I think it's ludicrous that they assume no one has ANY music on their computer at all at this point. And besides, after so many years of 75%+ market share, most people aren't paying to fill their first iPod. I'm still using songs on my iPhone that I purchased for my first iPod in 2003.
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.
Microsoft Targets iTunes Prices in New Zune Pass Commercial
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The Zune Marketplace is great for the Zune, and iTunes is great for the iPod. Both are highly capable media devices. That said, I really think Apple should take note from Microsoft (yes I said that) and include a subscription based model. For the short period I had my Zune it was great just to surf through and download whatever I felt like - introduced me to a lot of great bands.
The music on my iPod cost me nothing. It's my CD library. But in MS terms, that is probably like $500 because I had to buy the CDs before I could load them to my player.
I remember something like this from way back in 2004 or 2005. Something like iPod + 1000 songs = $1500 or something. They added the cost of the player onto the cost of the songs.
Long live brick and mortar. Long live hard copy.
I remember something like this from way back in 2004 or 2005. Something like iPod + 1000 songs = $1500 or something. They added the cost of the player onto the cost of the songs.
Long live brick and mortar. Long live hard copy.
I knew one person who owned a Zune. She couldn't figure it out to save her life. Then again, she was lucky to be able to use Windows. She couldn't figure out how to use OSX at all after sitting with a Macbook for 3 months. Sadly, she was part of our IT team (not that we had her by choice).
renting music
While I have to agree that renting music is bad if you don't download much new music, it does have many benefits and I don't see why it never caught on.
Think of it this way:
$10,800 ($15 x 12months x 50 years) for music for the next 60 years...
I think of this as a good deal, considering when I download music (from Zune) I download entire albums. I get to listen to the whole song and decide if I like it, without worrying about how much I'm paying. If you like to explore new music, its worth it. If you've found the 500 tracks you're gunna listen to for the rest of your life, then just buy them for $1 each...
I still think Apple should make both options available.
While I have to agree that renting music is bad if you don't download much new music, it does have many benefits and I don't see why it never caught on.
Think of it this way:
$10,800 ($15 x 12months x 50 years) for music for the next 60 years...
I think of this as a good deal, considering when I download music (from Zune) I download entire albums. I get to listen to the whole song and decide if I like it, without worrying about how much I'm paying. If you like to explore new music, its worth it. If you've found the 500 tracks you're gunna listen to for the rest of your life, then just buy them for $1 each...
I still think Apple should make both options available.
So it costs 50% more to fill an Zune capable of holding 30,000 but that doesn't matter because you get to preview as many songs as you want and NOT keep them?
Wow. They've sold me.
Just think of all that wasted bandwidth for "unlimited" songs that expire within a month. Being able to keep 10 songs you've downloaded out of a $14.99 a month service is pathetic.
Wow. They've sold me.
Just think of all that wasted bandwidth for "unlimited" songs that expire within a month. Being able to keep 10 songs you've downloaded out of a $14.99 a month service is pathetic.
The advert is lying
256kbps AAC iTunes Songs
$10 / album average = 12 songs average
1 song = 4 minutes average
1 song = 8MB
120GB holds 15000 songs or 1250 albums
which works out at $12,500 to fill a 120GB iPod with iTunes purchased music
You'd spend your entire lifetime buying songs if you didn't buy full albums in order to fill an iPod.
Never mind other issues, like easy access to podcasts that can easily take up space on an iPod, especially the video podcasts. There's also TV shows and movies that you could have purchased.
There's also the major issue that most people actually buy the 8 or 16 GB iPod nano or touch, not the 120GB iPod Classic. These can be filled quite simply from even a small music collection (100 CDs ripped at 256kbps), no iTunes purchases required.
256kbps AAC iTunes Songs
$10 / album average = 12 songs average
1 song = 4 minutes average
1 song = 8MB
120GB holds 15000 songs or 1250 albums
which works out at $12,500 to fill a 120GB iPod with iTunes purchased music
You'd spend your entire lifetime buying songs if you didn't buy full albums in order to fill an iPod.
Never mind other issues, like easy access to podcasts that can easily take up space on an iPod, especially the video podcasts. There's also TV shows and movies that you could have purchased.
There's also the major issue that most people actually buy the 8 or 16 GB iPod nano or touch, not the 120GB iPod Classic. These can be filled quite simply from even a small music collection (100 CDs ripped at 256kbps), no iTunes purchases required.
Let's take that out to 2 months, $30. On Zune, you keep 20 songs. On iTunes, you keep 3 albums, each with probably 12-15 songs. So 20 songs on Zune vs. 40 in iTunes. So in many cases, 100% bonus with iTunes.
Apple gives you an out any time you want to leave. It makes no difference when you leave, since the music is yours. And it doesn't make a difference if you decide to buy some songs from Amazon instead. Microsoft makes it an investment... the longer you're on, the harder it is to leave.
