Apple Aiming to End iTunes Music Downloads in Two Years [Update: Apple Says 'Not True']

[iamgalt]

Like so many others on this post, I prefer to own my music, and not lease it. It's bad enough that software is already going in this direction (Adobe, Autodesk), but if this music change goes through, it won't be long after that, that the movies and TV shows do the same. the entire idea of property and ownership is disappearing, and that's a sad thing.

BTW, I hope hope no one enjoys listening to music on planes, because from my experience, streaming music to a device while flying on a jet doesn't have the greatest results.

 

[sw1tcher]

The death of music ownership. The biggest iTunes betrayal yet.

How about... I BUY MY MUSIC, AND I OWN IT FOREVER, OKAY? STREAMING IS WORTHLESS TO ME! IF I WANTED TO STREAM, I'D JUST GO TO YOUTUBE AND PLAY WHATEVER I WANT!

If you've been buying and downloading music from iTunes, you never legally owned the music. You should have been buying CDs and vinyl records if you wanted to own your music.

See: http://www.zdnet.com/article/who-owns-your-digital-downloads-hint-its-not-you/

Seriously, I'd like to OWN the music I pay for. I don't own anything with streaming.

Paying for music =/= owning music.

 

[jscooper22]

So music will start only being available via download, aka "broadcast". Too bad there isn't device you could attach to the receiver to record whatever sound came out of it. I think someone should invent something, some sort of "cassette" maybe, that would contain a magnetic media on which sound could be recorded. The media could be a long strip wound around spools, kind of like tape. Hmmmmm.....

 

[69Mustang]

..and hello piracy.

If I cant buy my own music, I'll probably then just pirate it.
This is a ridiculously bad move. Seriously who comes up with the b.s? I mean 'innovation'?

Piracy is not the answer. If, and that if comes with a big dose of 'this really doesn't make sense", Apple did discontinue music dl's, you could still purchase music elsewhere. Apple isn't/wasn't the only avenue for purchasing. O.R., don't be that guy, man.

 

[dtrj787]

The thing is not every album and artist on iTunes is apart of Apple Music. That means that I won't have access to certain music. Apple can not force an artist to stop selling albums to just stream them.

Edit: Plus think of the data costs. Wifi is available, but not everywhere.

 

[El Cabong]

Apple does not care. You will be in the minority while the vast majority will be happy with a streaming subscription based model.

As long as it isn't Apple Music.

 

[ike1707]

Well, I guess it's back to buying on CD and importing. *sigh*

 

[samcraig]

First of all, you people saying you want to "own" your music better realize that technically you are just licensed the music. You don't actually own any music unless you make it.

I travel frequently, and I don't really wanna pay money for wifi on a plane, so I'd rather have my music library local.

Valid - however I have yet to hear of a music label sending an army out to remove a song or disc from people's music library. Conversely - I have heard several stories of songs/albums in people's iTunes library being removed/deleted/replaced with an alternate.

When people say they want to own their music. That means they want to maintain possession of it. You know that tho

 

[Black Magic]

yes but you have to pay 10$ for an album, so 10 albums are 100$ and 100 albums are 1000$ and so on....with this you pay 10$ per month and you have unlimited albums every day for 10$/month

1. $10 adds up overtime.
2. You never own it. If you ever hit a rough patch and lose your job, Apple Music bill will be one of the first things to go. You will lose all your music along with it.
3. Streaming quality may not be as good as the quality of your local library versions.

 

[LordQ]

Do you want piracy? Because that's how you get piracy.

 

[neuropsychguy]

..and hello piracy.

If I cant buy my own music, I'll probably then just pirate it.
This is a ridiculously bad move. Seriously who comes up with the b.s? I mean 'innovation'?

I'm sorry, but that's a completely ridiculous reaction. "I can't buy music from Apple and I refuse to 'rent' it so I'll just 'steal' it instead."

/I put steal in quotes because it's not really the correct word because obtaining a digital copy of a song through "piracy" doesn't necessarily take anything away from the owners of the song license unless the "pirate" does so instead of otherwise compensating the song license holders. In other words, it's only "theft" from the license holder(s) if you were going to legally acquire the song but didn't because you "pirated" instead.

 

[thespacekid]

Probably for the best since Apple can't keep any iCloud storage working properly. I guess those that are not in constant connection with the Internet won't be using iTunes.

 

[reyalP]

Just another indication that music today sucks so bad that nobody is buying it!

