iTunes to get subscription service by year's end?

This rumor is just about as old as iTunes itself, and while it has remained fairly dormant due to Steve's insistence on maintaining the oh-so-lucrative existing model, the subscription-based iTunes question has somehow surfaced again. According to Les Ottolenghi, CEO of INTENT MediaWorks, Apple could be leaning towards implementing such a service "within the next six months," and even went so far as to suggest we not believe any Apple-based denials that could potentially follow. Interestingly, several analysts even suggested that subscription-based systems haven't garnered much fanfare simply because the head honcho in digital music distribution isn't playing along. Unfortunately, no hints were dropped in regard to future pricing schemes, but you'll only be waiting about half a year to find out, anyway.

[Via Digg]

[Bob @ Apr 12th 2007 5:31PM]

Seems to me what you forgot was to put your website on here to try and generate traffic.

[Jonathan Keim @ Apr 12th 2007 4:26PM]

That will be a tempting offer.... But a person will almost have to buy 15 songs a month to justify the fee. And then the person wouldn't own the songs, so he would almost have to buy even more songs a month to justify the cost.

[Zach @ Apr 12th 2007 4:27PM]

yea know, for something like 15$ /month i might actually bite

[Dave @ Apr 12th 2007 4:34PM]

If the water-testing trends with Apple hold up, then a Subscription plan will definitely be opt-in. It'll just be an additional service, akin to what they're currently doing with selling both DRM and non-DRM music.

[Deezee @ Apr 12th 2007 4:51PM]

But wait, I thought apple was the ultimate innovator. Why are they copying everybody else on the subscription thing now. I've had subscription for years with Rhapsody and Napster. Yeah you don't own the music, but you have access to as much music as you want at any time. Its much smarter than paying a dollar a song for less than CD quality sound. If I want to pay a dollar a song I'll buy a CD.

[Seth Porter @ Apr 12th 2007 4:56PM]

yeah, i would spring for this. Do you have any idea how fast the subscription drm would get cracked? loads and loads of music that you can keep forever for a small monthly fee. I think they should do a video subscription thing with TV as well. That would be sick.

[John Miller @ Apr 12th 2007 5:03PM]

iTunes users could only be so lucky. Unfortunately Steve Jobs is still the CEO and as long as that is the case, Apple will always put short-term profit first and customer choice last.

[JonHimself @ Apr 12th 2007 5:11PM]

I would rather the subscription model be only for Movies and maybe TV shows, but especially for movies... music subscriptions don't interest me, but then again neither do music downloads.

[Scott @ Apr 12th 2007 5:20PM]

I assure you that if music subscriptions come along so will "advanced" video services (rental etc.) they tie into the same idea (rental is just an unrenewed subscription).

DRM is a lot easier for me to swallow when it at least provides some novel service instead of option limited "ownership".

[michael @ Apr 12th 2007 5:26PM]

Wow, Apple is late to the bandwagon. Other services have done this for such a long time already. Seriously, how long would it take for them to realize that. At least right now I can do that on Zune Marketplace.

[Otsego @ Apr 12th 2007 5:45PM]

I would be first in line. Plus theres no harm in giving customers the choice.. there are plenty of people that would will still pay to keep.

[mazola @ Apr 12th 2007 6:02PM]

Subscription based music service? OS delays? More lawsuits than you can shake a stick at?

We're talking about Apple, right?

[Greg @ Apr 12th 2007 6:14PM]

Wrong. For Apple to do this, they would have to bring out new hardware and the entire existing installed base would not be able to subscribe. All subscription services are based on the device having a "secure clock" -- without a secure clock, you load up the iPod, cancel the subscription, and never synch the iPod again. Viola -- 10,000 songs for $15. iPod's have never had a secure clock ... now a subscription for the iPhone ... that could happen.

[Cranium @ Apr 12th 2007 6:45PM]

HAhaha... Johnny-come-lately.
Subscription service is the best thing since sliced bread. Yahoo for $5.99/month or whatever is great. I haven't bought music in a year and a half, and I don't plan to any time soon...
Funny, Looks like ol' Steve's about to "invent" yet another thing that's already in use. Can't wait 'til the fanboys start touting the innovative new subscription service out of Cupertino

[l2k @ Apr 12th 2007 7:28PM]

About time. If it really happens, and is reasonably priced ($15/mo or less), I'm there. I've had a Napster subscription, and it is great - you can sample so much music with such variety and range. But, to be able to do the same with the itunes interface would be great. Itunes has its bad points, but it is so seamless with the pod that I can wait for it to improve more.

[Craig @ Apr 12th 2007 7:38PM]

Clock? Well, I know for a fact that the Creative Zen Xtra wasn't a DRM10 device when it was released, but Creative added it with a later firmware upgrade. I'm sure Apple can add a clock to existing iPods, even when they're in standby/sleep mode. It may take a bit more battery life to maintain, but I believe they can do it with most existing models, just fine. If and when they do release such a service, I'd be curious to see what device driver/protocol they use. Stick with Mass Storage or graduate to Media Transfer. As I recall Mass Storage couldn't handle subscription license management, least that was the reason I read... But who knows???

I'm counting on Sony to do something similar with CONNECT and PSP/PS3, at least someday.

[Lee Roy Brandon III @ Apr 12th 2007 7:52PM]

Any thoughts on whether this could be related to the iPhone release? A whole new market base of consumers ready to fill up their new gadget quick and on the cheap? Could the subscription service extend to music/video downloaded through the phone network?

