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.
New iPods and New Music Service?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Here is the complete article:
Labels Think Apple Has Perfect Pitch
Executives of major record firms believe a speedy, simple online music service for Mac users will be a hit.
By Jon Healey, Times Staff Writer
Top executives at the major record companies have finally found an online music service that makes them excited about the digital future but it's only for Macs.
The new service was developed by Apple Computer Inc., sources said Monday, and offers users of Macintoshes and iPod portable music players many of the same capabilities that already are available from services previously endorsed by the labels. But the Apple offering won over music executives because it makes buying and downloading music as simple and non-technical as buying a book from Amazon.com.
"This is exactly what the music industry has been waiting for," said one person familiar with the negotiations between the Cupertino, Calif., computer maker and the labels. "It's hip. It's quick. It's easy. If people on the Internet are actually interested in buying music, not just stealing it, this is the answer."
That ease of use has music executives optimistic that the Apple service will be an effective antidote to surging piracy on the Internet, sources said.
Other legitimate music services have cumbersome technology and pricing plans motivated in part by the labels' demands for security that make them much harder to use than unauthorized online services, such as the Kazaa file-sharing system.
Although no licensing deals have been announced, sources close to the situation say at least four of the five major record companies have committed their music to the Apple service. It could be launched next month.
As promising as the new service is, however, there is a big limitation. Apple's products account for just a sliver of the total computer market less than 3% of the computers sold worldwide are Macs. The vast majority of the potential audience for downloadable music services uses machines that run Microsoft Corp.'s Windows software.
An Apple spokeswoman declined to comment on the service Monday, as did representatives from the five major record corporations Sony Corp.'s Sony Music Entertainment, Vivendi Universal's Universal Music Group, AOL Time Warner Inc.'s Warner Music Group, Bertelsmann's BMG division and EMI Group.
The new service is so important to Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs that he personally demonstrated it to top executives at all five companies, sources said. More than a dozen music executives have visited Apple since last summer and came away enthusiastic.
The executives also like the massive marketing plan designed by Jobs to educate consumers about the service.
The plan contrasts sharply with Apple's previous marketing campaign for Macs, which rankled many music executives who felt it promoted piracy. Apple's advertisements were emblazoned with the mantra "rip, mix, burn," referring to the computers' ability to copy songs and record them onto CDs.
Although the iPod has been hailed by many critics as the best portable music player on the market, Mac users have been overlooked by most of the label-backed online music services, including Pressplay, MusicNet and Listen.com Inc.'s Rhapsody.
As a result, Mac users may find it easier to make unauthorized, free copies of songs through an online file-sharing service like LimeWire than to buy a copy through a label-sanctioned service. Apple hopes to change that situation with its new service, which is expected to be included in an updated edition of the iLife package of digital music, photo and movie software.
Sources said Apple will make the songs available for sale through a new version of iTunes, its software for managing music files on Macs. Users will be able to buy and download songs with a single click and transfer them automatically to any iPod they've registered with Apple.
Rather than make the songs available in the popular MP3 format, Apple plans to use a higher fidelity technology known as Advanced Audio Codec.
That approach allows the songs to be protected by electronic locks that prevent them from being played on more than one computer. Still, sources say, Apple wants to enable buyers to burn songs onto CDs. That feature would effectively remove the locks.
That's been a sticking point for executives at Sony, sources said. The other four major record companies, however, appear ready to license their music to the new service.
No details were available on the price of the service, although one source said it would be competitive with other services in the market. Pressplay, for example, charges just under $10 a month for unlimited downloads, plus about $1 for each song that can be burned to CD or transferred to a portable device.
Labels Think Apple Has Perfect Pitch
Executives of major record firms believe a speedy, simple online music service for Mac users will be a hit.
By Jon Healey, Times Staff Writer
Top executives at the major record companies have finally found an online music service that makes them excited about the digital future but it's only for Macs.
The new service was developed by Apple Computer Inc., sources said Monday, and offers users of Macintoshes and iPod portable music players many of the same capabilities that already are available from services previously endorsed by the labels. But the Apple offering won over music executives because it makes buying and downloading music as simple and non-technical as buying a book from Amazon.com.
