Why not? Beats is owned by Apple and will be branded as Apple's failure if the products are subpar. So story seems appropiate for this forum.
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 Notifies Service Provider Network of Upcoming Support for Beats Products
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why not? Beats is owned by Apple and will be branded as Apple's failure if the products are subpar. So story seems appropiate for this forum.
you were at least two posts too late with this...
Please stop making sense. You are angering the trolls and the simple minded..
Mergers and Acquisitions
Mergers are not acquisitions and acquisitions are not mergers. While the two words are often uttered in the same breath and share many similarities, they cannot be used interchangeably as they are in this article.
Mergers are not acquisitions and acquisitions are not mergers. While the two words are often uttered in the same breath and share many similarities, they cannot be used interchangeably as they are in this article.
I'd probably say I'm one of the people on this site that doesn't care about Beats....BUT, I'd probably say that more people here care about Beats than you think. I'm willing to bet more people here than you think own a pair and use them daily.
Beats are one of the most (if not thee most) successful pair of "premium" headphones to ever hit the market, so don't sell them short in terms of who cares about them.
Beats was acquired because the beats app. not the headphones.
but please do go on.
Because Klipsch isn't a major player. Apple is focused on the mass market (at least in mobile). A major part of the Beats acquisition was due to the market share that Beats has in the target demographic for music.
Dude, you're not allowed to have a rational thought that makes sense here! (I agree completely)
Do you really think Apple buys a piece of software for several billions of dollars? It is about market share, both of the headphone market share AND beats community.
Also look at Apple's actions since the acquisition. The focal point of their efforts with regard to Beats have been on the headphones and not on Beats Music. What does that tell you about their priorities?
Because Klipsch doesn't have a streaming service and sports megastars aren't wearing them.
----------
This is what I meant to say.
Because Kilpsch doesn't make highly over priced garbage like Beats by Dre and audio is more important than image to Kilpsch.
First problem will be fixed with the Genius Bar. As for the sound, we'll see what happens. They sounded like crap a couple years ago, now they've improved to average. The price definitely needs to come down though.
I wholeheartedly agree with you about this.
I wholeheartedly DISAGREE with you about this.
How does service and support handle complaints of flabby, bloated bass; non-existent mids and shrill highs?
It seems like you like to talk about something you have no knowledge of.
If it wasn't for the Beats Streaming App, they wouldn't of bought the company.
iTunes sales was dropping and Dr. Dre got a good deal from arists/record companies.
There were plenty of articles about this months ago before they made the purchase.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I wonder how many people bashing Samsung phones have actually tried them out extensively and how many are just repeating what they've heard others say online.
I wonder how many people bashing Android have actually tried it out extensively and how many are just repeating what they've heard others say online.
I wonder how many people bashing <everything else not Apple but somewhat competing with something from Apple> have actually tried them out extensively and how many are just repeating what they've heard others say online.
I wonder how many people bashing iPhone 6 & 6+ (right into the launch) have actually tried them out extensively and how many are just repeating what they've heard others say online. Where are those bigger pants, man purses, etc. to carry those >10M units sold?
Etc. There's certainly a valid point in the comment but it should definitely go both ways.
many people are not capable of identifying good frequency separation - this is true. in a similar way, not everyone can visually separate reds from greens. listening to these people talk about how strawberries are hard to find in a strawberry patch while discrediting those who can actually see the difference by saying 'to each their own' is somewhat frustrating.
so no - not everyone is an audiophile, but those who are speak up and get shot down. there's a huge difference between seeing how various smartphones fit into one's lifestyle - it takes usage, consideration, and a duration to form an opinion. with audio quality, it's different. you try a pair of headphones on at the store, and you immediately know its quality, as long as you can determine the audio's source isn't faulty. this is achieved by trying on the next pair of headphones from the same source. bam. you either CAN tell it sounds like ****, or you can't. those who can't, tend to buy fashionable headphones in lieu of ones that are UNANIMOUSLY determined to be of better quality, merely because it sounds better than what they're used to.
that's pretty much it. audiophiles aren't really speaking to preference. we know some people like a lot of bass, or lower highs, etc. the argument usually goose-chases around a fixed point - that being: sound quality is different from preference. and lots of uninformed (or 'colorblind') like to mash up the two.
lol but they are, my daughter works in a top department store where they have sold them for years , she said they have more returns than any other, they either break really easily or people complain of the awful sound.. It's cheap speaker drivers with some active EQ to compensate. Dunno who in their right mind would buy them, unless they like to pose.
Please explain where you got your superior knowledge then..
Plenty of articles do not make a confirmation of an acquisition strategy. Most of these articles (and I have read most of them) are copies of each other and written by people that do not have any knowledge on Merger and Acquisition Strategy.
People like to make assumptions about the strategy behind the beats acquisition, but the reality is that the market share of Beats Music is small at best (and hence also the value of the underlying contracts) and that the software at the base of it is generic and easily copied. The real capital is in the hardware market share that Beats has in the target demographics that Apple is focusing on.
In addition you can easily determine where Apple's priorities lie, by analyzing where they put their effort now: pushing Beats headphones.
Do you have anything more substantial to offer besides "plenty of articles"?
the App and Dres music connections was the deal breaker. Not the headphones.
If you read articles then you'd know.