Napster Feature on iTunes?

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by mrogers9, Oct 29, 2003.

  1. mrogers9 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2003
    #1
    Napster offers unlimited downloading of their entire catalogue for only $9.95 a month with the caveat that you can't burn it to a CD (that would cost an additional $.99 per song). I like this feature and hope Apple with come up with something similar, any idea if something like this might be in the works?
     
  2. FightTheFuture macrumors 6502a

    FightTheFuture

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Location:
    that town east of ann arbor
    #2
    Re: Napster Feature on iTunes?

    i forgot about the $9.95 a month. that is not good for ITMS users. but then again - alot of people dislike paying $9.95 a month for many things. do you know anything else about it? ie... if you have to sign up for the $9.95/month thing for a year?

    apple really has to be aggressive in marketing ITMS now, Napster has been a recognizable name to many people for years, and could easily become more household and gain more user base with their new jukebox/music store.
     
  3. cb911 macrumors 601

    cb911

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    Location:
    BrisVegas, Australia
    #3
    i think people are going to be really concearned with all the protection and stuff on mp3's now.

    people will want to always do whatever they want with their mp3's, they did buy them after all.

    Napster sure sounds like it's up to taking on iTMS though, but somehow i think Apple will make sure iTMS stays a strong contender in the market. ;)
     
  4. LethalWolfe macrumors G3

    LethalWolfe

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #4
    I'm not a fan of paying extra to be able to burn to CD.


    Lethal

    EDIT: Also, does that unlimited 9.95/month let you download actual files to your HDD, or does it just let you get streams of the songs?
     
  5. cb911 macrumors 601

    cb911

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    Location:
    BrisVegas, Australia
    #5
    you'd better be able to download the songs, or else what's the point? wouldn't that be basically paying for an internet radio station?
     
  6. mrogers9 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2003
    #6
    Its very little like a internet radio station. I don't know of any radio station where you can set the playlist and listen to songs in any order or however many times you like. This appeal to people like myself who don't burn many albums, but simply enjoy listening to what I want when I want while I am online (which is quite often). As, for the earlier poster's question, Napster says you dowbload the songs or stream them.
     
  7. stoid macrumors 601

    stoid

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2002
    Location:
    So long, and thanks for all the fish!
    #7
    I think that the 9.95 a month will turn off nearly everyone who wants to burn music to CD. Is the 9.95 optional? If I could pay 9.95 a month to listen to any song, OR get 30 second samples for free I think that would be much better than making the 9.95 a month mandatory.
     
  8. mrogers9 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2003
    #8
    Stoid, that is how they have it set up, i.e. you have to option to purchase songs for $.99 (which come with the 30 second preview) or you can pay $9.95 to have access to their entire catalogue without the ability to burn to CD, or you can do both. It seems to me, aside from app layout and song format, Napster does basically everything iTunes does plus more. I am a PC iTunes user and I love it, I just hope they add a feature like this is the next update.
     
  9. scem0 macrumors 604

    scem0

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    back in NYC!
    #9
    sorry apple - napsters service is a lot better....

    for me at least.

    Wow - thats a ****load of music for really cheap.

    scem0
     
  10. arn macrumors god

    arn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2001
    #10
    True... but once you stop subscribing you lose all your music.

    I'm not saying it's a bad system... for some people it's probably perfect. But remember, in year, you've paid $120 and have nothing you can take with you.

    arn
     
  11. macnews macrumors 6502a

    macnews

    Joined:
    May 12, 2003
    Location:
    Idaho
    #11
    I agree with ARN. It is also the reason why Apple said they didn't go with a subscription based service. I hate recurring fees and bills. Even if I had the option to turn it off it might be nice some time but why even turn it on? I mean I can't burn thus I would also assume I couldn't download to a MP3 player. So the music is "stuck" on the computer. Maybe when the whole home entertainment system is better integrated I would go for this option, but not until then.
     
  12. mrogers9 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2003
    #12
    Yeah, but don't you see that Napster offers both, not just a subscription service; so everyone’s needs are taken care of. Believe me, for a lot of people they would much rather go the subscription route. Those other PC serve ices were too messy/confusing, Napster however, like iTunes, is cleaner and more user friendly. And for Apple’s apparent target market, $120/year is not unreasonable (hell, the PowerBooks can cost more than $2,500), I have already purchased that many songs from my PC iTunes. Now, being that I don't burn many albums and I don't use an iPod/MP3 player, the Napster solution is better for me...plain and simple. Basically Napster is appealing to everyone that Apple is appealing to (quality of Mac products aside) and an additional group of people as well; regardless of how large or small it is, Apple could and should be trying to target these people too. Remember I am not asking that they change their system of sales, rather that they offer more options, this would be of little cost to them and would increase the amount of people exposed to this great Apple app (again, I am a PC user)…Of note however, I have read that Steve Jobs intended iTunes for PC to mainly be a sales pitch for the PC iPods, if this is truly the case, then I must admit it would be of little advantage to sell a service which does not allow the transfer of songs to the iPod.
     

Share This Page