Apple to Overhaul iTunes Service?

[jaw04005]

Meh. This will be a “value add” to supplement iTunes’ current model. Apple is not going to change over completely to anything. They’re essentially going to get their hand in another pie.

Personally, I think whatever extended service comes out of the LaLa acquisition will be designed primarily for iPhone customers to stream new music to their device and for people that want to listen to their iTunes collection at work.

I wouldn’t be surprised if beginning next year you still have to purchase tracks for download, but iTunes will also store an online 128 kbps copy in a digital locker for streaming purposes on a revamped iTunes.com.

It’s likely Apple has been working on this for a while — and LaLa was just icing on the cake.

Unlike what Microsoft is doing, I think Apple will stay clear of the traditional subscription model (unfortunately) and use this new hybrid system to maintain a hold on their dominant market position.

 

[Lesser Evets]

I like the old system of getting music, not this crazy new fangled crap with cloud computing.

It was better when you walked 5 miles through the snow, without shoes on because they were too expensive to wear, to get to the grammophone shop. They usually only had a couple hundred albums and you would buy one with your few pennies, rush home, and listen to that superior sound coming from a tin horn. Oh, how we treasured the little we had in those days.

Luddites unite!

 

[*LTD*]

Not to worry, Apple won't ruin iTunes the way JJ Abrams and his corporate monkey cabal ruined the Star Trek franchise, for example.

Steve et al have been at Apple's helm for over ten years. Just trust them to continue to put the User Experience first. That includes owning your music. There will be no iTunes "Reboot", just iTunes: The Next Generation.

Relax.

 

[Schroedinger]

I agree with Jaw.

What is Apple's motivation here? They are trying to find ways to add value to itunes store purchases. that motivated the recent LP format they released. They recognize that they are still competing with free, not with other stores.

I imagine that iTunes will keep a cloud copy that can be streamed to any device or computer after you log in, but only music purchased from itunes. Unlike lala, your entire library isn't put in the cloud.

I'm also guessing that this won't be an additional service, it will be part of iTunes for all consumers. Before you scream cries of there isn't enough bandwidth, remember that on devices with local storage we wouldn't be streaming. Your computer has a local copy. Your normal ipod has a local copy. Your iphone/ipod touch/Tablet/AppleTV has a local copy and can access anything not local that was purchased from iTunes.

But imagine being on a strange computer and being able to log in and stream your jams (god I'm not hip). Imagine the ability to not store anything locally on constant wifi devices like appletv or a tablet or a secondary laptop. Imagine iTunes home sharing that doesn't require your computers to be on the same local network.

Feel like spending 99¢ yet?

 

[punkboy]

I prefer to own my music and I am also not a fan of the cloud idea. Has everyone forgotten T-Mobiles Sidekick failure a few months back? I hope Apple does not go to a streaming service.

 

[Michael73]

Here's an interesting idea...

What about somehow melding the idea of a streaming service and Mobile Me? I'm thinking that Apple would love more people to sign up for this $99/yr service but has a perpetual problem of explaining its value. However, if they created a streaming service where you could rent songs and they lived in an iTunes-like app on Mobile Me the value might be more compelling.

 

[Povilas]

I have checked a map, and there is a good chunk of Russia in Europe. BTW, I'm not in the US or Europe. My problem is with people claiming that everything is better in their part of the continent than the average of the US.

Yes, there is, but the middle of nowhere is in ASIA and not Europe Who claims that everything? This is about mobile reception and in this case there is no room for discussion

 

[Thomas2006]

I doubt that the local download model will be made obsolete. Instead I see this as a way of moving the iTunes Music store out of iTunes. I for one think this is a great idea. Not only will an online store be more accessible but iTunes will get a much needed trim. Remember when iTunes was just for playing music?

Yes, move the iTunes Store and the radio stations to the internet and return the iTunes application to what it was in the beginning, an organizer and player that can sync your content to your iPod/iPhone.

Hopefully, Apple will use this opportunity to push HTML5 specifications so any browser that supports HTML5 can be used to access the iTunes store. Since we can get music without DRM, a web-based iTunes store will let people using Linux/*BSD to make purchases.

Finally, let us not forget the tablet Apple will be releasing next year. We should see ebooks, magazines, newspapers, and other "written" content become available.

 

[roland.g]

^^^
Way to force your opinion.


I absolutely love this idea. Obviously, iTunes wouldn't be "stream only" — because there's plenty of people with Classics, Nanos, and Touches who would be without music. But what if it meant that you didn’t have to store everything on your computer. What if it meant you could save all that space on your hard drive (or on your iPhone) by putting stuff into the "cloud"? How about being able to store your music online, and download a copy of a song onto your device if you really want it?

I would love to have music streamed to my iPhone over 3G — saves space on my device for other things. I would love to have music streamed to my Mac via the Internet — once again, it saves space for other things.

Imagine if you could take all the gigabytes of music stored on your hard drive, and suddenly get it all back. Plus, because the music wouldn't actually be stored on any of your devices, backing it up becomes a thing of the past (provided that Apple keeps it safe and sound on their servers, which I'm sure they would).

