reign supreme.

On a side note, do any of you guys reckon Apple will sue over Buy's Ads?

[Nermal]

I hope so :)

[medea]

not much, the site is horrid and the rules for the downloads are too harsh and will probably turn many users away. When iTMS launched it was heralded for it's ease of use etc. and that has not happened for Buy.com

[bignumbers]

I think it is a major threat for two reasons.

1) It provides a major source of online music to Windows users before Apple intros their Windows product/service.

2) It establishes the Windows Media format as a primary format for downloaded music.

Buy.com stinks, but they obviously have customers. The world has proven that a cruddy product (ie Windows) can sell very well. It's all about marketing.

[MrMacMan]

Look, very little threat, there are few chances that this service has to win the loyallity of its customers and others.

There are other services out there and they haven't done sooo well and they were before this service. Why didn't they? Harsh rules, little to download, and no set price.
Same goes with this.

[homeshire]

Originally posted by bignumbers
I think it is a major threat for two reasons.

1) It provides a major source of online music to Windows users before Apple intros their Windows product/service.

2) It establishes the Windows Media format as a primary format for downloaded music.

Buy.com stinks, but they obviously have customers. The world has proven that a cruddy product (ie Windows) can sell very well. It's all about marketing.

oh how i hate that he's right, but he's right. this could make the whole thing blow up in SJ's hands, as far as the future of expanding ITMS, because the one thing MS knows is that marketing and fud make the world go 'round, and MS has a years-long history of demonstrating just how well they understand marketing and fud. buymusic.com may just ride those coattails quite nicely in spite of all the reasons why they ought to go down in flames. :rolleyes:

[eyelikeart]

I think Apple won't be too much affected by this...mainly because of the way they've done it. Apple's got licensing from a lot of major artists & record labels, has integrated the entire process as a "1-click" purchase, AND has integrated it all into it's native music player...not to mention the momentum they have already achieved.

I haven't looked much into it, but it's my understanding BuyMusic's library is pretty bad?

[MacFan25]

I don't think that this service is really going to affect Apple either. Not being able to burn some songs onto CD's, and the Windows media format will probably be a turnoff to people.

I can't believe how similar the ads look to Apple's though. :rolleyes:

[MetallicPenguin]

And the fact that they are using those ads for serious advertisement (I think?!) might get some people confused or something.....they really need to get sued. And with that money Apple will build a large campaign and make a parade with all the Mac users in Times Square....I wish.


I think it's an average threat, the ad campaign will get a lot of people interested. And like someone said, they'll either hate it and not want to use another service or like it, and then not want to have to give up there collection of WMPs and take the time to switch services.

But Apple will come through.

[macnews]

Originally posted by bignumbers
I think it is a major threat for two reasons.

1) It provides a major source of online music to Windows users before Apple intros their Windows product/service.

2) It establishes the Windows Media format as a primary format for downloaded music.

Buy.com stinks, but they obviously have customers. The world has proven that a cruddy product (ie Windows) can sell very well. It's all about marketing.

Couldn't disagree more. One thing we have to remember is this is not something like an OS. Once the DRM issue has been solved on the windows side that will be the key. The WMF is probably the achilles heel for them in that is can't solve the DRM problem. At least not in the current version or priors.

We are talking about an online store. Just like a brick and mortor store, there can be more than one and is more dynamic than trying to be on top in the OS market.

[wdlove]

I think that the Windows version is any threat to Apple. Like others have mentioned the download process is more difficult and the selection is smaller. I think that the quality product of Apple will prevail!

[Fender2112]

I don't think this will be a threat to Mac users because we will avoid Windows Media files like the plague.

As for iTMS, it will depend on which format (AAC or Windows Media) people will adopt. My preception of Windows Media is that it is not the best quality format. However, AAC is supposed to be almost as good as uncompressed audio.

If my choices are "Cream of the Crop" or "Half Ass", for 20 cents I'm going with "Cream of the Crop".

[Doctor Q]

BuyMusic's service is specifically coded for Internet Explorer and will work only with that browser. This won't take much away from their market, since IE rules the web browser market under Windows. But some users are bound to be wary of a site that relies on Active-X controls. Even if there is no evidence that BuyMusic's code introduces any security risks, plenty of people are justifiably wary of enabling Active-X controls, since they involve code that you must trust, download, and execute locally.

