Apple in Mobile Music Negotiations... for WWDC?

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

NYTimes' Technology blog reports (http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/19/apple-wants-more-mobile-music-from-labels/) that Apple is currently in active negotiations with music labels about providing more mobile music content on their iTunes store.

One executive quoted specifically states that "[Apple wants] a big launch in June", presumably referring to the Worldwide Developer Conference (WWDC) scheduled to start on June 9th 2008. However, since negotiations only started a few weeks ago, the deals may not be in place in time for a WWDC announcement.

Apple reportedly wants to expand its Ringtone library and introduce the sale of "Answer Tones". Answer Tones (http://www.wireless.att.com/learn/ringtones-downloads/faq.jsp#answer_tones) are customized sounds played to callers instead of the traditional ringing sound.

Another area of negotiation is the distribution of iTunes songs over the cellular network. For now, the iPhone allows you to purchase iTunes music only over Wi-fi networks. This had been thought to be a limitation of the slower EDGE data network, but it appears this mobile music distribution must be specifically negotiated with the record labels. Traditionally, these over-the-air cellular music sales have carried a premium over the traditional internet distribution, and the music labels are requesting a higher price for these sales. The expected addition of faster 3G data service on the upcoming iPhone will certainly increase consumer demand for over-the-air iTunes downloads.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/05/19/apple-in-mobile-music-negotiations-for-wwdc/)

[aznkid25]

I hope this will happen.

[siurpeeman]

instead of more songs to choose as my ringtones, i'd really appreciate it if apple were to come out with more traditional ringtones. you know, like the one they use in the ads.

[cthomet]

may happen, but i doubt it will happen before WWDC, although they may be looking for more little announcements related to the iPhone so they may pull through

[MattInOz]

Sounds like Apple have a Consumer Event planned for either just before or
just after WWDC. I'd pick just before as the best bet...
then again get everyone to WWDC and the end of the Keynote is Steve dropping hints of another event "real soon"

To much non-developer stuff here for it to be at WWDC.
I guess it depends on the best way to play the hype

[hppy29]

I am sure most countries in the EU with iphones would be just happy to have any ringtones. I love my phones but I just wish apple would work on getting more services to those who dont yet even have some of the basics....

And what happend to apple redcing the cost of itunes in the UK

[m005e]

I just want a iPhone here in Australia so i can put the ringtones on

[hhaeschen]

Sometimes it's amazing how people are willing to pay for crap like answer tones... :confused:

[admiraldennis]

Ugh, answer tones suck. There is nothing worse than hearing ****** loud music over a crappy cell phone connection when a standard ringing tone would be far more effective.

[jettredmont]

I hate ringtones*. I hate hearing them. I hate the idea of paying for one. I hate them hate them hate them.

What is the point? Is anyone not annoyed when hearing a squawky compressed version of a song bleat out in the middle of a crowded room? I mean, if you like the song, you're annoyed it is so crappy sounding and played s short. If you hate the song, you're annoyed you have to listen to it. If you haven't heard it before, you aren't able to give it a good listen.

The only thing more annoying is the "let me sit here and jam to my ringtone" dork.

Did I mention I hate ringtones? You know what happens if I call you and instead of just subjecting everyone in your room to your ring tone, you also subject me to a static-laden clip of "Baby Got Back"? Yeah, that's right: I don't call you any more.

* "Ringtones" are here defined as any of the following:


A snippet of a larger work, typically a popular song that I never liked
Some ethnic or tribal jam, which qualifies under the terms of this rant after the second listen, because, honestly, I've heard a few good ones, the first time. You better change it before it rings again though.
Inhuman synthesized voice announcing the name of the caller as entered into your address book. Not so innately annoying, but I shudder to think of what a poorly-thought-out address book entry for a significant other might announce.


Specifically not included are "ringtones" which actually sound like a traditional or modern phone ringing.

[fastbite]

I have never bought music over the air yet -- but the more extensive the possibilities the better. Do you guys buy over the air???

[PLiK]

So is Big Music going to charge me more for a CD if I drive my own car to a music store instead of taking the bus?

What difference does it make to Big Music if I download a song over wi-fi or a cell network?

[TonyHoyle]

I don't see how answer tones are going to work - it's not your phone that produces the ringing sound, it's the phone operator (normally your own, as the line isn't active until the other end answers).

Only two possibilities I can think of:

1. The iphone answers the call immediately and begins playing muzak down the line, costing the caller money even if you don't answer. Doesn't work if the iphone is switched off or out of range of course. End users will hate this.. I certainly wouldn't call someone with such a system as I don't see why I should pay to have crap played at me.
2. The operator has special answer system for iphones, which would be expensive for them to setup and presumably only work within a single operator (otherwise you'd have all the cross licensing stuff to deal with). Can't see what the financial incentive for them to implement this would be, and precisely why they would limit it to iphones.