"This is exactly what the music industry has been waiting for," said one person familiar with the negotiations between the Cupertino, Calif., computer maker and the labels. "It's hip. It's quick. It's easy. If people on the Internet are actually interested in buying music, not just stealing it, this is the answer."
That ease of use has music executives optimistic that the Apple service will be an effective antidote to surging piracy on the Internet, sources said.
Other legitimate music services have cumbersome technology and pricing plans motivated in part by the labels' demands for security that make them much harder to use than unauthorized online services, such as the Kazaa file-sharing system.
Although no licensing deals have been announced, sources close to the situation say at least four of the five major record companies have committed their music to the Apple service. It could be launched next month.
As promising as the new service is, however, there is a big limitation. Apple's products account for just a sliver of the total computer market less than 3% of the computers sold worldwide are Macs. The vast majority of the potential audience for downloadable music services uses machines that run Microsoft Corp.'s Windows software.
An Apple spokeswoman declined to comment on the service Monday, as did representatives from the five major record corporations Sony Corp.'s Sony Music Entertainment, Vivendi Universal's Universal Music Group, AOL Time Warner Inc.'s Warner Music Group, Bertelsmann's BMG division and EMI Group.
The new service is so important to Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs that he personally demonstrated it to top executives at all five companies, sources said. More than a dozen music executives have visited Apple since last summer and came away enthusiastic.
The executives also like the massive marketing plan designed by Jobs to educate consumers about the service.
The plan contrasts sharply with Apple's previous marketing campaign for Macs, which rankled many music executives who felt it promoted piracy. Apple's advertisements were emblazoned with the mantra "rip, mix, burn," referring to the computers' ability to copy songs and record them onto CDs.
Although the iPod has been hailed by many critics as the best portable music player on the market, Mac users have been overlooked by most of the label-backed online music services, including Pressplay, MusicNet and Listen.com Inc.'s Rhapsody.
As a result, Mac users may find it easier to make unauthorized, free copies of songs through an online file-sharing service like LimeWire than to buy a copy through a label-sanctioned service. Apple hopes to change that situation with its new service, which is expected to be included in an updated edition of the iLife package of digital music, photo and movie software.
Sources said Apple will make the songs available for sale through a new version of iTunes, its software for managing music files on Macs. Users will be able to buy and download songs with a single click and transfer them automatically to any iPod they've registered with Apple.
Rather than make the songs available in the popular MP3 format, Apple plans to use a higher fidelity technology known as Advanced Audio Codec.
That approach allows the songs to be protected by electronic locks that prevent them from being played on more than one computer. Still, sources say, Apple wants to enable buyers to burn songs onto CDs. That feature would effectively remove the locks.
That's been a sticking point for executives at Sony, sources said. The other four major record companies, however, appear ready to license their music to the new service.
No details were available on the price of the service, although one source said it would be competitive with other services in the market. Pressplay, for example, charges just under $10 a month for unlimited downloads, plus about $1 for each song that can be burned to CD or transferred to a portable device.
in response to johnbr54
4000 songs at 1 dollar a piece and how to market it ?
If we assume a user say is 35 and has bought cds since they came out, then he or she could have easily loaded up on 400 cds over a period of say 20 years. One's own example always stinks but with me it is the case.
I am now going through all these cds to put them on my i-mac and I am finding about 1000 songs on these cds I really really want to hear again and again or which bring back memories. So I for one have easily spent 6000 dollars or more even on my cd collection - I could have had all the songs that matter to me with this service for 1000 dollars.
I am not suggesting that we buy an i-pod and immediately download 4000 songs and make it the most valuable player on earth, but as we go along through life some 20 - 40 really good songs would make it easily onto a player per year.
With my batting average that would equal to 10-20 cds
I for one see tremendous savings
4000 songs at 1 dollar a piece and how to market it ?
If we assume a user say is 35 and has bought cds since they came out, then he or she could have easily loaded up on 400 cds over a period of say 20 years. One's own example always stinks but with me it is the case.
I am now going through all these cds to put them on my i-mac and I am finding about 1000 songs on these cds I really really want to hear again and again or which bring back memories. So I for one have easily spent 6000 dollars or more even on my cd collection - I could have had all the songs that matter to me with this service for 1000 dollars.
I am not suggesting that we buy an i-pod and immediately download 4000 songs and make it the most valuable player on earth, but as we go along through life some 20 - 40 really good songs would make it easily onto a player per year.
