Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's Beats Music Deal Seen as Key to Bolstering Declining iTunes Revenue Momentum
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I would prefer to pay Qobuz a bit more for lossless, but even with the price decrease, that one does indeed feel like too much for renting instead of owning.
I think streaming vs downloads is a balance thing. I think downloads are going down because the digital markets are moderating. Many times streaming music is all you need instead of say radio. Streaming allows the user great control over what they hear which radio was failing at. However, there are times when you want to own the music. This is when you buy. Streaming without any ownership is bad for the music markets and vice versa. Streaming gives people who don't care that much a legitimate way to hear your songs without having to overcommit financially. It's an extension of giving the user just the amount of product they want and nothing more.
Last edited:
iTunes for Android
Apple needs to release the Android version of iTunes to make up for the 60% of users that have moved on. As a former iPhone user and now an Android user I really don't want to use Google Music or others but there are no good options. My main music library is still in iTunes on my PC and I need to use Windows Media Player or something else to sync my library to my Moto X. I'd much rather sync from iTunes right to my Android phone.
Apple needs to release the Android version of iTunes to make up for the 60% of users that have moved on. As a former iPhone user and now an Android user I really don't want to use Google Music or others but there are no good options. My main music library is still in iTunes on my PC and I need to use Windows Media Player or something else to sync my library to my Moto X. I'd much rather sync from iTunes right to my Android phone.
Apple doesn't need to support you at all, you left the ecosystem. Come back if you want it.
most people don't buy music anymore via the itunes model
why buy a $10 album when you can get unlimited streaming for $10 a month?
He makes a valid point though. Android isn't going anywhere. Apple might as well support it with iTunes music. Beats is probably a way to accomplish this as well.
40???? then you clearly arent the demo for the streaming market though. i bought one cd two years ago. thats about it but i happily pay for Spotify. no need to find downloads from other "sources" anymore. i am actually getting it legal this way now. plus i never listen to an album for more than a month so owning it wouldnt even make much sense for me besides costing more money
Who spends $10 on an album when you can buy the two or three tracks you actually like and let the filler sit there?
There goes Apple...innovating again by trying to duplicate/catch-up to similar services. To me, the quickest way to subscription services would be to create something like the Zune Pass that MS had (now XBox Music Pass), allow people to download anything they want (w/DRM) and keep 10 songs per month (non-DRM) as part of their subscription, all under the iTunes umbrella.
To Apple, spending $3B on a lame subscription/streaming service with a name synonymous with overpriced makes more sense, I guess.
After trying out the Beats service for a month (free trial), I uninstalled it and cancelled my subscription.
There are plenty of streaming/"Radio" music services. The problem is, there isn't enough good music these days.
To Apple, spending $3B on a lame subscription/streaming service with a name synonymous with overpriced makes more sense, I guess.
After trying out the Beats service for a month (free trial), I uninstalled it and cancelled my subscription.
There are plenty of streaming/"Radio" music services. The problem is, there isn't enough good music these days.
The purchase of media in general is declining. There's nothing Apple can do to convince people to buy music when streaming is the new market. Absolutely nothing about this is surprising/unexpected.
Streaming solves the radio problem.
Downloads solves the physical product problem.
Both will co-exist. People want greater control over the music they hear on the radio. Those are the streaming listeners. There will always be a benefit to downloading and owning some of your music. Downloads gives people greater control of the amount of product they are buying.
Downloads solves the physical product problem.
Both will co-exist. People want greater control over the music they hear on the radio. Those are the streaming listeners. There will always be a benefit to downloading and owning some of your music. Downloads gives people greater control of the amount of product they are buying.
Well, that's the point. I would buy around 40 CDs per month and listen only once to most of them.
So now I subscribe to Deezer and I never stream, always offline sync. And I only listen to COMPLETE albums, only once each.
I buy music that I want to keep or play remotely. When I do I buy through iTunes.
As far as I am concerned, Apple already have iTMS, iTunes radio, iTunes Match. Creating a subscription based music streaming service doesn't sound like such an impossible thing. If Apple is on the bad side of the music label, they could've just yanked the licenses for the current services.
Also Iovine is 61 years old, Steve Jobs died when he's 56.
Don't think so, it's like saying when the TV was introduced, that radio was a dying medium.
I'm also paying for the sheer convenience Spotify gives it's users.
I can listen to whatever I want, create as many playlists as I want, have everything available & synced across my iPhone, iPad & computers.
Brilliant!