Just watched it again, anyone think the cut around 20 seconds is a bit weird? When he says "Zune Pass" it doesn't fit in with the rest of the sentence.
I also must say that I'm not against subscriptions to music, as long as the money is shared amongst the artists that are downloaded/listened to. I suspect that the money goes to the big music companies, and goes to themselves and a few selected artists and most artists actually lose out.
Anyway, can anyone imagine an iTunes Music Subscription service, coupled with Genius to cleverly download music that you would like rather than you having to hunt it down yourself?
Anyway, can anyone imagine an iTunes Music Subscription service, coupled with Genius to cleverly download music that you would like rather than you having to hunt it down yourself?
No, the subscription music is 128kbps DRM-encumbered WMA.
Also not every song is available on the subscription service, it would suck if the music you actually wanted wasn't available for whatever reason.
It is what we call a non-match on action. Or a bad jump cut. The reason it is weird is it occurs in the middle of his sentence. The other jumps can be attributed to stylistic choice, but this one is just poor editing.
how many $1.29 songs does it hold?
And then there's videos and podcasts. M$ always miss the point in general.
Try unsubscribing, then losing ALL your music.
Additionally, Microsoft are in a position to bend to what ever the labels say.
Apple have shown the record execs that the iTunes is the way to do it, when all they were interested in was the subscription model.
Renting music sucks
I think between your own personal library of music and apps like Pandora, Last.FM and Slacker Radio, you should have more than enough variety to last a life time. For those wanting to discover new music, use the above mentioned apps.
I think between your own personal library of music and apps like Pandora, Last.FM and Slacker Radio, you should have more than enough variety to last a life time. For those wanting to discover new music, use the above mentioned apps.
Kinda makes me think about McDonald's versus everybody, and lately Starbucks. "Look, it's coffee! We put ice in it, and we charge less than Starbucks!" That's nice, but your coffee tastes like leftover cigarette ash, just like the rest of your food comparatively.
Microsoft just has no clue how to advertise. They throw out these insane generalizations and have ridiculous points, like the lady who rolled her eyes at 2GB of memory for making videos. I know these ads are supposed to make Microsoft look good, but when you have a bazillion media picking these things apart, it just makes Microsoft look stupid.
There's a lot of music out there that's good, but I wouldn't pay for. These are songs that I wouldn't care about losing. I often find tracks on iTunes that sound interesting, but I'm not going to risk the money just to find out I got a lemon. So a subscription service makes sense for me. If Apple had one, it would be a no brainer. But since they don't, ZunePass it is. I easily spend over $10 a month on music, so the song credits make the effective cost $10 or so that I already spend on music that I get to keep, and $5 a month on music that I don't care about losing. This also gives me the opportunity to explore at a whim.
End result: I get more music. And that's what it's all about.
Really stupid ad though. They should focus on the music, not trumped up over-inflated costs.
End result: I get more music. And that's what it's all about.
Really stupid ad though. They should focus on the music, not trumped up over-inflated costs.
Zune pass is like the strip club:
I could imagine some idiot would think this is a great idea, like the guy doing the commercial. But in the end, I like to avoid shelling out money and ultimately walking away with nothing, like a strip club; once the cash stops flowing, the fun is over. At least when I spend 2-3 dollars a month, I still own what I paid for. I don't have $30,000 laying around for music, like this nitwit is saying, but I won't be surrendering $15 a money for rented information.
I could imagine some idiot would think this is a great idea, like the guy doing the commercial. But in the end, I like to avoid shelling out money and ultimately walking away with nothing, like a strip club; once the cash stops flowing, the fun is over. At least when I spend 2-3 dollars a month, I still own what I paid for. I don't have $30,000 laying around for music, like this nitwit is saying, but I won't be surrendering $15 a money for rented information.
Geeze, Microsoft is becoming more pathetic every day. They lost the MP3 war. Zune will never catch iPod nor will their subscription service ever come close to the sales of iTunes. It's pretty sad that the only advantage Microsoft can think to use against Apple is the price of their products.
hypocrisy if you ask me.....
so MS would want me to pay $15 a month to listen to music i don't own?!
i wonder if MS would also tell me then that my $8.25 a month i pay for my MobileMe (dot Mac) is a great deal, since it's packed full of features that for me at least go way beyond simply listening to music.
given their current ad campaign i doubt they would. intead they would find some way of pointing out the "hidden costs" of owning a mac instead of buying a cheap PC. seems to me what they are saying is,"buy a Zune, and be happy that you can pay $15 a month to get music from us for it."
the same people that would support MS with this approach are the same ones that are always telling Apple fanboys, zealots, geeks, cultists, blah blah blah, that we should never have bought DRM music from iTunes because "THE MAN" (Apple) will forever have a hold on you and your music. excuse me, but isnt that what MS is so blatantly dong right here?!?! "Pay, Pay, Pay, and life will be grand. Stop Pay and kiss your music goodbye."