[cwcarr]

Music over the mobile network (not wi-fi) is inevitable and I'm sure it will happen - I cannot see however why prices should be any different. Exactly how does it cost the record companies any more to sell a track via iTunes on someone's iPhone when it is connected to a mobile network, than when it is connected to a wi-fi network? Charging for more this method of sale is simply ripping consumers off because the record companies think they can get away with it.

One of the beauties of a device such as the iPhone is its always-connected capability. It should be seamless from the user's point of view as to which connection method they are using.

Ultimately I believe the very fact that there is also the wi-fi option will mean that any price difference will simply hinder sales as people wait until they are within range of a wi-fi network before making purchases. As long as consumers have this choice, and the cost in convenience is not that great (really, who needs to buy that track this very instant?), the sales numbers will never really take off.

About 8 (http://about8.blogspot.com)

[ArtOfWarfare]

Uhhh...

how do you set up an answer tone?

...

And does a ring tone take priority over an answer tone or do they both play at once or what?

...

It seems like people could prank call without even needing the other person to pick up... they just set their answer tone to be something ridiculous and call away...

Rick Roll everyone and they can't do anything about it.

[zedsdead]

The "Answer Tones" seems pretty cool. Also, the EDGE information is interesting, but if Apple sets it up with higher prices, then it is terrible.

In regards to the music industry, I really wish Apple would finish the iTunes Plus nonsense. They are the #1 distributer of music in the US, and it is time to use that leverage to force Universal and Time Warner on board.

[jonnylink]

Answer tones have been around for a while, folks. I don't have a clue how they work, but they are a fact. Why the heck would you even doubt something like that? Because you can't figure it out you think that Apple and AT&T can't either?:p

If you don't believe me get access to Google's GrandCentral or make some calls to Japan. Or call people in the US where it is also available on some cell phones.

The thing that people have hit on though, they are annoying. It's like being put on hold right away a fed some one's annoying taste in music.

[flashy-cat]

I hate ringtones*. I hate hearing them. I hate the idea of paying for one. I hate them hate them hate them.

What is the point? Is anyone not annoyed when hearing a squawky compressed version of a song bleat out in the middle of a crowded room? I mean, if you like the song, you're annoyed it is so crappy sounding and played s short. If you hate the song, you're annoyed you have to listen to it. If you haven't heard it before, you aren't able to give it a good listen.

The only thing more annoying is the "let me sit here and jam to my ringtone" dork.

Did I mention I hate ringtones? You know what happens if I call you and instead of just subjecting everyone in your room to your ring tone, you also subject me to a static-laden clip of "Baby Got Back"? Yeah, that's right: I don't call you any more.

* "Ringtones" are here defined as any of the following:


A snippet of a larger work, typically a popular song that I never liked
Some ethnic or tribal jam, which qualifies under the terms of this rant after the second listen, because, honestly, I've heard a few good ones, the first time. You better change it before it rings again though.
Inhuman synthesized voice announcing the name of the caller as entered into your address book. Not so innately annoying, but I shudder to think of what a poorly-thought-out address book entry for a significant other might announce.


Specifically not included are "ringtones" which actually sound like a traditional or modern phone ringing.

Couldn't agree more :)

[weave]

The music industry seems to just try to do whatever it can to destroy itself.

Adapt or die, idiots.

[yyy]

I HATE answer tones :mad: I don't get the idea of listening to someone else's bad music taste while waiting for him/her to answer :confused:

[Baron58]

I would love 'answer tones' if I could record my own....

See, I don't want to carry two phones, so I refused a work-issued one and use my own. I also keep my desk phone forwarded to my cell, so I'm (a) not tied to my desk, and (b) nobody can figure out exactly where I am when they call.

However, there's a company policy that your outgoing message has to be "This is <your name> at <company name>. Thank you for calling. I'm sorry I can't take your call blah blah yadda yadda..... Please visit our website at <URL>". I REFUSE to put that crap on my outgoing message on my personal cell, I don't even have my name there, I just use the default AT&T outgoing.

If I had the answer tones feature, I could assign the "company" outgoing message to the company caller ID (for calls forwarded from my desk) and to my boss's cell number, so it would create the illusion of having that as my outgoing message!

[phinnaeus]

I hate ringtones*. I hate hearing them. I hate the idea of paying for one. I hate them hate them hate them.

What is the point? Is anyone not annoyed when hearing a squawky compressed version of a song bleat out in the middle of a crowded room? I mean, if you like the song, you're annoyed it is so crappy sounding and played s short. If you hate the song, you're annoyed you have to listen to it. If you haven't heard it before, you aren't able to give it a good listen.

The only thing more annoying is the "let me sit here and jam to my ringtone" dork.

Did I mention I hate ringtones? You know what happens if I call you and instead of just subjecting everyone in your room to your ring tone, you also subject me to a static-laden clip of "Baby Got Back"? Yeah, that's right: I don't call you any more.

