Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iTunes obsolete?

Subscriptions are best. Nothing else makes sense.

I think the first service to offer HD movie downloads from all studios with a subscription will be the winner.
 
Sky Blue said:
huh? why would you want to rent music?
Click to expand...

People "rent" TV shows through subscription based services and "rent movies" from stores or cable/satellite providers all the time and are quite happy with this model. Given the choice between downloading $30 in music every month and having to maintain my own music library and just paying a $30 monthly subscription fee for unlimited access to a 5 Terabyte sized music collection I'll take the subscription based service any day of the week.
 
Sky Blue said:
huh? why would you want to rent music?
Click to expand...

From a subscription service, I want to be able to choose artists, albums, or songs from basically everything ever recorded, put them on my iPod or listen at home, and pay a reasonable fee for it. Why do I need to "own" (quotes because the ownership of music on a cd is pretty sketchy right now) an album if I have access to it at any time?

I don't know whether or not that will work as a business model, but that's what I want.😉
 
huck500 said:
Subscriptions are best. Nothing else makes sense.
...
Click to expand...
Try to find anyone who really cares about music to agree with you. 😉

Subscriptions only make sense if you are the kind of person that just wants whatever music the media is pushing lately, playing in the background while you drive/work/whatever.

If you care that little for the music itself, get a radio.
That's what they are for.
 
nope, saw it through last.fm; but, seeing as the link didn't work, i knew they'd be one on digg.

anyway i like ron paul and pictures of lolcats...
 
kudukudu said:
People "rent" TV shows through subscription based services and "rent movies" from stores or cable/satellite providers all the time and are quite happy with this model.
Click to expand...


That's because the two mediums are completely different.

There are very few films that you can bother watching more than once or twice... a conventional linear dramatic structure holds no surprises upon repeated viewing. Who needs to own most Hollywood movies? If you think that you'll be wanting to watch Aliens vs Predator for the 23rd time, you're kidding yourself.

Whereas music, your favourite albums, classic albums, can be listened to time and time again... this is why most, but not all, people prefer to own their music collections in one form or another, and why subscription models aren't that popular... especially as subscription models, as far as I know, aren't as comprehensive as many music fans would like. I like to know that wherever I am in the world, I can listen to Tetsu Inoue or Philip Glass on my iPod at any time I like, without having to pay monthly for the privilege... 🙂
 
anyway, back to the topic: if you really like music you wouldn't download low bandwidth versions of tunes off itunes; you'd buy cds or vinyl. the subscription model of last.fm is directly competing with downloads from itunes - and will very likely provide much better value for money.

at the moment downloads may win out, only because you can put them on your ipod, but the way things are going (ie. ipod touch, stuff hooked up to wifi all the time) the subscription-streaming model will eventually win out.
 
huck500 said:
Why do I need to "own" (quotes because the ownership of music on a cd is pretty sketchy right now) an album if I have access to it at any time?
Click to expand...

What you neatly ommit is that you are tied into to paying a monthly fee for the rest of your life in order to "own" this music.

shov said:
anyway, back to the topic: if you really like music you wouldn't download low bandwidth versions of tunes off itunes; you'd buy cds or vinyl.
Click to expand...

If you buy iTunes plus, then 256 AAC is every bit as good as CD. It's all subjective, but I highly doubt anyone would be able to tell the difference.
 
shov said:
anyway, back to the topic: if you really like music you wouldn't download low bandwidth versions of tunes off itunes; you'd buy cds or vinyl. the subscription model of last.fm is directly competing with downloads from itunes - and will very likely provide much better value for money.

at the moment downloads may win out, only because you can put them on your ipod, but the way things are going (ie. ipod touch, stuff hooked up to wifi all the time) the subscription-streaming model will eventually win out.
Click to expand...

Say what you will, but the majority of people on here, myself included, would NOT use a subscription model and would never use last.fm. If if works for you then that's good, but it will never become the standard and will never overtake download-based purchasing.
 
