Beats Co-Founders Dr. Dre and Jimmy Iovine Expected to Take on Senior Roles at Apple Following Acquisition

[DUCKofD3ATH]

umm, what is Tim Cook thinking

"Beatles"

Oops

 

[rhett7660]

Why does a fashionable fad like Beats make sense for Apple? For all we know 6 months from now Beats won't be fashionable. Google didn't buy a thermostat company, they infested in data, in the connected home, in the internet of things. Apple would be investing in an overpriced fad.

Um, maybe they are investing in the same thing along with rights for the streaming music? You know some of the same things google did.

I highly doubt Apple is buying this company for the headphones.

 

[lazard]

Just playing devil's advocate here for a moment, but your dislike of bass, doesn't make Beats crap, it just makes them an unsuitable product for you.

For clarity, I don't have any Beats and actually, nor do I want a pair as I find them a bit too "look at me" for my liking (I'm also 46, not 16!).

Beats delivers mediocre audio quality for its price ($150-300). Even if all you are looking for is more bass, there are a dozen other manufacturers that offer a superior product at the same price. With beats, you're paying for glossy paint and celebrity endorsements.

 

[pirata]

I have the beats wireless bluetooth headphones and I don't think they're crap nor "bassy". Its funny all the people on here talking like they know whats best for apple, how many billion dollar company owners are on this forum? I'm sure apple knows what they are doing, and if you chose not to purchase apple products I'm sure apple won't miss you.

 

[TheSlush]

Tim Cook collecting external endorsers?

I worry that such a move is evidence of some sort of inherent insecurity or lack of confidence within Tim Cook. It's as if he wants to bolt on proven, successful leaders from outside of Apple in order to bolster and advise his own decision-making. This is not the type of endorsement that Steve Jobs ever needed. His vision of what was ahead was always clear and singular.

Moves like this just strike me as conventional and therefore un-Applelike.

 

[SlCKB0Y]

I think they put in real terms. When you have people not playing a musical instrument, then it's not music.

Most of the people he mentioned, with the exception of a few of them actually have classical training. Red Hot Chili Peppers and maybe some of the guys in war didn't have classical training, but most of the others have a LOT of classical training and incorporate classical orchestrations in some of their music. Go listen to Stanley Clarke's earlier albums, same with Billy Cobham, etc. Stanley Clarke grew up playing the upright bass and still to this day uses it in recordings and live performances with and without using a bow. You'll probably find most jazz musicians actually grew up playing and studying classical music at some point in time. Look at Miles Davis, he went to Julliard.

1. Define "musical instrument"

2. If you go back far enough people like you were making exactly the same comments you are making but about jazz, rock n roll etc. (bad influence, ruining music)

 

[steve333]

Really? What poll or data do you have to support that statement? I see this move as a way for Apple to ensure another generation of users, given how popular the Beats By Dre brand is with the yuf. So what if a few Liberal Elites and Conservative hardliners are put off the brand because they see something inherently wrong with the Beats brand? I think that despite all the outrage and disbelief about this acquisition, everyone who buys Apple gear will keep buying Apple gear and the biggest risk will be to the Beats brand because by becoming part of Apple, it will lose some of its hip factor and there are so many other headphone brands to choose from.

Apple shouldn't associate itself with inferior products, let alone a tone deaf rapper
Beats headphones suck

 

[thefourthpope]

Out of curiosity, why do you find it odd that Apple would want to appeal to a younger croud? I can't think of a reason why they wouldn't want to.

I assume Apple already appeals to a younger crowd, so I guess I'm trying to to come to grips with the idea that that might not be the case (and therefore that I am older than I like to think).

Beyond that bit of my own confusion I am all for this deal--lord knows apple has the cash and a solid history of business moves.

----------

Also, I don't agree with your assumption that Apple will be done with major purchases after they buy Beats. Apple has purchased several tech companies in the past and will continue to do so in the future. Apple also spends billions in house on R&D. Apple will likely also pursue further media acquisitions to expand their
ability to deliver content.

Right. Let's not pretend this is apples only or last acquisition.

 

[flat five]

Oh you don't give a crap about my opinions? LOL. You keep responding to everything I've said. Apparently you do. And this IS an internet forum for sharing opinions and posting facts, which I have. I don't look for people to fight with but you stated the Beats weren't junk and then you asked what do I consider junk headphones. All of your posts deserved a response.

you think you're arguing against me but not talking in a way which correlates with what i said.

i asked you and rog 'if beats are junk then what do you guys call junk headphones"

in a subsequent attempt at clarifying, i put this link "junk headphones"

here's the link this way:
https://www.google.com/search?clien...8&oe=UTF-8#q=cheap+headphones&rls=en&tbm=shop
(as in- you have to click that so you'll have a better chance at hearing what i'm saying)

to me, those are junk.. and i'm asking what you call that since you've already used the term 'junk' on beats..

in other words, those links show you what i consider junk headphones.. and beats (definitely!) is not in that category.. i believe you'd agree with me on that, right?

they're good headphones.. they're not the best.. there are plenty of other headphones which are better.. they're also not the best bang for your buck.. in ways, they could be valued at $100 but are selling for $300.. in a similar way other items which carry a fashionable vibe sell for more.

but-- $100 headphones aren't junk.. they're good and they sound good (again, making comparison to junk and even mid grade headphones)..

or-- are you actually saying beats are on par with those junk $10 colby's in the link?