* "Ringtones" are here defined as any of the following:


A snippet of a larger work, typically a popular song that I never liked
Some ethnic or tribal jam, which qualifies under the terms of this rant after the second listen, because, honestly, I've heard a few good ones, the first time. You better change it before it rings again though.
Inhuman synthesized voice announcing the name of the caller as entered into your address book. Not so innately annoying, but I shudder to think of what a poorly-thought-out address book entry for a significant other might announce.


Specifically not included are "ringtones" which actually sound like a traditional or modern phone ringing.

I've been lurking on these forums for a while, but this post finally gave me the motivation to register. And so, to this I will only say one thing:

+1.

[Shasterball]

Sometimes it's amazing how people are willing to pay for crap like answer tones... :confused:

Agreed 100%. But I guess you can't fault Apple if people are willing to pay....

[diamond.g]

Ugh, answer tones suck. There is nothing worse than hearing ****** loud music over a crappy cell phone connection when a standard ringing tone would be far more effective.

I don't like the music ones either, but the one I did like was the one I had for my wife. It was something like "Your husband feels your call is important, he will be with you in a moment". I thought it was awesome (as did my wife...). Sprint had a bunch one for friends, family, mistress etc. I didn't like the music ones at all due to them sounding like crap.

[sassenach74]

Wirelessly posted (PPC; 240x320; HTC_TyTN/1.0 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 7.7))

I reckon it would be nearly as annoying as people who quote an entire lengthy post just to say things like 'I agree'.
Not as much a big deal on a desktop, but have you tried reading it on a cell phone? You have to keep clicking 'more' to find the end of the post, then when you've read 'I agree' '+1' etc, you have to keep pressing back to get to the next post. Would be nice if we can keep posts as lean as possible, no? After all I'm sure most of us here use cell phones and a good portion of us read mac rumors on them. Sorry about the rant, I have been biting my tongue on it for a bit though.

[WhySoSerious]

Wirelessly posted (PPC; 240x320; HTC_TyTN/1.0 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 7.7))

I reckon it would be nearly as annoying as people who quote an entire lengthy post just to say things like 'I agree'.
Not as much a big deal on a desktop, but have you tried reading it on a cell phone? You have to keep clicking 'more' to find the end of the post, then when you've read 'I agree' '+1' etc, you have to keep pressing back to get to the next post. Would be nice if we can keep posts as lean as possible, no? After all I'm sure most of us here use cell phones and a good portion of us read mac rumors on them. Sorry about the rant, I have been biting my tongue on it for a bit though.

seriously man, shut up. you're complaining for the sake of complaining. stop it.

[kornyboy]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)

I hope they are able to strike the deal and allow for music downloads over cellular networks. That would be great.

[abrooks]

Wirelessly posted (PPC; 240x320; HTC_TyTN/1.0 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 7.7))

I reckon it would be nearly as annoying as people who quote an entire lengthy post just to say things like 'I agree'.
Not as much a big deal on a desktop, but have you tried reading it on a cell phone? You have to keep clicking 'more' to find the end of the post, then when you've read 'I agree' '+1' etc, you have to keep pressing back to get to the next post. Would be nice if we can keep posts as lean as possible, no? After all I'm sure most of us here use cell phones and a good portion of us read mac rumors on them. Sorry about the rant, I have been biting my tongue on it for a bit though.

About time you got a better phone then.

[mackiwilad]

Music over the mobile network (not wi-fi) is inevitable and I'm sure it will happen - I cannot see however why prices should be any different. Exactly how does it cost the record companies any more to sell a track via iTunes on someone's iPhone when it is connected to a mobile network, than when it is connected to a wi-fi network? Charging for more this method of sale is simply ripping consumers off because the record companies think they can get away with it.



About 8 (http://about8.blogspot.com)

Really, the answer is simple. Big Music are a pack of ravenous pigs who will do anything to anyone to get more money out of your pocket. I mean, I'm all for capitalism and all that.. but the naked greed you can see coming off these corporate slugs make me feel sick.
I hope the free market is able to move past them as soon as possible.

[trainwrecka]

Sometimes it's amazing how people are willing to pay for crap like answer tones... :confused:

I'm quilty of this....:o

Of course, I've had answer tones on my iPhone since Nov or Dec. Managing them in iTunes would be better. I only have them for a few of my closest friends and family. Just funny for them to hear once or twice... I all but forgot about them until now.

[sassenach74]

seriously man, shut up. you're complaining for the sake of complaining. stop it.

You might want a re-cap on the forum rules....

Instantly Bannable Offenses
These can be one-time bannable offenses for which you will not get a warning.