Does anybody know more about the details, in particular, whether the Active-X control(s) they use is/are already part of some versions of Windows?

[Sayhey]

Originally posted by bignumbers
I think it is a major threat for two reasons.

1) It provides a major source of online music to Windows users before Apple intros their Windows product/service.

2) It establishes the Windows Media format as a primary format for downloaded music.

Buy.com stinks, but they obviously have customers. The world has proven that a cruddy product (ie Windows) can sell very well. It's all about marketing.

Absolutly, well said. If Apple thinks they can ignore this competition then they may as well be resigned to leave the 97% of computer users to others. iTunes Music Store is a great product that has the potential to draw people to the mac platform, but Apple had better confront this competition aggressively and soon.

[rueyeet]

Originally posted by bignumbers
I think it is a major threat for two reasons.

1) It provides a major source of online music to Windows users before Apple intros their Windows product/service.

2) It establishes the Windows Media format as a primary format for downloaded music.


It's almost impossible to get legal downloads of major-name acts in anything BUT Windows Media or Real Audio on the Windows side, actually. Believe me, I tried! EMusic is the one service that offers unrestricted MP3's, but they don't have any of the big names.

BuyMusic may be a major source of online music, but it stops short of truly differentiating itself from the other Windows options, or really being anything like the iTMS. Customers who happily jump on for the legal downloads will jump off just as fast when they realize they still can't DO anything with their music. The first time they try to assemble a playlist and get stuck by the confusing restrictions, they're going to know this thing sucks.

I think the real threat is that they're trying to make people associate this with the iTMS, and ride on its success; then when their customers are turned off by the crappy experience, those same customers will be that much less likely to give the iTMS for Windows a serious try.

Of course, it could well be that the iTMS for Windows will be limited by the recording companies to suck as well; only time will tell.

[Snowy_River]

Originally posted by tazo
none. not after i got screwed.


Tazo-

This is the second time you've alluded to this. Why don't you actually tell us what happened?

[Kwyjibo]

i'm not really sure but i'll be better equipped to make a decision once I see data on thier sales volume. Also they are excluding people with out windows xp becuase wmp 9 only really works well (if you can call it welll) in xp

[Doctor Q]

Maybe Apple and BuyMusic.com should settle this the old-fashioned way: a man-to-man(?) fight between Tommy Lee and Michael Jackson. Tommy Lee's billboard (http://www.msnbc.com/news/942581.asp?cp1=1) in New York Times Square kicked off the BuyMusic marketing campaign, while Michael Jackson said "we should look to new technologies, like Apple's new Music Store" in a press release (http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/07/22/jackson/) protesting draconian copyright legislation introduced into the House of Representatives.

[nagromme]

BuyMusic.com sounds like it could bomb badly, unless they really fool a lot of people. The problems with BM, compared to the freedom of iTunes Music Store, include:

* Non-transferrable licenses. Downloaded files WILL NOT PLAY once you retire the PC you bought the tracks on.

* Can't burn all songs to CD (but I've seen no examples to prove this). Other songs have a limited number of burns, such as 3.

* Can't use all songs on portable players (but I've seen no examples to prove this). Other songs can only be transferred to a player a limited number of times.

* Can't use all brands of portable player. No iPod, no Archos players, nothing that doesn't support WMA with WMP9's DRM. (Some major brands do.)

* Can't transfer songs to your other computers. You can separately download, from scratch, a "secondary" version of some songs on a limited number (such as 3) of other computers. Secondary licenses can't burn CDs or use portable players at all. When those computers are retired, you can't use the secondary licenses anymore.

* Price. Songs start at .79 (not .70 as some publications reported), popular ones tend to be .99, and they cost up to $1.99 or more each. Albums start at $7.95--more than iTunes' cheapest--and range to $14.99 or more. More, in some cases, than Buy.com themselves charges for the actual CD.

* Despite the site name, you do NOT buy the music. You "sublicense" it. Their own fine print says that you do not "buy" or "own" what you have paid for. This is little different from past rental/subscription failures--but minus their monthly fee.

* Can't preview every song.

* The restrictions on burning CDs, "secondary" computers, and using on portable players vary from song to song. Complex rules about different types of licenses ("primary" vs. "secondary"). Confusion rather than consistency.