With my batting average that would equal to 10-20 cds
I for one see tremendous savings
The LA Times story is huge. Confirmation.
Several comments...
Sony's real sticking point is probably that it's heavily invested in Windows?
If Apple can't get Sony to sign on, will they kill the whole program? As everyone has mentioned, selection is critical to success.
The article only mentions the big five. If Apple does not seek them out, will smaller labels be able to join the program of their own initiative? Will enough of the smaller labels bother?
The article says the new program will come out in a month in an updated version of iTunes. Will this be iTunes 3.1 or the next major upgrade, v. 4, with Rendezvous?
Now that we know it probably will happen, who thinks that the program will be part of .mac?
The article is right in pointing out that Apple OSs have been largely overlooked with current pay-for-download services. This is further evidence that Apple isn't waiting around for third-parties to fill the gaps anymore.
Does anyone know anything about "Advanced Audio Codec"? Will older/current iPods be able to play them?
Finally, Apple rocks. It's so good to be with an innovator.
Several comments...
Sony's real sticking point is probably that it's heavily invested in Windows?
If Apple can't get Sony to sign on, will they kill the whole program? As everyone has mentioned, selection is critical to success.
The article only mentions the big five. If Apple does not seek them out, will smaller labels be able to join the program of their own initiative? Will enough of the smaller labels bother?
The article says the new program will come out in a month in an updated version of iTunes. Will this be iTunes 3.1 or the next major upgrade, v. 4, with Rendezvous?
Now that we know it probably will happen, who thinks that the program will be part of .mac?
The article is right in pointing out that Apple OSs have been largely overlooked with current pay-for-download services. This is further evidence that Apple isn't waiting around for third-parties to fill the gaps anymore.
Does anyone know anything about "Advanced Audio Codec"? Will older/current iPods be able to play them?
Finally, Apple rocks. It's so good to be with an innovator.
woo yeah!
excellent, excellent news.
i think it explains the iPod delay. apple need to iron out this deal and the workings of their new iTunes and iPod setup. i guess they are running a little behind schedule and didn't make enough of the old model iPods to last out.
they might be running on empty for iPods for as much as a couple of months i forsee, before they get this whole deal up and running... but then that's no need for a lack of official announcements. if there's no iPods left, then the announcement can't much damage sales! in fact, it would get other mp3-player-buyers to wait a while for the iPod after all.
can anyone forsee a service for windows being integrated into MusicMatch, the iTunes for Windows that works with the iPod? maybe a few months later down the line.
you just know microsoft are going to be immitating the whole thing VERY soon, and steal Apple's well-deserved glory. bah!
excellent, excellent news.
i think it explains the iPod delay. apple need to iron out this deal and the workings of their new iTunes and iPod setup. i guess they are running a little behind schedule and didn't make enough of the old model iPods to last out.
they might be running on empty for iPods for as much as a couple of months i forsee, before they get this whole deal up and running... but then that's no need for a lack of official announcements. if there's no iPods left, then the announcement can't much damage sales! in fact, it would get other mp3-player-buyers to wait a while for the iPod after all.
can anyone forsee a service for windows being integrated into MusicMatch, the iTunes for Windows that works with the iPod? maybe a few months later down the line.
you just know microsoft are going to be immitating the whole thing VERY soon, and steal Apple's well-deserved glory. bah!
low stocks?
well, i was under the impression that iPods were hard to come by right now. sorry if i am wrong about that. maybe it's just the 5gb ones.
point taken.
well, i was under the impression that iPods were hard to come by right now. sorry if i am wrong about that. maybe it's just the 5gb ones.
point taken.
that is what i implied. i thought no new iPods until new the iPods and iTunes can be tailored to this new music service. it sounded in the LA Times report as though the whole service still needed some work. maybe not, though. maybe it will all be out very soon.
but i haven't got my hopes up for an update being imminent.
but i haven't got my hopes up for an update being imminent.
its true
Seems to be true. L.A. Times reports that Apple indeed is coming out with a new music service.
Sources said Apple will make the songs available for sale through a new version of iTunes, its software for managing music files on Macs. Users will be able to buy and download songs with a single click and transfer them automatically to any iPod they've registered with Apple.