Insults. Direct personal insult of another member, i.e., "You are an idiot." and all the variations. Why? Because this isn't grade school. People should be able to discuss or even dispute other's posts without insulting people. And the only purpose of a post like this is to incite other people. You may dispute somebody's opinion, but not attack/flame the person who stated it. There are a lot of other non-direct-personal insults that won't necessary get you banned instantly, but depending on the context/nature may lead to post editing, post deletion, warnings, or time-outs. They include telling people to shut up, or being extremely or repeatedly rude or sarcastic.

But you probably read this already....

Oh and here's another:

Things Not to Do
These are usually not instantly bannable - but will likely get you edited and/or warned.

Useless posts. Do not bother making posts with only one or two words (e.g., LOL) or a smilie, or post simply to have the first reply in a thread. Such posts waste everyone's time and will be deleted. Posts saying "I agree", "me too", or the equivalent are also routinely removed.

Have a good day.

[samh004]

The record companies better think again about charging more for something over cellular that is exactly the same as over wifi or connected to the wall, it's the same damn song, if anyone should be asking for more money it's the cellular network because of the increased bandwidth burden.

And as for answer tones, that's to do with the network back-end isn't it. I don't see how downloading it from iTunes will get it to your network providers servers.

[Kwill]

Did I mention I hate ringtones? You know what happens if I call you and instead of just subjecting everyone in your room to your ring tone, you also subject me to a static-laden clip of "Baby Got Back"? Yeah, that's right: I don't call you any more....

Specifically not included are "ringtones" which actually sound like a traditional or modern phone ringing.

The thought of hearing someone's poor taste in music blurt in my ear is disarming. Even soft sounds may confuse the caller into thinking he is on hold before the caller answers. Let's hope the current monthly fee and eventual expiration of Answer Tones will suppress popularity.

When it comes to ringtones, although I dislike most, there are advantages to knowing who is phoning by the sound of the ring. Unfortunately, most people do not give consideration to general appeal since they are audible to the public.

[theplexi]

While I'm sure the music labels dictate the method of transmission as part of their music distribution deals; the real bottle neck in music over the air is the wireless carriers. ATT, Verizon, T-Mobile, Sprint...they all command revenue shares on every piece of content sold over their network. Every time you buy a ringtone from Jamster or one of those companies, half of the sale usually goes to the carrier, and Jamster makes a fractional amount that's barely worth the effort (Granted they continue to do so because they still make money in volume; however it's not a clear pass through in profit.) Just to give you an idea of the absurdness of it all: Imagine you use Comcast as your internet provider, and you go online and order a pizza from dominos. When you get the pizza, the delivery guy only charges you $5, but on your Comcast bill at the end of the month, you have a charge of $6 for your pizza delivery because you used Comcast's network to place the order; therefore, they claim a commission.

Ridiculous! Make no mistake, Apple's fight to get OTA downloads via the iPhone is probably with AT&T. (Also keep in mind that downloading 3MB file over EDGE while in a moving vehicle is nearly impossible. Now that 3G is on it's way, OTA is more likely.)

[SirOmega]

I'm not entirely sure that the music industry necessarily wants more money for cellphone transactions.

What I think is more likely is that the carrier wants a good sized chunk too. So if the music industry wants 70% of the sale price (70c of a 99c music purchase), and the carrier wants 30-40c per song, there wouldnt be any money left over for Apple. So the price has to go up, and we see $1.99 prices - 1.40 for the music industry, 29c for the wireless carrier and 30c for Apple.

[moot]

Really, the answer is simple. Big Music are a pack of ravenous pigs who will do anything to anyone to get more money out of your pocket. I mean, I'm all for capitalism and all that.. but the naked greed you can see coming off these corporate slugs make me feel sick.
I hope the free market is able to move past them as soon as possible.

You're right but it is not really an issue with just Big Music. Every company wants to control its product's market. For example, the same product is sold around the world always at different prices.

It is never about how much something cost to make, it's about what price the market can bear.

For example, luckily the U.S has some of the cheapest prices for a lot of products because the average U.S consumer is not willing to pay more. Meanwhile, more profit is made from sales in other countries.

The same is true for Apple who price their products ridiculously in some markets.

So while I don't like what Big Music are asking for, and I will actually never pay their stupid prices for such a service, it is not such an unusual business approach.

[cwcarr]

I'm not entirely sure that the music industry necessarily wants more money for cellphone transactions.

What I think is more likely is that the carrier wants a good sized chunk too. So if the music industry wants 70% of the sale price (70c of a 99c music purchase), and the carrier wants 30-40c per song, there wouldnt be any money left over for Apple. So the price has to go up, and we see $1.99 prices - 1.40 for the music industry, 29c for the wireless carrier and 30c for Apple.

I confess that I hadn't thought about the carriers being the source of the extra fees, although I agree it is the most likely. This seems to be another issue regarding consumers wanting internet services to be treated like utilities, and the services companies wanting to be treated the way they want to be treated.