 

[0029937]

"I don't really wanna pay money for wifi on a plane, so I'd rather have my music library local.

And you can with streaming services like Spotify, Apple Music... offline playlists.

 

[BGarza]

Since the collapse of CDs, the biggest struggle for small touring bands today is finding a way to sell their album in a way that instantaneously puts it on the customer's iPhone or Android. If it doesn't end up on their phone, within iTunes or the Android equivalent, there's a 99% chance it'll never be heard.

At least asking fans to buy an album on iTunes meant earning 70% of the $5-10 album price. Telling an audience "Hey everybody, go to Apple Music and stream our songs as much as you can" is total horse ****.

 

[chrisbru]

I don't buy this rumor. Why on earth would Apple do this... it simply doesn't make any sense. I understand streaming is 'popular' however I don't know anyone in my circle who actually pays for a streaming service.

Anecdotal evidence isn't really good. In my circle, everyone subscribes to a streaming service. Very few buy full albums, and only some buy individual tracks.

 

[TrueBlou]

They are not going to actively pursue the disbandment of a service which is generating them a significant amount of revenue, to do so makes no sense whatsoever. Sales may be declining, but not to a point where it's not with operating the service.

When the cost of running the traditional iTunes Store gets to a point where the revenue doesn't give a significant margin over the operating costs. Then they'll look at shutting it down.

No company in their right mind would think, you know what, we're making too much money, let's get rid of something profitable.

Although with the decisions Apple has been making for the past while anything is possible.

 

[ike1707]

Someday? On an infinite time scale? Anything could happen. Dubious rumor for now. Maybe even a hardball negotiating leak of some kind.

But it wouldn't kill me, since Amazon (or any) MP3s work fine with iTunes. I would, however, miss Apple's MP4 quality-vs-filesize.

I'd still use and love iTunes for managing my playlists, and I still wouldn't become a streamer I'll keep my library of Apple songs—which have been DRM-free for ages, and have always had music from other download sources mixed in.

oh well, back to CD or Amazon downloads

Yep. Probably CD for me just for importing options and sound quality.

 

[thespacekid]

WHAAAAAAATTTTTTT!!!!!!!??!?!?!?!??! That is the STUPIDEST thing I have ever heard! I don't want streaming is not for me.

You mean you don't have 24/7 internet connectivity and/or want to repeatedly give Apple money to be able to listen to your music?

 

[nt5672]

Okay fine, I'll buy my music elsewhere. I have zero loyalty to iTunes.

Me too. It seems Apple can only do one thing at a time.

 

[VulchR]

I'd like to know what Apple is smoking if they think I am going to pay a monthly fee for streaming on top of the money I'd have to pay for the bandwidth for streaming. Where I am 4G has hardly started, and even 3G is difficult to get some places. I hopping this is just a bad rumor, but if Apple go this route I'd seriously look at alternatives. Apple's quality control has been going downhill, the user experience is still primitive (want to see the full files names in Finder? you can't set this to be the default), and if the rumor is true, they want all to pay month for music.

And let me guess, the streaming will come in two flavours: a cheap one with ads, and a premium one without for twice the price...

Screw that. Bad if the rumor is true.

What's next, streaming apps? Streaming OS's? All for a monthly fee? I so loathe Google, but if push comes to shove....

 

[sputnikv]

you can't push these ideas so long that ISPs and carriers lag on improving their networks and their pricing!

 

[xmichaelp]

Honestly, this is fine with me. It might be hard to imagine but streaming will take over even more than it does today. It won't be as shocking in 2-4 years.

All itunes music is DRM free and can be reuploaded to Apple servers anyways.

 

[jpn]

the writing of the article is a bit unclear.
does this article claim that iTunes (purchased) downloads AND also apple Music (subscription based) downloads also would not be possible? therefore you could not listen to apple Music if off line?
i subscribe to apple Music. and would never go back to an iTunes purchased model. but, i do download the music i want from apple Music. there are just too many places i want to listen when i am not on line.
i get the part about various markets being in a different place as to streaming service mentality, but unlimited data plans needed to always be streaming the same music? not ready for that.

 

[Rogifan]

Ehhm... So, what about things that are not available on Apple Music? Prince, Adele's 25, the new Beyonce album? Apple is seriously considering losing this market?

I would imagine Apple made a boatload of money off of Prince and Bey over the past month. Why give that up?