Perhaps this means that if I actually want to "own" the track on my physical hardware, I could just download a copy off the server… to use in my iMovie, or iPhoto slideshow, etc.

I would jump on this in a heartbeat. Now, will they do the same for movies?

I can already stream any music in my library that is not already on my iPhone to my iPhone with Simplify over wifi or 3G. The problem I see with a model like this is that people often want access to their content when they do not have access to the internet.

 

[BJMRamage]

PulpTunes allows me to stream my iTunes Library anywhere in the world with an internet connection! (FREE)

I cannot access it at work due to a firewall blockage-though i can see that happening to Apple's streaming service, as it is with all/most other streaming services.


I dislike the idea of not owning songs/videos/whatever from iTunes. I like the idea of possibly accessing my songs from anywhere, but NOT with paying an extra fee/monthly fee. to some renting music is great, not to me. i grew up in a different time where buying things meant more than having things briefly and paying for the brevity.

 

[SeaFox]

Such a move, however, would be a big departure for Apple who has previously insisted that customers wish to own their music. This on-demand streaming raises issues of long term ownership as well as technical issues if rights holders or providers go out of business in the future.

Not to mention those of us who want our music in a high quality format and bitrate and have usage caps on our Internet service. This change in service means redownloading the track every time I wanted to hear it in effect.

And duh the record companies like it, the less they actually have to give you for your money the better. Now they aren't even having to let you have possession of a digital file, you're merely buying permission to listen to the song now. This is one step closer to the jukebox "pay-per-play" model they really want (they'll have your credit card on file for charging automatically, of course).

 

[gloss]

Frankly, I'd be fine if iTunes was rejiggered to be something like Rhapsody, where I have the option of paying $10 a month or so for streaming music that I can copy to my iPhone if I like, and if I'd like to buy the music for local storage I could do so at normal pricing.

I'd rather pay $10 a month to sample a lot of music and then buy the stuff that's actually worthwhile than spend $10 a pop on CDs that might be hit-or-miss. And it's certainly easier than piracy.

 

[jesuscandle]

I think a big part of the confusion here is that few people have used lala.

I like the service quite a bit and have never bought a single "streaming only" track. Everything I've purchased from lala has been a high-quality, DRM free MP3.

Lala automatically adds the MP3 to my itunes library (local storage) AND enables me to play that track as much as a want from the cloud.

Repeat: You download the file AND you get the streaming track. It's "both", not "either / or."

Lala also lets you get one play free of tracks you DON'T own. Obviously, I wish you could get more (ie - something for nothing), but it's still a great way to sample artists.

If this was all built into iTunes, it would be WIN WIN WIN. My big "problem" with lala is basically "why listen to it in the web browser when my itunes / ipod is right here?" Admittedly - "unlimited" storage in a mobile context is one answer to that question.

AND none of you Luddites would have to give up downloading actual music files.

 

[Fishrrman]

"Burn CDs? I stopped doing that in 2004. Come on...really?"

Some of us still like to have our music in physical form. Especially us older folks. Behind me I have boxes with over a thousand home-created CD's. I don't own an iPod (or any other "music player"). I'll probably never buy an iPod (I don't like the way iTunes tries to "control" one's music library). I _might_ buy an mp3 player someday (Sansa Fuze looks like what I'm after). But even if I do get one, I want "physical control" of my music and mp3 files.

I've never bought a song from iTunes - not one, not ever.

"You need to embrace the change and accept it. Buying CDs and then having to transfer a particular song from device to device to listen to it is absurd and very old school."

Some of us don't care for "change" all that much, especially change for change' sake. And what is wrong with "old school" per se?

 

[Cinnabar]

I, for one, think that this a good move for Apple, and one that I'd been expecting them to introduce for a while. It's all about choice isn't it? They are not going to do away with being able to pay for music that you download and keep. That would be foolish. Instead, for those people who want to listen to a lot of new music - say 30, 40, 50 new albums a month - this is a perfect model. Imagine how much you would have to fork out to make that possible under normal consitions? You pay your subscription and then stream as much as you like at home, but you are also able to temporarily store files for listening to on your iPod/iPhone on the move. If you like one new album a lot, you may even consolidate your collection by buying it permanently. Most people aleady do this through Spotify, but the process could be simplified if everything happens direct through iTunes (an files would play in the dedicated iPod format and not through the Spotify app which doesn't allow you to use other apps whilst plugged in).

Now for the same service for films...

 

[Becordial]

the "gamechanging" iTablet hasn't even been built yet and you're already casually talking about taking it into the bath? Sacrilege!

That was pretty funny!

 

[ctdonath]

Past implications of the iTablet indicate a reliance on "cloud"-type services due to the device not having enough resident space to store everything a user wants, and local storage forcing a user to, well, deal with local storage.

