Apple Playing 'Catch Up' With Beats Acquisition as Music Labels Push for Subscription Services

rish said:
Why I've begun purchasing CD's. Downloading albums is still too expensive despite there being no physical packaging! I understand that you don't really own your downloads nor can you pass on your music collection as part of a will? At least my cd's can be passed on. I don't particularly want to pay for music I won't ever own but like the idea of radio as long as it's cost free.
Click to expand...

Never tried it before but I guess I can burn audio CDs with music from iTunes?

And iTunes can be cheaper sometimes. I've just bought Bob Dylan's album on iTunes for 6,99EUR (30PLN) but the price for the same "physical" album is about 10,5EUR (45PLN) in on-line stores (without shipping!).
 
Razeus said:
Apple is going to ruin this service.

Judging by iCloud and iTunes Match, Apple really doesn't get the cloud or cloud services.

People STILL have to download iTunes to their desktops just to listen to and buy music for pete sakes. Now wonder Google is killing them in cloud services. All of their software is accessible on any browser, any device.
Click to expand...

Actually iCloud and iTunes Match rocks but I agree about iTunes... it should be available via a browser. They'd get so many more people to use the service, including iTunes Radio. A lot of people listen to Pandora where I work on their laptops. Not a single one of them will download iTunes, sign up and offer their credit card information just to listen to iTunes Radio.
 
Rogifan said:
So is this Cook and the Board saying Eddy Cue either has too much on his plate or isn't the guy to take iTunes where it needs to go?
Click to expand...

I think those are difficult assumptions to make given what we know. For all we know Cue proposed the deal to Cook. Beats would still be under Cue's management so it doesn't lighten his load any and could be Cue recognizes the deal gets Apple where it needs to be. If it was the latter then it doesn't bode well for Cook either.

Rogifan said:
You really think what Beats negotiated would transfer to Apple?
Click to expand...

I do otherwise the deal isn't justifiable at $3.2b for an est. $1b company and it's going to be an interesting conference call at the end of the quarter.
 
nol2001 said:
if Apple launch a Spotify style service, I wonder will it be possible to export my spotify playlists into Apple's one?

not being able to take the 4,000 spotify songs could be a big barrier to leaving Spotify.
Click to expand...

Unless there's a significant cost difference, why would you change? Genuinely curious. With 4K worth of songs, you seem to think it's currently pretty good.
 
Nalmond92 said:
So apple get:
Streaming system
Improved audio in devices
Proper headphones (big headphones for a big screen)
All the Beats team - these guys know a lot about music - And loveine is very important in the industry
Click to expand...

I'd like to know what "improved audio in devices" actually means. Better DAC? Amp section? Or just more volume out of tinny device speakers with boosted highs and lows. Sometime tells me they aren't anywhere close to the very common (and relatively inexpensive) headphone amps with Wolfson DACs out there. But I honestly don't know...
 
69Mustang said:
Unless there's a significant cost difference, why would you change? Genuinely curious. With 4K worth of songs, you seem to think it's currently pretty good.
Click to expand...

I still use iTunes too (because I like Korean music and it's not on Spotify) so I would rather ditch Spotify and have all my music on iTunes.
 
Apple has truly lost it's edge.

Doesn't all the industry understand? CONSUMERS DO NOT WANT TO RENT MUSIC!!!!! THEY WANT TO OWN IT!!!!

I want to not only stream the music, but I want to download it and keep it forever, and ever, and ever, etc.

If Apple does add subscription, I hope it includes option to download the music and keep it forever without additional fee. That would be the killer feature. Best of all, DRM free.
 
Chupa Chupa said:
I think those are assumptions that can't be made. For all we know Cue proposed the deal to Cook. Beats would still be under Cue's domain so not nec. the former, and if it was the latter then it doesn't bode well for Cook either.



I do otherwise the deal isn't justifiable at $3.2b for an est. $1b company and it's going to be an interesting conference call at the end of the quarter.
Click to expand...

Well the rumors are the Beats leadership will report to Cook. We've also heard rumors that Jimmy Iovine will be a special advisor to Cook. Buzzfeed is reporting that Iovine will be responsible for music at Apple. That leads me to believe Cue will be giving up iTunes responsibility. What is interesting is it seems Cook is amassing a lot of special advisors. They don't show up as executives on Apple'n leadership page but they report directly to Cook. I'm curious as to what they're all doing and how it will all come together eventually.
 
Benjamins said:
for 3.2 billion you can get all the developers in India to make you an Android App within 1 hour. That includes QA testing.
Click to expand...

A) No you cant and B) can they make legally binding contracts that allows the app to stream music from all of the major music labels on multiple platforms?
 
Merode said:
Never tried it before but I guess I can burn audio CDs with music from iTunes?