If I am paying per kilobyte for data downloads to my phone, I cannot accept the idea that I must pay extra for certain types of data. Bits are bits, and it doesn't cost AT&T (or 02 or Optus, or Vodafone etc. etc.) more to transfer some particular bits to my phone just because they come from the iTunes music store.

In fact, by the provider charging more for particular data, and therefore knowing what I am downloading, and when, you could perhaps stretch the argument to being one about privacy.

About 8 (http://about8.blogspot.com)

[sishaw]

Answer tones have been around for a while, folks. I don't have a clue how they work, but they are a fact. Why the heck would you even doubt something like that? Because you can't figure it out you think that Apple and AT&T can't either?:p

If you don't believe me get access to Google's GrandCentral or make some calls to Japan. Or call people in the US where it is also available on some cell phones.

The thing that people have hit on though, they are annoying. It's like being put on hold right away a fed some one's annoying taste in music.

Yeah, my cellular provider has them also. It's not such a big deal, but I guess there's a market for them. I have yet to encounter any myself.

[macfan881]

I hate ringtones*. I hate hearing them. I hate the idea of paying for one. I hate them hate them hate them.

What is the point? Is anyone not annoyed when hearing a squawky compressed version of a song bleat out in the middle of a crowded room? I mean, if you like the song, you're annoyed it is so crappy sounding and played s short. If you hate the song, you're annoyed you have to listen to it. If you haven't heard it before, you aren't able to give it a good listen.

The only thing more annoying is the "let me sit here and jam to my ringtone" dork.

Did I mention I hate ringtones? You know what happens if I call you and instead of just subjecting everyone in your room to your ring tone, you also subject me to a static-laden clip of "Baby Got Back"? Yeah, that's right: I don't call you any more.

* "Ringtones" are here defined as any of the following:


A snippet of a larger work, typically a popular song that I never liked
Some ethnic or tribal jam, which qualifies under the terms of this rant after the second listen, because, honestly, I've heard a few good ones, the first time. You better change it before it rings again though.
Inhuman synthesized voice announcing the name of the caller as entered into your address book. Not so innately annoying, but I shudder to think of what a poorly-thought-out address book entry for a significant other might announce.


Specifically not included are "ringtones" which actually sound like a traditional or modern phone ringing.

you guys really need to get a life if ringtones piss you off this much id hate to see how normaly things annoy you good lord

[stagi]

I use the iTunes store right now when on Wifi and think it would be great to use it over a 3G connection. A lot of times I am trying to remember a song and love pulling up the iTunes store and browsing for that song in my head but a lot of times I want to do this I am not on a Wifi connection.

[megfilmworks]

For me it's not the content of a ringtone (whether it's a song or more traditional) that is annoying, it's the volume.

[rockosmodurnlif]

Answer tones? The first of my friends to get this "feature" where when I call I get to hear some snippet of a song they've chosen, they will be getting nothing but txt messages, some of which will simply be "call me".

I'm not going to say Apple shouldn't do it, I just hope no one uses it.

I hate ringtones*. I hate hearing them. I hate the idea of paying for one. I hate them hate them hate them.

What is the point? Is anyone not annoyed when hearing a squawky compressed version of a song bleat out in the middle of a crowded room? I mean, if you like the song, you're annoyed it is so crappy sounding and played s short. If you hate the song, you're annoyed you have to listen to it. If you haven't heard it before, you aren't able to give it a good listen.

The only thing more annoying is the "let me sit here and jam to my ringtone" dork.

Did I mention I hate ringtones? You know what happens if I call you and instead of just subjecting everyone in your room to your ring tone, you also subject me to a static-laden clip of "Baby Got Back"? Yeah, that's right: I don't call you any more.

* "Ringtones" are here defined as any of the following:


A snippet of a larger work, typically a popular song that I never liked
Some ethnic or tribal jam, which qualifies under the terms of this rant after the second listen, because, honestly, I've heard a few good ones, the first time. You better change it before it rings again though.
Inhuman synthesized voice announcing the name of the caller as entered into your address book. Not so innately annoying, but I shudder to think of what a poorly-thought-out address book entry for a significant other might announce.


Specifically not included are "ringtones" which actually sound like a traditional or modern phone ringing.
No. I am not annoyed. I like the variety of ringtones because when I hear them I know it's not my phone.

[megfilmworks]

For me, when I am walking with my headset and listening to music I can tell (I have a different song for every important person in my life) who is calling without looking at my iPhone.
When I am in public I turn my ringer way down and use vibrate. I don't want to hear anyone else's phone ringing in public no matter what type of ringtone it is.

[SirOmega]

I confess that I hadn't thought about the carriers being the source of the extra fees, although I agree it is the most likely. This seems to be another issue regarding consumers wanting internet services to be treated like utilities, and the services companies wanting to be treated the way they want to be treated.