One downside to the current online-purchase model is that you do indeed have to take local possession of the data, and then throw it around as needed. I'd like to have my whole >40GB music collection on my 8GB iPod, but obviously that won't fit; if instead there were a service to provide legal ownership yet refer to a copy somewhere else, I could virtually have all my music with little more than a catalog on my iPod which streams everything I "own" from the Lala server. Arrange for ownership, then stream it remotely instead of possess it locally.

Kinda like "owning" investments in a financial sense: for all legal purposes I may own something, but eTrade and Fidelity handle all the dirty work of actual possession.

 

[yoppie]

I think this would be a good move for Apple. Since hearing the news of Apple acquiring Lala, I've tried out the site and have uploaded my entire music library and think it's great. I also purchased a $5 Napster card to check out what a subscription service would be like and it's pretty good too. The only thing I don't like about Napster is that I can't take the music on the go (other than the 5 MP3s they let you download).

I used to think I wanted to "own" the music but this short trial experience has shown me otherwise. The sweet spot for me would be a Zune Pass like service. I can get all the music I want + stream it anywhere + can take it on the go on my iPods. If Apple does this, I'll be sold.

To those of you who want to "own" the music, you can keep on doing that. I'm sure Apple won't scrap that model anytime soon. We're just asking for choice here. Let us "rent" if we'd like that instead.

 

[peterdevries]

Not interested in streaming services. Don't like the idea where you pay £9.99 (Spotify) per month and don't get to keep the songs.

Good luck to Apple if they're going down this path. Spotify at least is doing well.

Your glass is mostly half empty right?

I cannot see Apple discontinuing the current model and substituting it with Lala's. Most likely it will be an extension to the current functionality with cloud services for always on-line devices, such as iMacs (who has one that isn't connected to the internet), iPhones and maybe a tablet..

 

[QCassidy352]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7D11 Safari/528.16)

Not interested. If it supplements the current model. I just won't use it; if it replaces downloading then I'm going with amazon (whose music store is pretty good).

I'm confident they would not get rid of downloading tho, as it would completely gut their iPod sales model. Even for iPhones, who wants to be using the data connection constantly?

 

[Eric2]

“Burn CDs? I stopped doing that in 2004. Come on...really?”

Absolutely

- It’s cheaper
- Better quality
- Also acts as a back up

I’ll start downloading more when we see 24bit files not this mp3 rubbish.

I do use spotify and its very useful to listen to new music before purchasing. I can see the attraction but hope its not at the cost of quality.

 

[talkingfuture]

For me the best solution would be like this

Music to Own

TV streaming off a subscription

Movies to rent

I'd be happy if iTunes gave me the option to do these (already rent movies). But I'd like them to always provide the own option on everything as well.

 

[ShiftyPig]

I'm hoping Apple goes for a split - 99¢/$1.29 gets you a song that you can download and have on your Mac/iPod, but when you sign into iTunes from any computer on the planet you can stream the song you've already purchased.

Hopefully Apple doesn't change its stance on downloading a copy of a song.

 

[ssspinball]

“Burn CDs? I stopped doing that in 2004. Come on...really?”

Absolutely

- It’s cheaper
- Better quality
- Also acts as a back up

So burning thousands of CDs is cheaper than owning an iPod/iPhone that you can reuse over and over? I think not. Those costs add up, and also, it's only cheaper if your time is free because burning CDs takes a LOT more hands-on time than syncing a PMP. I know this because I used to burn CD-RWs for my car with mp3 files and finally gave up on this because it was so time intensive compared to connecting my iPhone to the auxiliary in.

There's no reason it would necessarily be better quality. It can be as good as the source file on either destination.

The backup is a nice option, but it's WAY cheaper and simpler to buy a 1+ TB external drive and backup files that way. CD's (and even DVD's) are WAY TOO SMALL to do any serious backup, especially if you're concerned about quality which equals much larger file sizes.

Just about every car in every price range includes auxiliary in. Some cars even have hard drives now. CD players are still included as well, but the younger generation has already given up on CDs. Their time has passed, and I for one won't miss them.

 

[whooleytoo]

I think a big part of the confusion here is that few people have used lala.

I like the service quite a bit and have never bought a single "streaming only" track. Everything I've purchased from lala has been a high-quality, DRM free MP3.

Lala automatically adds the MP3 to my itunes library (local storage) AND enables me to play that track as much as a want from the cloud.

Repeat: You download the file AND you get the streaming track. It's "both", not "either / or."

Lala also lets you get one play free of tracks you DON'T own. Obviously, I wish you could get more (ie - something for nothing), but it's still a great way to sample artists.

If this was all built into iTunes, it would be WIN WIN WIN. My big "problem" with lala is basically "why listen to it in the web browser when my itunes / ipod is right here?" Admittedly - "unlimited" storage in a mobile context is one answer to that question.

AND none of you Luddites would have to give up downloading actual music files.

That's interesting info, thanks!

I've little interest in streaming, but being able to listen to the entire track once is a big plus. With 30-second previews, it can be hit-and-miss whether the preview actually lets you know what the entire song is like.

If it's a hybrid system (such as the above), I'm all in favour of it. Choice is good. As long as the option of downloading DRM-free music is still there, I'm happy.