I use last.fm, but it's not a replacement for iTunes - it is a complementary service. It tracks all of my listening habits and suggests new music for me based on other users with similar musical tastes. "Just for You" and the Mini-store for iTunes have never gotten me anything good, but Last.fm will now allow me to find something that may be a good fit for me, then listen to a few songs or even a few albums before deciding whether I should buy the music or not. And even if I decide to not buy the music, the ad revenue gets passed on to the artist anyways so it's good karma. last.fm is a great service for finding new music, and I suggest using a program such as CoverSutra to scrobble your tracks for you.
 
elppa said:
What you neatly ommit is that you are tied into to paying a monthly fee for the rest of your life in order to "own" this music.



If you buy iTunes plus, then 256 AAC is every bit as good as CD. It's all subjective, but I highly doubt anyone would be able to tell the difference.
Click to expand...

God I love blanket statements by ppl who clearly have sub par hearing or crap audio equipment. 320 AAC is thin and brittle sounding compared to 1411kbps uncompressed audio. There goes your 256 AAC argument. And the reconstruction of the analogue waveform is anything but subjective. The more you approximate and truncate the quantification, the less accurate the waveform, and the more degraded the music. It's just a matter of who still gives a damn about quality or who can be bothered to detect it.
 
CIrawI3riCIge said:
God I love blanket statements by ppl who clearly have sub par hearing or crap audio equipment. 320 AAC is thin and brittle sounding compared to 1411kbps uncompressed audio. There goes your 256 AAC argument. And the reconstruction of the analogue waveform is anything but subjective. The more you approximate and truncate the quantification, the less accurate the waveform, and the more degraded the music. It's just a matter of who still gives a damn about quality or who can be bothered to detect it.
Click to expand...

Which isn't the vast majority of people. Because they just want to listen to their music and not go on some sort of audiophile superiority complex/"my ears are better than your ears" ego trip.
 
Virgil-TB2 said:
Try to find anyone who really cares about music to agree with you. 😉

Subscriptions only make sense if you are the kind of person that just wants whatever music the media is pushing lately, playing in the background while you drive/work/whatever.

If you care that little for the music itself, get a radio.
That's what they are for.
Click to expand...

I thought I explained this clearly, but I guess not. Let me try again.

Here's what I want from my subscription service:

- As close to every existing recording as possible... my taste in music is very diverse

- The ability to download/stream and listen to any of it at home or on a portable device

- A reasonable price... I'd say under $50/month would be good

I own about 900 cds, which I've purchased over the past 20 years or so. That's 3-4 cds a month, so $30-$40/month.

If I have the choice to spend $40 on cds or spend $50 on a service that gives me access to thousands or tens of thousands of recordings, probably more, I'd choose the service. Anyone who REALLY cares about music would, I think.😉

Lossless quality would be great, but I have no problem with some compression.

Saying that CDs are the best option today is pretty short-sighted, in my opinion. There are plenty of great artists that have very limited distribution, and plenty of old recordings that will never be distributed again because it wouldn't be profitable.
 
Blue Velvet said:
There are very few films that you can bother watching more than once or twice...
Click to expand...
I would beg to differ. Some movies can be watched over and over again. While others, one time is painful.

For those movies that one enjoys watching, it is very convenient to already have them. Note, I did not say all movies, just those one enjoys.
 
huck500 said:
I own about 900 cds, which I've purchased over the past 20 years or so. That's 3-4 cds a month, so $30-$40/month.

If I have the choice to spend $40 on cds or spend $50 on a service that gives me access to thousands or tens of thousands of recordings, probably more, I'd choose the service. Anyone who REALLY cares about music would, I think.😉
Click to expand...
Let's say I spend $40 on some CDs and you spend $50 on a subscription service. A month later your subscription service shuts down. I still have my CDs. What do you have?


Paying to stream music is just burning money, IMO.


Lethal
 
LethalWolfe said:
Let's say I spend $40 on some CDs and you spend $50 on a subscription service. A month later your subscription service shuts down. I still have my CDs. What do you have?


Paying to stream music is just burning money, IMO.


Lethal
Click to expand...

I'll just switch to another service. What will you do when a better medium supplants CDs? Buy all your favorite albums again? I already did that with LPs.

And it's all just burning money, let's face it...😛
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back