And iTunes can be cheaper sometimes. I've just bought Bob Dylan's album on iTunes for 6,99EUR (30PLN) but the price for the same "physical" album is about 10,5EUR (45PLN) in on-line stores (without shipping!).
Click to expand...

You're right. However at least I own the music to pass on. Besides the new iMacs don't have a SuperDrive so have to transfer music via my mac book. Tedious at times.

Like the idea of Pandora.
 
Another weird side effect of this purchase .....

Should this go through, we'll have a bunch of HP laptops out there with Beats audio in them, proudly advertised with colored stickers on them.

So will Apple mail these people updated stickers with little white Apple logos on them and the red Beats logos inside the apples? Then the competitor's product can help advertise for Apple!
 
Depends on the consumer ....

I think you're right when it comes to true music fans or musicians themselves. But a large part of today's customer base are the teens and pre-teens who only want the ability to play whatever's trendy and cool, over and over for a few months, until it's no longer cool. Then they'd rather pretend they never had those songs in the first place, and they move on to something else.

Unfortunately, my pre-teen daughter fits this mold precisely. She *loves* her Beats audio subscription. Before that, it was just a big hassle for all of us when she'd fill up her iPhone or iPod with all the random material she said she wanted -- only to have to delete most of it out and replace it with other content, every 60 days or so. (Really, it was all pop and country music garbage that I wouldn't waste the disk space holding onto anyway!)


alchemistmuffin said:
Apple has truly lost it's edge.

Doesn't all the industry understand? CONSUMERS DO NOT WANT TO RENT MUSIC!!!!! THEY WANT TO OWN IT!!!!

I want to not only stream the music, but I want to download it and keep it forever, and ever, and ever, etc.

If Apple does add subscription, I hope it includes option to download the music and keep it forever without additional fee. That would be the killer feature. Best of all, DRM free.
Click to expand...
 
terrible waste of money

Spotify won the Streaming war

this is like buying an IceBox company after Refrigerators have been invented

anyone invest in Typewriter Ink Ribbons lately?

forget Tesla, lets buy some Coal plants instead

dumb dumb dumb :mad:
 
alchemistmuffin said:
Apple has truly lost it's edge.

Doesn't all the industry understand? CONSUMERS DO NOT WANT TO RENT MUSIC!!!!! THEY WANT TO OWN IT!!!!

I want to not only stream the music, but I want to download it and keep it forever, and ever, and ever, etc.

If Apple does add subscription, I hope it includes option to download the music and keep it forever without additional fee. That would be the killer feature. Best of all, DRM free.
Click to expand...

I find it baffling to me people can post stuff like this. Within the very article you are replying to, it indicates what's common knowledge: As a share of total music revenue, individual track and album sales are steadily dropping, while subscription music service sales are rising. And it's not difficult to see why: It's such an incredibly better value one you get over the need to "own" something. Besides: what do you even own? Within the license document you agree to by running iTunes, it explicitly forbids you from selling or transferring you music to anyone. Not that licensing language is going to stop anyone from doing so, but stop pretending you "own" anything when it comes to digital music. You own a perpetual license; nothing more. So it comes down to: $10 for one album, or $10 for a month's access to all the albums you can eat? Which do you think makes sense to "most" consumers?

There are totally legitimate emotional reasons to want to have a CD or hold a rare record album in your hands, or to pass a favorite album on to your kids or whatever, but those are niche reasons that don't justify an entire sales model that's non-sustainable. For most consumers, subscription access to music makes practical and financial sense.
 
Rogifan said:
Well the rumors are the Beats leadership will report to Cook. We've also heard rumors that Jimmy Iovine will be a special advisor to Cook. Buzzfeed is reporting that Iovine will be responsible for music at Apple. That leads me to believe Cue will be giving up iTunes responsibility. What is interesting is it seems Cook is amassing a lot of special advisors. They don't show up as executives on Apple'n leadership page but they report directly to Cook. I'm curious as to what they're all doing and how it will all come together eventually.
Click to expand...

Special Advisor is like a Good Will Ambassador. He'll be the one, not Cue, to be the face of Apple to the music industry b/c he has a relationship. That I can see and would be a smart move.

I have to doubt Apple is going to let some outsider non-Apple newbies come in and wrest control of iTunes from Cue. That's a recipe for disaster. Cue and Ive will be overseeing the integration into iTunes. Also I'd imagine if Beats reported to Cook and Ive had no direct control it would not make him a happy camper. We've already seen one territory fight this year involving him.
 
:confused: So what happened to the Lala streaming music purchase a few years ago? I thought Apple was working on doing something like that. Also - isn't iTunes radio also fulfilling this need? Must be for the brand recognition. I've never used their service, but from what I've read it's nothing spectacular.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top