* Tied completely to Microsoft (.net, Explorer/ActiveX, and WMP 9) and to the greed of the RIAA. Even on Windows, browsers other than Explorer are locked out.

* Slower, awkward store interface and multi-step technical process, compared to iTunes' complete simplicity and fast searching/instant re-sorting. BuyMusic needs complex how-to videos while iMS just works and is integrated into the jukebox.

* Can't download a whole album automatically. You must get the songs individually. (Bad for users and artists alike.)

* If you buy multiple songs at once, you must wait for each to finish downloading and then manually click to download the next.

* Cover art is not included with the songs. (Windows Media Player is able to locate art online, though, as a separate step.)

* Your current media player (like WinAmp) where all your ripped CDs are, will not play BM.com downloads--not even if your player supports WMA. It must support the DRM too (WinAmp doesn't, causing problems if it's set to be the app used with .wma files.) So... you can ONLY play your tunes from Windows Media Player 9. No making playlists that combine those songs with your CDs. No transferring them to your player in one step along with your CDs. No shuffle-playing your WinAmp collection and your BM downloads.

* Many songs on the site are "Not available for sale." Whatever that means.

* Supposedly BM.com's parent company tends to spam customers heavily.

* Lastly... no Mac (or Linux or other UNIX) support. Not even if you copy the WMA files to WMP for OS X.

iTunes Music Store with AAC/FairPlay suffers from none of those issues... although it's not (yet) on Windows, and is not expected for Linux. And iTunes is completely integrated with the portable player that has half the market. BM.com has no such elegant hardware tie-in.

And will independent labels be jumping on board like they are doing with Apple? I have my doubts.

And now some people are suggesting that they really have fewer than 100,000 songs you can actually buy. Add up all the genres and you get about 111,000--many of which are "unavailable for sale."

[Lanbrown]

Originally posted by smegdude
Hopefully nobody will use buymusic and they will go out of business so apple can get a larger market share :D

Competition is good. Why do you think CD prices are so high? Answer, because there is no direct competition. Even iTMS is not considered competition.

[Lanbrown]

Originally posted by Doctor Q
Does anybody know more about the details, in particular, whether the Active-X control(s) they use is/are already part of some versions of Windows?

Active-X is two parts, much like Java but also totally different. You have the client and then you have the application. The application would need to be downloaded before you can use the site. The client part is already on the peecee. Microsoft doesn't talk about Active-X much and no one can really verify if there are any security vulnerabilities with it. There have been a few instances with an application that had vulnerabilities that people could exploit; Symantec is a good example. But MS is not divulging anything about the part that is on the peecee that comes with the OS. Look at their track record and make your own assumption.

[iPC]

4 of 5

Only for all the new PC's that are sold that come with media player 9 already, WinXP, etc etc. That is a big chunk of the current market. That and a $40,000,000.00 ad budget!

Could be a force. Give it 2 months, and we will probably know.

[rotorblade]

I think the poor execution and variable DRM scheme at BuyMusic.com is going to offer Apple a great opportunity to come up with a slam dunk commercial when iTunes for Windows is announced. Using some text from a previous post:
.
"Are you wary, disgusted, uninterested, or otherwise "tuned out" by the negative experience of your online music service?

iTunes for Windows. Come join the rest of us!"
.
or something to that affect anyway.

[Aciddan]

Originally posted by Pancake
I'm pretty sure this has been talked to death in another thread, but hear's is what I think.

It is no threat to iTMS on mac because that isn't thier audience.

It most likly isn't a threat to the futer of iTMS on windows unless people decide they love it's messed upped service(i.e. WMP, price fluxuations, DRM differences, etc.)

I believe it is a HUGE threat!

Why? Not because it is better (a wise man once said you don't obtain marketshare by being 'better' but by being 'different')

We can (and do) go on about how iTMS is better or the standard Mac vs PC arguments - except you will notice that Wintel is still 95% of all PCs out there... It's definitely not because it's better.

Do we all expect that when iTMS makes an appearance on windows that everyone will jump ship because it is better? I think we'll be dissapointed...

No, the reason why this is such a huge threat is because they got it to market before Apple. They don't need a better service - they've got a 5+ month head start on their competitor.