If I am paying per kilobyte for data downloads to my phone, I cannot accept the idea that I must pay extra for certain types of data. Bits are bits, and it doesn't cost AT&T (or 02 or Optus, or Vodafone etc. etc.) more to transfer some particular bits to my phone just because they come from the iTunes music store.

In fact, by the provider charging more for particular data, and therefore knowing what I am downloading, and when, you could perhaps stretch the argument to being one about privacy.

Thats what the whole net neutrality debate is all about. ISPs (in this case, the wireless carrier) charging more for certain types of traffic. Downloading a song, movie, etc? Since the ISP knows its desirable, then charge a little bit extra for the transport of those bits. Its why AT&T head Ed Whitacre said in late 2005...

"What they [Internet companies] would like to do is to use my pipes free. But I ain't going to let them do that…. For a Google or Yahoo or Vonage or anybody to expect to use these pipes [for] free is nuts!"

This firing off the whole net neutrality debate.

[denm316]

instead of more songs to choose as my ringtones, i'd really appreciate it if apple were to come out with more traditional ringtones. you know, like the one they use in the ads.


Could not agree more

[GQB]

I can't envision the pressing need to download songs directly to my iPhone.

Could someone please explain for me the scenario by which I really need this capability? I seriously don't get it.

I'm somewhere away from my computer (i.e. iTunes) and I hear a song that I just HAVE to have. I apparently didn't hear it on my iPhone, despite that's where most of my content comes from. Instead of just jotting down or noting the name of the song and artist and downloading it when I get home, I just HAVE to have it RIGHT NOW (despite the fact that I JUST HEARD IT.)

Why does this feel like a feature aimed at 9 year olds who just HAVE to hear that song 10 times in a row?

Seriously don't get this.

[/dev/toaster]

"Answer tones" are by far the most annoying thing on the planet. I have a few friends of mine that I won't call their cell because of it. Most people who use these features have strange tastes in music, and end up having something that gives me a headache.

Actually, there is 1 thing that is more annoying then "answer tones". Those people who seem to think I am intrested in their conversation, so they make sure everyone in the room can hear it. Yes, I am talking about Nextel users. Not the contractor types ... but the people who are talking about lasts nights game so everyone can hear it. I have witnessed people who have long 10 minute conversations over the Nextel after the plane has landed. The best part is, the conversations are pointless.

[GQB]

For me, when I am walking with my headset and listening to music I can tell (I have a different song for every important person in my life) who is calling without looking at my iPhone.
When I am in public I turn my ringer way down and use vibrate. I don't want to hear anyone else's phone ringing in public no matter what type of ringtone it is.

I use ring tones that I can hear but others don't notice. My favorite sounds like a pencil falling off a desk and rattling. I hear it immediately and no one else even notices it. I've even had it go off in quiet concert settings accidentally and no one noticed.

There's NOTHING I hate more (well, there is, but I'll stay apolitical... bush...cough...bush) than morons who think I really need to hear 15 seconds of some pop or rap piece of crap whenever their phone goes off.

[twoodcc]

well it seems it would be hard for this to happen by WWDC, but i hope that it does

[genshi]

I don't see how answer tones are going to work - it's not your phone that produces the ringing sound, it's the phone operator (normally your own, as the line isn't active until the other end answers).

Only two possibilities I can think of:

1. The iphone answers the call immediately and begins playing muzak down the line, costing the caller money even if you don't answer. Doesn't work if the iphone is switched off or out of range of course. End users will hate this.. I certainly wouldn't call someone with such a system as I don't see why I should pay to have crap played at me.
2. The operator has special answer system for iphones, which would be expensive for them to setup and presumably only work within a single operator (otherwise you'd have all the cross licensing stuff to deal with). Can't see what the financial incentive for them to implement this would be, and precisely why they would limit it to iphones.

Uhhh...

how do you set up an answer tone?

And does a ring tone take priority over an answer tone or do they both play at once or what?

It seems like people could prank call without even needing the other person to pick up... they just set their answer tone to be something ridiculous and call away...

Rick Roll everyone and they can't do anything about it.

Answer from http://www.wireless.att.com/learn/ringtones-downloads/faq.jsp#answer_tones

Q. Are Answer Tones different than Ringtones?
A. Yes, Answer Tones are different than Ringtones.

Ringtones are what you hear from your phone when someone calls you. Answer Tones are what your caller hears when they call your phone, in place of the standard ringing sound.

Ringtones are downloaded to your phone and stored within the handset. Answer Tones are stored on the AT&T network in a personal "library" that you can access and manage via the web or Media Net. And because your Answer Tones are stored on AT&T's servers (rather than downloaded to your handset), you can move your SIM card to another phone and your callers will still hear the Answer Tone you've selected for them.

Each Answer Tone will have an expiration date associated with it. As an Answer Tone's expiration date approaches, we will alert you via a free text message so that you may re-purchase another Answer Tone.

