i know, thats the music labels and greedy folks for you though, they push the model that will make the the most money, not what is neccissarily what the consumer wantsBlue Velvet said:Not 'we are convinced that this is what our customers want'.
The arrogance of that first statement is breathtaking.
The 1 million include the SuperPass subscriptions and that's around for a few years. So, it is not just the Rhapsody subscribers.Nickygoat said:...What surprised me from that article was that Napster only has 410,000 subscribers and Real 1 million? I find that suprisingly low for Napster and high for Real....
I wonder if Microsoft mandates such a provision in their DRM system. For all you know, they may provide the ability to secretly upload commercials into your portable player along with the purchased songs. They can even tie the comemrcials to the DRM decryption key, so the songs break if you delete them.Sun Baked said:Can't wait until they find a way of including commercials into the mix...
What a complete load of BS and they know it. I'm willing to bet Leigh couldn't keep a streight face when he said that.Many record label executives prefer the subscription approach, Leigh said, because consumers are more likely to sample songs from relatively unknown artists, a phenomenon that helps the industry create more moneymaking stars.
How would you know? As far as I know, you can't get the developer docs for Microsoft's DRM with signing an NDA.SiliconAddict said:They don't.
What other choice do they have???SPUY767 said:Yahoo is going to flounder because right of the bat, by choosing PFS, they alienated 70% of the market.
Nope, not a monopoly. There is choice - WMA and providers or Apple and its' hw/sw offering. You can choose one or the other but the ability not to mix is not a monopoly. Anymore then not being able to mix any other competitive packages or formats.dejo said:If there are no choices, then it's called a monopoly...
Kind of expected this. After all with the hardware lock-in both sides are using, this was only going to affect the WMA services -- do they really think people are going to drop their $500 iPods, and buy $500 <hmm, what are the other ones called anyway> just because this service is a little cheaper?PlaceofDis said:i guess the subscription market is rather fickle right now, wonder how much all three would drop if Apple entered the market with subscription service?
Because many stock brokers work on a "window" philosophy. They expect a stock to trade within a certain "window" of prices, which generally they expect to rise over time (otherwise why be investing in that stock?). If it falls out of the "window", either on the upside or on the downside, it means that the stock is not acting as they expected and so they generally drop the stock immediately, and perhaps investigate and get back in on the stock once the "unexpected" action has ceased (with an adjusted window, of course).macnulty said:why would he sell after the stock dropped?
I never said there wasn't any choices. I said "If there are no choices..."macnulty said:Nope, not a monopoly. There is choice - WMA and providers or Apple and its' hw/sw offering. You can choose one or the other but the ability not to mix is not a monopoly. Anymore then not being able to mix any other competitive packages or formats.