Yahoo Online Music Service

[~Shard~]

Ah, and yet another player enters the market - who hasn't opened an online music store yet? 😉

Yahoo is a big player though, and will definitely bring added competition to the marketplace, which is a good thing for Apple - and ultimately a good thing for us consumers!

 

[bbyrdhouse]

Own vs. rent songs. Rent just does not work for me.

I just don't "get" renting songs either.

I guess if you were giong to have a party or something and needed access to alot of music for only $7.00, but buying the music just makes more sense to me.

 

[munkle]

it should be far from attractive to mac users like us, as
it won't support any iPod, right?

No iPod support makes it unattractive to iPod users. No Mac support is what makes it unattractive to Mac users.

(Requirements: Windows 2000 or XP, IE 6.0+, Windows Media Player 9.0+) 🙄

 

[Tulse]

How are the artists supposed to make any money off of this model?

How is Yahoo! supposed to make money on this model? The economics of this makes no sense to me, unless Yahoo! is licensing the songs for practically nothing.

I can't see this threatening Apple much -- none of the subscription services are playable on the overwhelmingly favourite player. And, for that matter, if Apple did feel threatened, it would be trivially easy for them to add a subscription version of iTMS that would play on the iPod, suggesting that this move is a lousy long-term strategy for Yahoo! It looks like all this will do is kill off Napster and the other smaller subscription services.

 

[bubbalwz]

It should be noted that the yahoo service will also allow the purchase of songs (own instead of use) for $.79 and albums for $8. Of course the music won't play on an iPod.

 

[nichos]

The real facts

The summary here is wrong. The price (which is introductory) is as low as $4.99/mo. See here
Second, you CAN burn your music to a CD, yes there is an additional fee, but they start at $.79 depending on how which plan you get.
All the info is here:
http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/
A real good pro/con article by one of the developers can be found on his blog
One of the cons: doesn't work on mac, yet

 

[andiwm2003]

so, our favorite company REAL just released their music service. although they revolutionized the internet with their service (thats what those morons claimed on their page) nobody even took notice. this offer hopefully puts them out of business for good.
but apple beware, there might be something to subscription services. i wouldn't want one but the people in all of the companies offering subscription aren't stupid. seems there is a market for subscription. apple shouldn't ignore it.

my 2 cents.

 

[Lord Sandwich]

Hopefully this leads to iTunes allowing you to stream the entire catalog for free, rather than just 30-second clips. It'd be a killer feature, and one that only Apple can pull off since they make most of their money selling iPods anyway.

 

[cgc]

The Yahoo music store annual subscription rate was $60 according to the commercial on TV a few minutes ago. Pricing is getting more and more attractive.

 

[DTphonehome]

Mixed feelings...

I think it's great that someone has undercut Napster so significantly on price. Yahoo! can afford to sell this service at break-even, or even at a loss, while Napster has no other revenue stream. If they lower their prices, they'll kill margins, and they can't stay in business. Napster stock is down 30% so far this morning (Apple is down 3%...btw, 35 bucks for Apple is a bargain, stock up, kiddies).

However, Apple had really better step up to the plate by either offering a subscription that is competitively priced with Yahoo!, or lowering the price of per-track downloads (which won't happen). While I would never pay $15 a month for unlimited music, I certainly would pay $7 (or $5 with the year option!) per month.

--DT

 

[Wash!!]

Music is about soul not renting

I read a comment one time and so happens I agree with it. Music is about feelings and memories, it touches your soul and it takes you to places and memories where you were happy or sad, it makes you want to dance or being near what you hold dearly it touches you. That's why we buy it because every time you played it, it takes you there, with this "subscriptions" models you are renting your memories and feelings to someone else, and if you decided to cancel all your memories are gone...

Have we come in this society so materialistic that we are willing to rent out our feelings and memories for cheap...

I buy from itms or buy cd's because every time I feel like listing to that special song it's there for me and I don't have to worry about if I paid my monthly fee to have....

end of rant
😎

 

[numediaman]

This reinforces something that seems rather apparent: there are few obstacles to entering this market. Because of this fact, there will always be new companies who will want to eat into Apple's marketshare.

Maybe this shows that Apple should diversify . . . say, enter the market for high-quality computers. Nah, will never happen. They'll stick to iPods.

 

[sinisterdesign]

the best thing that i can think of to come out of this is the quicker demise of Crapster.

i guess if you just listen to top 40 or the latest passing fad in music, this is GREAT, but i don't like the thought of renting my music. i'll admit, i have stacks of CDs that i haven't broken out of their cases in ages, but that's b/c most of them are in itunes.

 

[LionelEHutz]

eMusic.com is a better subscription model

It's a subscription where you pay for a certain amount of downloads per month. The files don't have any restriction and eMusic says that their files play on the iPod. I don't have an iPod so I can't confirm this. Anyway, I've been using it since December and I'm happy with it. It's a good compliment to iTunes since eMusic has more indie label stuff and iTunes has the major releases. Renting music from Yahoo or Napster -- No thanks.

 

[scu]

why would you want to rent songs and then just have to end up paying extra in the end to burn them to a cd-r. im going to stick with the itunes 🙂

agreed. I spend an average of $15 a month on iTunes. Two months may go by before I buy something. But in the end I own the music for ever.