Because the Answer Tones service is provided on the AT&T network (unlike Ringtones), there is a monthly fee for service.

It's funny to see this article today as I had never heard of Answer Tones until reading this, but I experienced it for the first time last night:

I called a new friend I had never called before and instead of her phone ringing, it immediately started playing music (really, really bad music) so I assumed it just went straight to voice mail, so I hung up (because I didn't want to leave a message) and called back and it went right to the bad music again. So this time I waited (again, assuming it was going to voicemail) to leave a message and after about what seemed a full minute, she answered! I was very confused. I told her that her phone didn't ring it just went straight to some music and she said "oh, that IS my ring!" That REALLY annoyed me. I won't be calling her again.

[Drewstin77]

answer tones (wile annoying) are already available for iPhone users, i know because my friend and i both bought ours a few months ago & everytime i call him i hear that stupid "beautiful girls" song playing.

[Peace]

ummm. Wouldn't the answer tone kind of defeat the purpose of a ringtone ? They seem to counter each other.. I like to control my own phone thank you very much.

[tbobmccoy]

The best ringtones are snippets of old video game music, which are already compressed. I love hearing the final fantasy theme play when I answer my iPhone :cool:

[officerdick]

What will happen is when you buy an iPhone you get unlimited music downloads. There is going to be an "RIAA" tax on the iPhone, but the price will remain the same, and the music will be locked to the iPhone. TDC a danish tele-carrier just did this, free music for the costumers.

[djrobsd]

While these might be cute for teenagers, I think the average demographic of an iphone user is not going to be too into this answertone thing. I have it on my Verizon phone, and it annoyed all my friends so I finally turned it off. While they are cute and fun, they are kinda obnoxious too.

[genshi]

ummm. Wouldn't the answer tone kind of defeat the purpose of a ringtone ? They seem to counter each other.. I like to control my own phone thank you very much.

What!? You must have not read the whole thread otherwise you would have seen my post:

Q. Are Answer Tones different than Ringtones?
A. Yes, Answer Tones are different than Ringtones.

Ringtones are what you hear from your phone when someone calls you. Answer Tones are what your caller hears when they call your phone, in place of the standard ringing sound.

Ringtones are downloaded to your phone and stored within the handset. Answer Tones are stored on the AT&T network in a personal "library" that you can access and manage via the web or Media Net. And because your Answer Tones are stored on AT&T's servers (rather than downloaded to your handset), you can move your SIM card to another phone and your callers will still hear the Answer Tone you've selected for them.

Each Answer Tone will have an expiration date associated with it. As an Answer Tone's expiration date approaches, we will alert you via a free text message so that you may re-purchase another Answer Tone.

Because the Answer Tones service is provided on the AT&T network (unlike Ringtones), there is a monthly fee for service.

[MacFly123]

So is Big Music going to charge me more for a CD if I drive my own car to a music store instead of taking the bus?

What difference does it make to Big Music if I download a song over wi-fi or a cell network?

AMEN!!! They are such greedy idiots, all they think about is money and now they are going to jeopardize what would be a massive success.

From what I have heard the iTunes WIFI store has already done very well, if they made it work anywhere with 3G as well it would be even better. I have been waiting for this, and not only music, but later adding all video, movies, podcasts etc. to the iTunes (mobile) store. Come on Apple, don't let these greedy morons ruin everything!

[megfilmworks]

Sometimes it's amazing how people are willing to pay for crap like answer tones... :confused:

Kinda like Starbux$

[MacFly123]

I can't envision the pressing need to download songs directly to my iPhone.

Could someone please explain for me the scenario by which I really need this capability? I seriously don't get it.

I'm somewhere away from my computer (i.e. iTunes) and I hear a song that I just HAVE to have. I apparently didn't hear it on my iPhone, despite that's where most of my content comes from. Instead of just jotting down or noting the name of the song and artist and downloading it when I get home, I just HAVE to have it RIGHT NOW (despite the fact that I JUST HEARD IT.)

Why does this feel like a feature aimed at 9 year olds who just HAVE to hear that song 10 times in a row?

Seriously don't get this.

Welcome to the American lifestyle lol.

Your lack of vision is not allowing you to see that the iPhone is the future of mobile platforms and that virtually EVERYONE will have a mobile computing device like the iPhone soon that will fill many needs that a computer once did. So if you think it is not important to have media content distribution established on such a platform and devices then you seriously need to open your eyes a bit!

[Lixivial]

Could someone please explain for me the scenario by which I really need this capability? I seriously don't get it.

There are a lot more potential usages for this other than superfluous instant gratification (though that certainly doesn't hurt sales).

I can envision a system that integrates radio from the car into the iPhone allowing you to purchase or pull cover art/lyrics from iTunes on the fly. Maybe stream ahead, or backward a couple of songs. Or perhaps cross referencing the song you listened to on the radio, rating it, and throwing you 5 other songs you might enjoy from the iTunes store. Likewise, any other public place that plays music, such as bars, clubs, etc.