Rather than make the songs available in the popular MP3 format, Apple plans to use a higher fidelity technology known as Advanced Audio Codec.
That approach allows the songs to be protected by electronic locks that prevent them from being played on more than one computer. Still, sources say, Apple wants to enable buyers to burn songs onto CDs. That feature would effectively remove the locks.
That's been a sticking point for executives at Sony, sources said. The other four major record companies, however, appear ready to license their music to the new service.
No details were available on the price of the service, although one source said it would be competitive with other services in the market. Pressplay, for example, charges just under $10 a month for unlimited downloads, plus about $1 for each song that can be burned to CD or transferred to a portable device.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-music4mar04,1,7646945.story?coll=la-home-todays-times
Seems to be true. L.A. Times reports that Apple indeed is coming out with a new music service.
Sources said Apple will make the songs available for sale through a new version of iTunes, its software for managing music files on Macs. Users will be able to buy and download songs with a single click and transfer them automatically to any iPod they've registered with Apple.
Rather than make the songs available in the popular MP3 format, Apple plans to use a higher fidelity technology known as Advanced Audio Codec.
That approach allows the songs to be protected by electronic locks that prevent them from being played on more than one computer. Still, sources say, Apple wants to enable buyers to burn songs onto CDs. That feature would effectively remove the locks.
That's been a sticking point for executives at Sony, sources said. The other four major record companies, however, appear ready to license their music to the new service.
No details were available on the price of the service, although one source said it would be competitive with other services in the market. Pressplay, for example, charges just under $10 a month for unlimited downloads, plus about $1 for each song that can be burned to CD or transferred to a portable device.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-music4mar04,1,7646945.story?coll=la-home-todays-times
i concur to those who predict a post-war release. waiting for people to be over that, and thinking about their home-affairs. so, a month still, maybe more, i think.
Here's my take on the whole thing.
Apple's going to release, at the same time, the new iPods, the music service, and a new version of iTunes (the one with AAC and Rendezvous). The music service will feature maybe a variation on a theme - specifically, perhaps Ogg or AAC (or whatever the open source one is), to feature support for anti-piracy. Perhaps, iTunes will support the music in a proprietary format, only available to iTunes, and being stored in some discreet, far-away invisible folder somewhere.
This service will be successful. Its being deployed by a company who runs huge servers and has the software base for customers (iTunes) already in place. Plus, many CDs nowadays come out with a whopping 9 or 10 songs on the CD, but still cost $16 or $17. Also, not everyone likes every song on the CD. This way, you get what you want, and it inspires musicians to make better music, because that way more songs will get bought.
Added: Personally, I don't buy CDs anymore, because of the premiums of the CD, and because so little money actually goes to the artist. Also, I don't feel like dragging my ass out to the store and deciding "Hrmm...what should I spend $20 on today?" This plan makes it easy. 1-Click is a genius idea. Once this plan launches, I'll be in line to sign up.
Apple's going to release, at the same time, the new iPods, the music service, and a new version of iTunes (the one with AAC and Rendezvous). The music service will feature maybe a variation on a theme - specifically, perhaps Ogg or AAC (or whatever the open source one is), to feature support for anti-piracy. Perhaps, iTunes will support the music in a proprietary format, only available to iTunes, and being stored in some discreet, far-away invisible folder somewhere.
This service will be successful. Its being deployed by a company who runs huge servers and has the software base for customers (iTunes) already in place. Plus, many CDs nowadays come out with a whopping 9 or 10 songs on the CD, but still cost $16 or $17. Also, not everyone likes every song on the CD. This way, you get what you want, and it inspires musicians to make better music, because that way more songs will get bought.
Added: Personally, I don't buy CDs anymore, because of the premiums of the CD, and because so little money actually goes to the artist. Also, I don't feel like dragging my ass out to the store and deciding "Hrmm...what should I spend $20 on today?" This plan makes it easy. 1-Click is a genius idea. Once this plan launches, I'll be in line to sign up.
Well, Apple most definitely haven't stopped selling because of the war. They still advertise and sell their products today as before the war. And I support the attitude of positivity in spite of the war, to not let things fall apart/stop because of it.
I just believe it to be a wiser business move to announce a major new product (which the iPod/Music Service will be, it will be groundbreaking) when more media attention will be likely, or at least when the public are in a state to care more about such announcements.
