Solid?
No, gaseous nonsense from someone who hasn't the least clue what he's on about. No facts, no observable connection to any aspect of the market that I'm aware of, and no notion of how this is all going to spin out....
Colour me unimpressed.
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 Analyst Meeting Conference Call
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Solid?
No, gaseous nonsense from someone who hasn't the least clue what he's on about. No facts, no observable connection to any aspect of the market that I'm aware of, and no notion of how this is all going to spin out....
Colour me unimpressed.
I agree; what a crock. This isn't about the labels and Apple, it's about the labels and the artists. As the digital distribution technology becomes the dominant way in which music is sold, then the artists have the very real possibility of bypassing the major labels altogether. Apple is a major facilitator is this transition, not a roadblock. Anyway, that's how I see it.
If you follow Andrew's articles, he's against DRM at all costs. He'd really like to undercut iTMS in the hopes that the labels would collapse (or at least concede) without access to the new distribution channel.
He's got some good reasons for concern (not least of which is the obscene prices labels can charge when they control the distribution, as they continue to do through DRM), but this article tells me he's kinda gone over the edge. His proposed solution would cause more problems than it would solve, in my opinion.
I wouldn't call this one solid. Some of his earlier articles, maybe...
I found this comment rather disturbing. Greater efficiency in logistics and production usually leads to higher profits and greater customer satisfaction. This efficiency does not need to come at the cost of creativity of design or product quality; in fact both can be enhanced by an increased ability to make rapid design changes. Apple should worry about efficiency.
Adding ogg to the iPod might be useful from a marketing perspective. It could be a selling point for some consumers who would count up the number of formats supported when comparing products. Thus both novices and audiophiles would feel comfortable that the support is there even if they seldom or never use it.
The way I took Jobs comments was not that Apple was unconcerned about "manufacturing or logistical efficiency," far from it, but rather Jobs confidence that no one else could "beat" Apple in this regard. He's a cocky SOB, but he knows where the money and attention to detail must go.
PhotoPod!
I know! I know!
I smell it in Steve's words.
He's talking about digital hub stategies, new digital lifestyle developments and the limitations of iPhoto...
There's going to be photo album functionality in next year's iPods!
Maybe photos can be imported from cameras directly via USB 2.0.
Maybe there's even going to be iPhoto for Windows!
I know! I know!
I smell it in Steve's words.
He's talking about digital hub stategies, new digital lifestyle developments and the limitations of iPhoto...
There's going to be photo album functionality in next year's iPods!
Maybe photos can be imported from cameras directly via USB 2.0.
Maybe there's even going to be iPhoto for Windows!