And that's really just scratching the surface of music, let alone other sorts of media/information.

Convergence of these once disparate systems into a mobile model is the key here, as opposed to fitting this new technology into the current business model.

[seashellz]

remastered BEATLES

[Ha ze]

I love that people can download from iTunes "over the air" if it's via wifi, but if it's via 3G or some other mobile phone network it should be more expensive?

Makes no sense. The download is still coming from an Apple/iTunes server and the connection is being made with at&t (or whoever) service, so in what part f that does the record company deserve more? I'd think at&t would deserve a slight per song cut more then the record company.

[megfilmworks]

I love that people can download from iTunes "over the air" if it's via wifi, but if it's via 3G or some other mobile phone network it should be more expensive?

Makes no sense. The download is still coming from an Apple/iTunes server and the connection is being made with at&t (or whoever) service, so in what part f that does the record company deserve more? I'd think at&t would deserve a slight per song cut more then the record company.

It's not the record label but the pipe. Att, in this case, may want a piece of the action if you are using their network.
What does that have to do with the record labels??

[winterspan]

I hate ringtones*. I hate hearing them. I hate the idea of paying for one. I hate them hate them hate them.

What is the point? Is anyone not annoyed when hearing a squawky compressed version of a song bleat out in the middle of a crowded room? I mean, if you like the song, you're annoyed it is so crappy sounding and played s short. If you hate the song, you're annoyed you have to listen to it. If you haven't heard it before, you aren't able to give it a good listen.

The only thing more annoying is the "let me sit here and jam to my ringtone" dork.

Did I mention I hate ringtones? You know what happens if I call you and instead of just subjecting everyone in your room to your ring tone, you also subject me to a static-laden clip of "Baby Got Back"? Yeah, that's right: I don't call you any more.



I completely agree. Why on earth did someone have to come up with such a TERRIBLE IDEA. I have always been annoyed by this crap and cannot understand why ANYONE would pay for such nonsense!

Seriously, for you ringtoners out there, why in the hell do you buy these things? Why would you want to hear 10 second music clips every time your phone rings? What is WRONG WITH YOU? What is the appeal? Do you realize you are annoying everyone around you?!?

As far as over-the-air downloads and the consequent money-grubbing of the major labels... I'm not going to comment (yet). That subject deserves a comprehensive treatise!

[jettredmont]

You might want a re-cap on the forum rules....

Instantly Bannable Offenses
These can be one-time bannable offenses for which you will not get a warning.

Insults. Direct personal insult of another member, i.e., "You are an idiot." and all the variations. Why? Because this isn't grade school. People should be able to discuss or even dispute other's posts without insulting people. And the only purpose of a post like this is to incite other people. You may dispute somebody's opinion, but not attack/flame the person who stated it. There are a lot of other non-direct-personal insults that won't necessary get you banned instantly, but depending on the context/nature may lead to post editing, post deletion, warnings, or time-outs. They include telling people to shut up, or being extremely or repeatedly rude or sarcastic.

But you probably read this already....

Oh and here's another:

Things Not to Do
These are usually not instantly bannable - but will likely get you edited and/or warned.

Useless posts. Do not bother making posts with only one or two words (e.g., LOL) or a smilie, or post simply to have the first reply in a thread. Such posts waste everyone's time and will be deleted. Posts saying "I agree", "me too", or the equivalent are also routinely removed.

Have a good day.

I agree. +1.

Really, though, you need to learn what parody is. To spell it out: you complained about people filling your phone screen with low-content "vote" posts, yet your post was relatively low-content for its girth as well, an unintentional irony. The obvious response is a jibing parody, and that's what you got.

[GQB]

Welcome to the American lifestyle lol.

Your lack of vision is not allowing you to see that the iPhone is the future of mobile platforms and that virtually EVERYONE will have a mobile computing device like the iPhone soon that will fill many needs that a computer once did. So if you think it is not important to have media content distribution established on such a platform and devices then you seriously need to open your eyes a bit!

I'd agree if we were indeed at a point where the mobile platform was your sole platform.
But I'll suggest that my 'lack of vision' has more to do more with my total lack of interest in contemporary music (and any trace of need for immediate gratification) than my lack of technological vision.

I'll claim possession of taste rather than lack of vision. :)

[Ha ze]

It's not the record label but the pipe. Att, in this case, may want a piece of the action if you are using their network.
What does that have to do with the record labels??

Thats exactly my point. The articles I have read have said that the record companies will be using this as a negotiating point because they typically charge higher amounts for OTA downloads.

[Dmac77]

What is with people in America and our instant gratification fetish? Why must everything happen now, for christ sake, why would could i not wait a few hours until i get home to download a song off of itunes? especially when I am going to be charged extra not just by the pigs at the labels and by AT&T for bandwidth use?