Competing New Music Service
Just saw this over at Wired News and thought it shed some good light on the plausiblity of the .99$ price point.
http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,58229,00.html
Just saw this over at Wired News and thought it shed some good light on the plausiblity of the .99$ price point.
http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,58229,00.html
Not the point - why should Apple release something new & splash-worthy at a time when everyone's mind is elsewhere?
As long as eyes, hearts, & minds are riveted to events in Iraq, no-one will notice something as non-essential & ultimately insignificant as a new music-download service. (Yes, Mac users can be quite a self-obsessed group, so I suppose WE might notice...but everyone else will be watching the other news.)
Apple's style of kung-fu involves arranging maximum buzz & maximum attention for every new product, every significant move; doing something now, it would have to be big enough, startling enough to draw attention away from the Middle East, and there is no more compelling human drama than war.
In other words, if Apple waits & lets things umm...digest a bit, situations may improve, marketing-wise, and they'll be able to catch an extra eyeball or 2wo; otherwise, they face an almost-certain waste of money, resources and opportunity.
And in the current economy, can even Apple afford that?
Re: Competing New Music Service
Gawd.
VH-1, the website, where you can watch the videos, and read for free about the artists and the tours and the "industry news", but all top-40/AOR (w/ a little Eminem, & a splash of metal for spice), and a 1-click-purchase (oh, so easy!) to hear the toons...at 99¢ each....
I'm sure this idea has appeal for those who are looking for new ways to wring every dime out of the public, but I'm not interested.
Gawd.
VH-1, the website, where you can watch the videos, and read for free about the artists and the tours and the "industry news", but all top-40/AOR (w/ a little Eminem, & a splash of metal for spice), and a 1-click-purchase (oh, so easy!) to hear the toons...at 99¢ each....
I'm sure this idea has appeal for those who are looking for new ways to wring every dime out of the public, but I'm not interested.
Too expensive
I like the idea, but a per-song price would become rediculously expensive. It should be like $5 a month. If you have a 5 gig Ipod, it would cost you around $1500 to fill it up. That's a lot of money...and you're spending $299 just to buy it. That's an estimate of $1799 to fill up and own a 5 gig Ipod. That's a lot of money. Also, what happens (I've done this in the past) if you delete 50 songs to free up space on your hard drive, and then 3 months later you want one of those songs to put on a cd, or 2 or 3 of those songs. Do you pay another $3 just to get those 3 songs that you already payed for? Something to think about...
I like the idea, but a per-song price would become rediculously expensive. It should be like $5 a month. If you have a 5 gig Ipod, it would cost you around $1500 to fill it up. That's a lot of money...and you're spending $299 just to buy it. That's an estimate of $1799 to fill up and own a 5 gig Ipod. That's a lot of money. Also, what happens (I've done this in the past) if you delete 50 songs to free up space on your hard drive, and then 3 months later you want one of those songs to put on a cd, or 2 or 3 of those songs. Do you pay another $3 just to get those 3 songs that you already payed for? Something to think about...
Rolling Stone...
OK, I have no idea how credible the rumor at Apple Insider is...but, if it is true, this might contain a hint at a reason for release date...
IF apple has secured a feature story in Rolling Stone, it would make sense for Apple to announce the service on the day that the Magazine hits the racks. Anyone know what day in the month RS typically is available?
If they could secure a feature in Rolling Stone, and perhaps a cover article, that would be great press; and given the status of Steve Jobs and the nature of this announcement, this may be doable.
Sort of like the Time Magazine cover article of the new iMac when it was released.
So, perhaps we should focus on this a target for release? Just a thought...
OK, I have no idea how credible the rumor at Apple Insider is...but, if it is true, this might contain a hint at a reason for release date...
IF apple has secured a feature story in Rolling Stone, it would make sense for Apple to announce the service on the day that the Magazine hits the racks. Anyone know what day in the month RS typically is available?
If they could secure a feature in Rolling Stone, and perhaps a cover article, that would be great press; and given the status of Steve Jobs and the nature of this announcement, this may be doable.
Sort of like the Time Magazine cover article of the new iMac when it was released.
So, perhaps we should focus on this a target for release? Just a thought...