Once iTMS comes along (I might add it still isn't available for 50% of mac users!) - Joe Blow Windows will go "Oh! that's like BuyMusic isn't it?" - Scary how that 5 months will reverse the true statement "BuyMusic is *like* iTMS"

Scary but I think a realistic view of how iTMS will operate once the windows market is opened up - the only way to bring back the balance is for a very smart aggressive marketing campaign.

-- Dan, ends another rant...

[RayCon]

Originally posted by smegdude
its threat is dependent on two two major factors:
1. how long it takes for iTMS to get to pc. If it takes too long people will start using buymusic regularly and so won't want to start buying the same music again to get it in a different format.
2. What DRM is used on the pc version of iTMS when its released. If it has the same DRM as the mac version then there is a lower threat, if it has different DRM and there are more strict rules with burning cds etc. then there will be less reason to use iTunes than buymusic.


I do agree. But, remember, all things being "equal", or even if BuyMusic is only half as good, ITMS could be in trouble. Because quality matters little to the masses. If the peecee users cared about quality, the wouldn't buy peecees, would they?

[Doctor Q]

There is a simple solution to the threat from BuyMusic competition: All Apple has to do is raise their market share to 90% of the home consumer personal computer market (since business users probably don't buy a lot of online music anyway). Then they don't have to waste time porting to Windows at all! I wonder why Steve Jobs didn't think of this before? He really should have asked me. ;)

[NavyIntel007]

$40,000,000 marketing campaign or not, BuyMusic.com has not made the buzz that Apple did with it's iTMS. I mean Apple made CNN, Foxnews, even the Tampa Tribune. I read nothing about BuyMusic.com in any of these. Now maybe I wasn't looking, but I remember Apple making big bold print. I think we're all over reacting here. We all worry because we are "in the know" but go around and ask people about buymusic.com and they might look at you funny.

I don't fear BuyMusic.com. If BM doesn't produce at least double the sales numbers for the first few weeks that Apple did with iTMS than I believe it's a failure. There's no excuse why BM should not get 30 times what iTMS sold in the first two weeks. The only thing I fear is that if buymusic.com pisses off too many people, they may think twice about making digital music purchases again which will hurt apple.

Clearly, the Apple camp is truly in it for the music. They're offering fair pricing, fair use and a decent collection. BM is just being a copy cat out to make a lousy three quarters and four pennies. They don't really care.

This can be a learning experience though... What could BM be doing right with their service? What artists do they have that we should have?

But, at the end of the day, when both services are side by side...

What works with my ipod?
What will work with my next computer?
Which is overall cheaper?
Who's got the better prices?

iTMS wins hands down.

But, Apple Smarten up and Get this software out there.

[Snowy_River]

Originally posted by Aciddan
I believe it is a HUGE threat!

...

We can (and do) go on about how iTMS is better or the standard Mac vs PC arguments - except you will notice that Wintel is still 95% of all PCs out there... It's definitely not because it's better.

Well, no, I'd have to disagree. Most people buy Windows machines because, well, most people buy Windows machines. My dad uses Windows at work, and he and my mom are looking at getting a new computer at home (to replace their rev.A iMac). My dad wanted to get a Windows machine, but my mom insisted on getting another Mac because otherwise they loose me as a tech support resource, which is very important to my mom.

My point is that it matters to most people what they are familiar with, when it comes to a machine. Software is a whole different boat. And I include in 'software' the service that you use to do something like get music.

If everyone starts using BM and finds it tolerable, who cares? Once iTMS is available under Windows, is it going to hurt them in any way to try it? It's not like buying a whole new computer system. They can download it and try it, and, if Apple's doing their job, they'll find that it's better than BM. Now, they tell their friends how much better and easier iTMS is to work with than BM. POOF. Apple dominates. (I know it's not quite as easy as that, but you get the point.)

So, I would humbly submit that your argument for why this is a threat doesn't hold much water. I consider this a non-threat.

[applemacdude]

None. Comon after reading all their little "rules" buymusic.com sucks. Not 1/10 as good as itms. Maybe I'll celebrate by buying a song off itms. (But the ni'll have to install 10 back on download itunes 4 and ask my dad for permission to use his credit car) (a bit too much eih?)

[jbomber]

if the crappy knock off ad i just saw is any indication, then Apple has NOTHING to worry about.