

Apple to offer unlimited free iTunes music to iPod/iPhone owners - naish
http://www.macworld.co.uk/ipod-itunes/news/index.cfm?RSS&NewsID=20765

======
BrandonM
Am I the only person who _likes_ ownership? I buy all my CDs and rip them to
my computer. I installed Gentoo on my computers and I use programs that I have
installed. I'm using GMail right now, but that's only because I haven't taken
the time yet to research and set up my own (similar) local solution.
Basically, I don't like to trust my goods and information to other people, and
I find it strange that so many people willingly forfeit true ownership.

~~~
mechanical_fish
I'm with you, but I think the trend is in the other direction. As a lifelong
book collector, my eyes were opened when I heard Cory Doctorow (an even more
obsessive bibliophile) state that he was thinking of selling off most of his
books -- the logic being that, in a world with digitized libraries, eBay,
Amazon and ABE books, it's easier and cheaper for him to just obtain a used
copy of anything he wants to reread and sell it on the used market after he's
done.

I don't actually believe this enough, yet, to put it into practice, but it
shocked me into thinking about it.

It is _grossly_ inefficient for me to have to keep a physical copy of _Star
Wars_ around in my house just to prove that I bought the darned thing. It is
grossly inefficient to have my own, personally recorded collection of every
single Alton Brown _Good Eats_ episode. These things are not rare: They are
treasured by zillions of fans. They are unlikely to become rare in my
lifetime. I have, or will soon get, all the bandwidth I need to download them
on demand. The only reason I have to cart them from one apartment to the next
is that our stupid copyright laws make it easy for their creators to jerk me
around -- raising prices, charging me over and over again, editing the films
to make them different from what I remember, taking the films off the market
for ten years, inserting artificial roadblocks that make no sense in the high-
bandwidth era (like physical DVDs from Netflix instead of digital downloads
from Youtube HD) -- unless I buy a physical copy and make it my own.

I don't think that's going to last. Time is not on the side of that model.
It's not as efficient and the people who still believe in it get older by the
day.

------
mykdavies
"to offer" != "is reportedly considering offering"

------
hernan7
Too good to be true?

Anyway, if this comes to pass I can imagine playlists being a hot commodity.
Kind of little out-of-band time-shifted radio stations. Downloading will stop
being "try before you buy" and will become, well, "just try this".

A plan like that would make me consider buying an iPod and putting up with the
iTunes DRM.

------
caudicus
I don't have any exact quotes but (correct me if I'm wrong) Steve Jobs has
historically been against a service like this, and said his customers are
quite happy buying music per-track.

Yet just as with the iPhone SDK, where he initially did not want third party
developers writing applications on it, he listened to the demands of the
market. Yeah, he's still being a little up tight about iPhone App
registration...but I guess my point is the man makes an initial guess of
what's best for the company, but then listens to the market in the end, as he
should.

Exciting stuff though. I'm psyched.

~~~
Hexstream
"Steve Jobs [...] said his customers are quite happy buying music per-track.
Yet just as with the iPhone SDK, where he initially did not want third party
developers writing applications on it, he listened to the demands of the
market."

Maybe he's just being deliberately misleading.

~~~
caudicus
I guess then he'd need a motive to be misleading. Off the top of my head I
could see him doing it to enforce his love for surprise in his demos...any
other ideas?

I don't know how I'd feel if he was being deliberately misleading. He is still
a CEO of a large publicly traded company...and should be somewhat upfront
about what they're up to. I mean to hide is one thing, but to deliberately
mislead?

~~~
manvsmachine
His motivation is just being himself... you could correctly predict every
single project Apple is secretly working on and he would adamantly deny every
one, then confirm them all 2 days later at MacWorld. That's just how he is.

------
jws
This is "free" as in "pay a fixed fee up front for a license that lasts until
the hardware breaks".

Interesting dilemma. The labels will want to make it for some tracks only and
make others be pay per track. Apple will probably want "all of the artist's
tracks in iTunes". That could make an incentive for the labels to keep
material out of iTunes.

~~~
caudicus
Which is frankly fine with me. I mean, I use Rhapsody via a web browser on my
mac to listen to music because I can just pay a fixed fee per month and listen
to a lot of good music. Some tracks are not streamable, yes. In addition,
Rhapsody for a while has promoted a service called "Rhapsody To Go" which lets
you download music to a compatible MP3 player (no iPods) and listen to it on
that as long as you maintain a subscription.

My point being this model is well hashed out. It is really only a matter of
time until Apple jumps on this. In terms of the hardware pricing, they'll
probably set up some kind of a subscription service pricing model (as that is
the existing model) and then derive pricing on hardware based on that, if they
go that route. But subscription based is the simplest to market and
understand.