All good though, you still never answered my question. Obviously you couldn't. Have an awesome weekend.

why do you keep asking me that question as if it proves something to me and/or i'm somehow wrong because i don't answer it..

re-read the first post you responded to of mine.

"maybe overpriced as you can get similar quality for less but that doesn't mean beats is a junk product."

like you're arguing me and your point which you're using to hammer it home is the same thing you quoted me saying in your first response.. it makes not-so-much-sense

 

[BGrifter]

or-- are you actually saying beats are on par with those junk $10 colby's in the link?

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B0006B486K?pc_redir=1399868058&robot_redir=1

They're inferior to the $15 set of headphones in the link above. Commonly available for $10 on sale. Junk is a pretty apt label for Beats products.

 

[thekev]

I worry that such a move is evidence of some sort of inherent insecurity or lack of confidence within Tim Cook. It's as if he wants to bolt on proven, successful leaders from outside of Apple in order to bolster and advise his own decision-making. This is not the type of endorsement that Steve Jobs ever needed. His vision of what was ahead was always clear and singular.

Moves like this just strike me as conventional and therefore un-Applelike.

It would be more than just Cook. Such a purchase would require board approval.

 

[krravi]

Hes not the one who made it about a black male.

Huh?

Read this again...

"As a black male I have to say I'm dismayed by the racist undertones and comments surrounding this story - both here on Macrumors and elsewhere on the net. That the saintly white Apple brand can't possibly be 'tarnished' by a black man."

So lets take a hypothetical example. Say this deal is bad for Apple and it turns off a lot of people as they don't identify with that culture or music or whatever other reasons there might be.... And Apple suffers in the process.

Would you still advocate for the deal?

You answer that question and the real racist shall be revealed.

 

[Trapezoid]

Huh?

Read this again...

"As a black male I have to say I'm dismayed by the racist undertones and comments surrounding this story - both here on Macrumors and elsewhere on the net. That the saintly white Apple brand can't possibly be 'tarnished' by a black man."

So lets take a hypothetical example. Say this deal is bad for Apple and it turns off a lot of people as they don't identify with that culture or music or whatever other reasons there might be.... And Apple suffers in the process.

Would you still advocate for the deal?

You answer that question and the real racist shall be revealed.

What? Your post makes no sense. If this deal causes apple to suffer, which it shouldn't because if the reason ppl start leaving apple is because "they don't agree with that culture", those ppl are morons.

What possible reason could there be for this deal to make apple suffer other than beats not actually being as successful as previously thought? The "culture" has nothing to do with it. Either the business will succeed or it won't. It doesn't matter if beats is owned by Dr. Dre from south central, or Eugene Poindexter from idaho.

This is about money. Period. It'll either fail or succeed regardless of what "culture" the ceo is from.

 

[rangen]

OSX Ignorance and possibly a hint of racism here.

bleh

 

[DeepIn2U]

That's quite a leap Supa_Fly. I forgot, we ethnic minority folk lack a sense of humour. OS X Brooklyn would have been considered a hint of racism too toward Jimmy Iovine? I think not.

It seemed at the time to be quite a leap but the very next follow-up to the news on this forums site seemed to actually prove my perception! I wish I honestly had the time to link the article to show my perspective - and that's all its really worth isn't it?!

There was no such thing as OSX Brooklyn so what the hell are you going on with? Jimmy Iovine? Palease.

----------

Yes.

I am disappointed with some of the naysayers in this thread. I hoped that a group of humans that are/desire-to-be more technology-savvy would be better than that...but alas, it is no more than a subsection of humans across the world...this place is just like every place else.

Thank you ... I have a feeling my perception may have been included in your post and honestly if so I would agree. wholeheartedly from your point of view but it wasn't intentional.

People do change given the right conditions or the right people that they surround themselves with or interact with ... so give everyone a chance.

"Don't give hate a chance" Jamiroquai.

 

[Philter]

Well there's your problem right there. You have all that crap getting in the way of your platinum record music. Oh wait, you don't have a platinum?.... Maybe your equipment isn't that great and/or your ears aren't working too well. I don't hear your songs on the radio? Oh, right, you probably don't like the radio. It's for social conformists, right?

Beats aren't for the studio!! That doesn't mean the quality is horrific. Im not taking a Lexusto a drag-race, but I'll drive it everywhere else, because it's comfortable and it looks good.

You can hear my music in a movie theater near you. Not every studio does music for radio.

----------

Mate, it's not a cock size comparison contest ...

No, it's about your point of reference, if you have one.