Apple is a head of the curve on this. I suspect they will also introduce a subscription plan, but no one has been very successful with it. The market is sure betting on Yahoo.

 

[crawdad62]

No iPod support makes it unattractive to iPod users. No Mac support is what makes it unattractive to Mac users.

(Requirements: Windows 2000 or XP, IE 6.0+, Windows Media Player 9.0+) 🙄

This is why these services are having a hard time getting a foothold. Some people would be fine with the subscription service. Heck Yahoo's seems like a deal. Even if it were and adjunct to listen to whole tracks and review them a bit before actually buy it on ITMS. But for the life of me I can't figure out why these service pretty much lock the iPod out.

The iPod had a HUGE marketshare. Yeah that's what I want to do. Set up a service that locks out the most potential customers. 🙄

 

[shamino]

Wow, only half the price of Napster. I think they'll have to do the math again. I wonder whether this new subscription service has a DRM which can be as easily hacked as Napster's.

It's the Microsoft-standard DRM. Crack one, crack 'em all.

 

[KrysBaz]

Ah, and yet another player enters the market - who hasn't opened an online music store yet?

Me, but I am thinking about it, global domination of the online music business.

Where do I start?


Does anybody know what the weathers like in the Bahmas at the moment? 😀

 

[alfismoney]

Pay per song wants users to pay about $1 each for songs that don't sound as good as they do on the radio, let alone on CD or vinyl. Bad deal in my opinion. However, if one were to use the new automator in Tiger (or Applescript on an older version), one could set up the Yahoo or Napster services to automatically strip the drm rights on download so they could be used on an iPod. Not the most ethical thing in the world but that's exactly why Apple won't offer a subscription service, they provide the best software available to circumvent it...

 

[Lancetx]

Of course the music won't play on an iPod.

And that one simple fact is why this Yahoo! service (or any service based on M$ DRM) will never challenge the iTMS as long as the iPod continues to dominate the mp3 player market.

 

[DTphonehome]

This is why these services are having a hard time getting a foothold. Some people would be fine with the subscription service. Heck Yahoo's seems like a deal. Even if it were and adjunct to listen to whole tracks and review them a bit before actually buy it on ITMS. But for the life of me I can't figure out why these service pretty much lock the iPod out.

The iPod had a HUGE marketshare. Yeah that's what I want to do. Set up a service that locks out the most potential customers. 🙄

These services would like nothing more than to support the iPod. But they can't sell unprotected MP3s, and Apple won't share its DRM (rightly so).

 

[shamino]

"This is all about expanding the market," said Dave Goldberg, general manager of Yahoo's music division. "We are convinced this is the way you should be listening to your music."

Note the statement. They think you should be doing what they want. They did not say they think this is what people actually want.

They're trying to force their customers in doing things the Yahoo/Microsoft/Napster way, even though the market has repeatedly said that they're not interested.

This is precisely the attitude that is responsible for all those other music-rental services failing to take market share away from Apple (or even slow its growth rate.)

But that's fine. Let them go ahead with this nonsensical thinking. They'll lose money like all the rest.

I think the mantra of the music business must be "if it failed for a hundred other people, we should do it too."

 

[munkle]

I read a comment one time and so happens I agree with it. Music is about feelings and memories, it touches your soul and it takes you to places and memories where you were happy or sad, it makes you want to dance or being near what you hold dearly it touches you. That's why we buy it because every time you played it, it takes you there, with this "subscriptions" models you are renting your memories and feelings to someone else, and if you decided to cancel all your memories are gone...

Have we come in this society so materialistic that we are willing to rent out our feelings and memories for cheap...

I buy from itms or buy cd's because every time I feel like listing to that special song it's there for me and I don't have to worry about if I paid my monthly fee to have....

end of rant
😎

Yes music can have that wonderful quality but not all music possesses the same personal significance . Sometimes it's fun just to listen to a song, to try some tracks by new artists, to broaden your musical horizons. It is similar to books. Books can be breathtaking, change your mode of thinking, affect you to the core but sometimes you just want to read a fun novel or a trashy magazine. Doing one does not preclude you from doing the other, nor does it diminish the significance of either.

And you misunderstand the subscription music model. A subscription model does not prevent you from buying songs or albums. You are able to do both.

And your memories belong to you and only you, even if they are tied in with a song. I have memories tied in with songs, places, landmarks, occasions, films etc. I don't have to own a restaurant for a memory of a wonderful meal I shared there to become mine. Has society become so materialistic that we have to own something before it means something to us? 😉

end of retort
😎

 

[Thataboy]

I have to believe apple has something big in store for itunes. it could be the addition of a subscription option, but it could be a lot more.

apple probably needs to create a new, itunes-like jukebox called something like iHub. you organize all your media in there with all the itunes niceties we have grown to love. part of iHub would be content stores, such as iTunes, iFlix (if they can get the name), iTones (ringtones for my fantasy mobile OS, Apple Gala), etc. They could expand fairplay to have an ownership and rental component. you could buy or rent music, and you could buy or rent fairplay protected movies. You could rent at lower cost and maybe lower quality, and buy at near lossless.

this has to be where they are headed, right? no? im insane, you say? 🙂

 

[DTphonehome]

Pay per song wants users to pay about $1 each for songs that don't sound as good as they do on the radio...

I hope you're talking about satellite radio. If you mean FM, then dude, you haven't listened to the radio in a long time.