Time will tell. I hope, for the sake of my AAPL stock, that my concerns are not justified.
This guy says it a lot better than I do. Check out this youtube video. I like this guy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vq0_e5m3hg0
Time will tell. I hope, for the sake of my AAPL stock, that my concerns are not justified.
I am skeptical about streaming being the main reason for this possible transaction, too. Beats bought MOG for a reported 14 million two years ago. Paying 3.2 billion for a brand new streaming service seems out of whack. Apple is in a unique position to start their own streaming service for a lot less money already. It isn't like they are starting from scratch in the music industry.Im still not discounting the fashion aspect to this. Maybe Apple executives have decided to go all in on affordable luxury knowing theyll never be able to compete in the race to the bottom (e.g. Motorolas new $129 Moto E phone). In order to do that your products have to be stylish, have to be something people lust after. How much of that can be done with technology alone? Also if Apple has big plans in the wearable space (beyond just a smart watch or FuelBand type device) fashion will play a huge part. Perhaps Apple will use the Beats brand to kick start a wearables line? Im still skeptical about this deal and even more skeptical that its about Beats streaming service. Apple could have easily waved a ton of money at Jimmy Iovine to get him to join Apple and build the future of iTunes, negotiate content deals, etc.
In order to do that your products have to be stylish, have to be something people lust after. How much of that can be done with technology alone?
Im still skeptical about this deal and even more skeptical that its about Beats streaming service. Apple could have easily waved a ton of money at Jimmy Iovine to get him to join Apple and build the future of iTunes, negotiate content deals, etc.
A bunch of audio snobs criticizing the best selling (and best sounding) premium headphones on the market? Elitists need to get over themselves and judge Beats by their near flawless sound, not the name on the box.
Consumer_Reports said:In almost almost every category there are lower-priced models that offer the same, and sometimes better, sound quality. So if sound quality is your only consideration, choose one of those models rather than a Beats set.
And the fashion statement is that you look an utter tool for wearing them to 90% of folk. So its a lose lose really.
If - and it's a big if - they are buying Beats,
Since when is this an Apple concern?![]()
Originally Posted by Mattsasa View Post
What gap needs to be filled? Can someone explain to me how beats music is filling a gap?
Wait about 6 months AFTER this acquisition and then ask this same question again. The faithful will swing from shock, despair, junk, "I can't believe Apple would buy Beats" to coming up with a good-sized bag of spin why this was a brilliant move, how much better Beats equipment sounds now (even if it doesn't change one bit) and so on.
Example? Think of the collective view of AT&T before iPhone and then after. AT&T got an Apple halo effect from the "endorsement" by Apple. Same thing here.
Well I don't own any... but I think visually the design is very nice on the Beats line, quite possibly one of the best designed headphones, to each their own though, I guess.
Personally, I wouldn't spend 300+ dollars on a pair of consumer grade headphones of any kind, but if you've got some hard on to hate the Beats brand, that really is your problem, not headphone's owner.
Originally Posted by viacavour
Yap, the radio station model is pretty limited, and serves to upsell itunes songs. You cannot skip more than 6 songs within the hour.
The Beats model is more liberating. The user has more control.
Apple had to drag the record companies kicking and screaming into the single song purchase model. They have definitely had success recognizing what the consumer will ultimately want.
Its not just me, everyone is laughing at them and rolling eyes. Its like wearing a hat that reads "I'm a gullible idiot".
It's fashion... wouldn't the same apply to anyone who wears; Nike/Reebok sneakers, DKNY/Armani clothing, STARter Hats, Tommy Hilfiger/Sean John Jeans or god forbid carry around anproduct... that's just immature thinking.
Maybe you hide the Apple Logo of your computer and or iPhone?
I mean unless you wear all label free clothing and don't buy anything of brand name, you're really in the same boat as these so called "gullible idiots".
Well, no not really. Because we know that an Apple laptop really is the best laptop you can buy on the market. Where as clued up people know Beats by Dre headphones are absolutely horrible marketing crap. Thats where the gullibility comes from.
A few android users would disagree about your statement in regards to iPhones. Same goes people who use hard core gaming machines... I'm an all Apple user but there isn't a Mac that could compare with a hardcore gamer's Windows PC. That person would look at your or I as an "idiot" for paying the "apple tax".
It really is all relative.
Being a big headphone-phile since I was 18 I've tested close to 60 pairs in my time. The Beats don't sound "bad" they just don't sound "$300 good". But looking around IMO they are the sleekest looking things on the market today. No Sennheiser, Sony, Bose, nor Shure headphone has the sleek look as a Beats. Just as there is hardly a Windows PC that looks as good as a Mac... at least until they are copied.
Well I never mentioned iPhones and I said MacBooks, I was referring to Apples Macbook range which is easily the best laptop on the market.
Irregardless, this is nothing like an Android vs Apple type agreement or a vague matter of taste - these headphones are hugely ridiculed by the majority of people, you are perhaps not aware of it, maybe its not as much of a joke in LA. If you think the design or not of them is good/bad (i'm pretty in different, I think they're a bit plastic and tacky, but there are much better look based headphones out there like the Marleys) its irrelevant the laughs are at the expensive of the brand, like when delinquent youths in the UK all wore Burberry and now North Face. I'll stick to my Focal Spirit Professionals safe in the knowledge I have a fair superior headset
This always made me laugh though - http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c...8_168188973330550_515838466_n_zps66a01776.jpg
Uh - consumers are flocking to streaming music platforms, where Apple is the one kicking and screaming to hold onto their iTunes model which is floundering in comparison. So no, your statement of "definitely had success recognizing what the consumer will ultimately want" is not applicable here (and debatable in other areas -s ee: screen size).
That's why it is called "MacRumors"...
But why buying this overprized and underperforming headphones? if Apple wants good headphones there are better ones out there. Way better ones. So, its the streaming thing? Why not buying Pandora or Spotify then, the latter would make so much sense. Link with a button to buy directly from iTunes if you like a song, maybe with a small discount if a Spotify subscriber. Huge user base to win over to iTunes.
Or -why not changing iTunes into a streaming service as well, they have got all the music already, I guess need to renegotiate rights but which company would say to Apple "no, you didn't succeed in music business before so why should we..."
Maybe a rumor after all.
A bunch of audio snobs criticizing the best selling (and best sounding) premium headphones on the market? Elitists need to get over themselves and judge Beats by their near flawless sound, not the name on the box.