the same people that would support MS with this approach are the same ones who have been forever critical of iPhone owners and are quick to do the math and say that your iPhone will cost you $2000+ over the next 2 yrs because you have to actually pay for ATT service. they never have been able to tell me, what carriers out there are providing free service to any particular phone no matter what the price point.
of course they justify it by saying you can keep 10 songs a month. all this tells me, is MS is actually forcing me to pay $180 for music each year rather than me having the choice of spending much less for the music i actually want.
i understand subscription models have merit, but ONLY for a certain type of consumer. so do a shotgun comparison of MS's model and Apple's model and then suggest that one is better than the other, only shows how desperate MS actually is these days.
if there are any MS fanboys out there that can explain to me now, if apple is so insignificant in the grand scheme of things with its tiny little market share that it has, then why is MS spending so much money trying to discredit them?
looks to me, and im sure everyone else, that apple has pinched a nerve somewhere and MS is worried. am i the only one here that recognizes that Apple is battling on two fronts not one?
Front one: OS. like many others (linux, etc) Mac OS takes a distant 2nd to MS, ignoring the hardware the OSes are installed on too.
Front two: Hardware. there apple DOES NOT compete against MS. they compete against the likes of Dell, HP, and Acer. there they are placed 4th.
i'll tell you why MS is worried. they know that all it would take for apple to put a huge squeeze on them in the OS market, would be for apple to license their OS to run on other PCs. simple as that.
im not saying apple will, nor am i saying that they should, nor am i saying that they want to. apple is sitting on $30billion (thats billion with a B) in cash and debt free. theyve never put the emphasis on market share. theyve always focused on margins. and its working for them, now.
it may never happen, but there may come a time when apple recognizes they can no longer command the margins theyve been getting and as such take the next step to assure success and decide to go mainstream with their OS as an independent function of their hardware.
if that were to happen, it is all speculation and certainly a matter of opinion, but i would be one to say MS would not continue to hold the stronghold in the market that they have now.
wow, sorry this post got so long. ill shut up now.
so MS would want me to pay $15 a month to listen to music i don't own?!
i wonder if MS would also tell me then that my $8.25 a month i pay for my MobileMe (dot Mac) is a great deal, since it's packed full of features that for me at least go way beyond simply listening to music.
given their current ad campaign i doubt they would. intead they would find some way of pointing out the "hidden costs" of owning a mac instead of buying a cheap PC. seems to me what they are saying is,"buy a Zune, and be happy that you can pay $15 a month to get music from us for it."
the same people that would support MS with this approach are the same ones that are always telling Apple fanboys, zealots, geeks, cultists, blah blah blah, that we should never have bought DRM music from iTunes because "THE MAN" (Apple) will forever have a hold on you and your music. excuse me, but isnt that what MS is so blatantly dong right here?!?! "Pay, Pay, Pay, and life will be grand. Stop Pay and kiss your music goodbye."
the same people that would support MS with this approach are the same ones who have been forever critical of iPhone owners and are quick to do the math and say that your iPhone will cost you $2000+ over the next 2 yrs because you have to actually pay for ATT service. they never have been able to tell me, what carriers out there are providing free service to any particular phone no matter what the price point.
of course they justify it by saying you can keep 10 songs a month. all this tells me, is MS is actually forcing me to pay $180 for music each year rather than me having the choice of spending much less for the music i actually want.
i understand subscription models have merit, but ONLY for a certain type of consumer. so do a shotgun comparison of MS's model and Apple's model and then suggest that one is better than the other, only shows how desperate MS actually is these days.
if there are any MS fanboys out there that can explain to me now, if apple is so insignificant in the grand scheme of things with its tiny little market share that it has, then why is MS spending so much money trying to discredit them?
looks to me, and im sure everyone else, that apple has pinched a nerve somewhere and MS is worried. am i the only one here that recognizes that Apple is battling on two fronts not one?
Front one: OS. like many others (linux, etc) Mac OS takes a distant 2nd to MS, ignoring the hardware the OSes are installed on too.
Front two: Hardware. there apple DOES NOT compete against MS. they compete against the likes of Dell, HP, and Acer. there they are placed 4th.
i'll tell you why MS is worried. they know that all it would take for apple to put a huge squeeze on them in the OS market, would be for apple to license their OS to run on other PCs. simple as that.
im not saying apple will, nor am i saying that they should, nor am i saying that they want to. apple is sitting on $30billion (thats billion with a B) in cash and debt free. theyve never put the emphasis on market share. theyve always focused on margins. and its working for them, now.
it may never happen, but there may come a time when apple recognizes they can no longer command the margins theyve been getting and as such take the next step to assure success and decide to go mainstream with their OS as an independent function of their hardware.
if that were to happen, it is all speculation and certainly a matter of opinion, but i would be one to say MS would not continue to hold the stronghold in the market that they have now.
wow, sorry this post got so long. ill shut up now.