[ark_v2 @ Apr 12th 2007 8:04PM]

The subscription didn't work in the past simply because it was retarded. But if apple can trick the masses and make them believe they will own the songs, when they won't, might be a different story. Still, subscriptions are retarded.

[Keith S. @ Apr 12th 2007 8:24PM]

As a subscriber to the Rhapsody music service and owner of a Sansa Rhapsody player, I can vouch for how nice it is to have a subscription service and player designed for it. If Apple is smart, they will copy the Rhapsody's Channel feature where you can define music channels on your device and have the service update the player with 4 or more hours of new music per channel every time you sync the device. It's like having an online radio station to go. It's the lack of a subscription service that has prevented me from even considering buying an iPod.

Unlike others, I think I might be buying more CDs than I did before subscribing to the service. Before, my purchases had pretty much stopped because I couldn't find new music that I liked. With the suscription, I have been turned on to a lot more artists than before. I consider it an unlimited CD listening station to go. If I listen to an album I really like, I still buy the CD for keeps and to support the artist. I am also am a sucker for music DVDs with 5.1 mixes.

[B @ Apr 12th 2007 8:32PM]

You have got to be fraggin kidding. Why would I want to 'rent' music, when I can own it. Besides, why would Apple go with such a loser idea when the current model works just fine.

If ITunes does go toward a subscription model, I won't give up my iPods, but I will start purchasing CD's again because, I can't get my head around how absolutely silly renting music is. Also, if Apple's iTunes division is any indicator, the subscription model is a no-starter.

Which is a really good thing because $.99 isn't too much to pay for a song.

[Cranium @ Apr 12th 2007 8:59PM]

Hmm... So for $6/mo I could buy, let's see, as many as 6 songs from iTunes, and listen to those 6 songs over and over.
-OR-
I can listen to as many different songs, albums, radio stations as I want, and if for some reason I still own a DiscMan and I feel the need to have some of my songs in it and plug it into my cassette adapter in my fly-ass Cabriolet, I can still buy the tracks. And they're only $0.79 each!

Yeah, iTunes is much better...

[B @ Apr 12th 2007 9:15PM]

Hmmmm...let's see. I would suggest if you owned a Cabriolet (is that Porsche or VW, by the way) yet I am going to worry about paying $.20 more for a track?

Interesting. I don't even own a car, yet I am not quite so...thrifty. Perhaps if iTunes went toward a subscription model that would enable me to get that car!

So you think that stealing music (which, let's be honest is what you're doing if you are copying music from your subscription service, as you seem to imply, btw). As I understand the subscription model–and correct me if I am wrong–copying the music somewhat defeats the purpose of the model somewhat.

And last be not least, how many millions has the iTunes Music Store taken in so far? I guess there are a lot more people out there not quite as wise as you are.

[Robert @ Apr 12th 2007 10:32PM]

I wouldn't subscribe to a music service, but I would subscribe to a movie service that worked with my AppleTV in a heartbeat. So long netflix...

[Galley @ Apr 12th 2007 10:35PM]

Just imagine... $40/month for "3-at-a-time" movie rentals and unlimited TV Shows? Who wouldn't go for that kind of deal?

[Cranium @ Apr 12th 2007 10:47PM]

"I guess there are a lot more people out there not quite as wise as you are."

Ain't that the truth.
BTW- Where on earth did you get the impression that I'm copying/stealing music? I didn't even do Napster back in the day. I've never done any of that stuff. And now I don't need to. Why would I pay a monthly service fee to rip off music they let me play anyway?

[Mickey Jones @ Apr 12th 2007 11:38PM]

Why would you NOT offer the choice between the pay model and the subscription model? Only one real reason is that you are afraid it will cut into current revenues.

I like subscription. There are many many songs I would have never heard if the 30-second/pay scheme was the only one available. And really, $15 a month is the going rate for the premium Rhapsody and Urge subscriptions. $15 to hear everything (except for those hold-out labels. Who want to hear their cr@ppy music anyhow). And it I want to 'own' it, I can buy it.

Stop trying to be different and just add it Apple.

[Jeff @ Apr 13th 2007 1:59AM]

subscriptions for video, maybe. I'd pay a small monthly fee for TV shows (like the Daily Show, which have low replay value) - it would have to undercut cable by a whole lot: like $10-$15 a month or something.

renting music though? i'm not interested in the least.

[Logboy @ Apr 13th 2007 3:32AM]

Note to Staff: It's not news if theres a question mark at the end of the headline. This isn't Fox news.

Hey why torrent your whole music library, when you can rent all the songs you want to :) neat.

[Ken F @ Apr 13th 2007 2:27PM]

I have had a subscription music service for the past two years, and I wouldn't 'buy' music any other way.

With a service like Yahoo Music or Rhapsody, you get an unlimited number of songs every month -- playable on three different computers -- for just $6-8 per month. If you listen to 10 songs in a week, the cost is $6/mo. If you listen to 1,000 songs in a week, the cost is still $6/mo.

[Monthly cost varies depending on whether you subscribe monthly, quarterly, or yearly.]

The Rhapsody/Yahoo "Unlimited" package costs $12-$15/mo and allows you to listen to and copy an -unlimited- amount of music to three different PCs plus three different mobile devices. PalmOS and Windows Mobile devices are supported, as are a number of music players, like the popular Sansas. You can access the same playlists on every device, both PC and mobile. The only thing you can't do is copy these songs to CDs -- for that, you've got to pay an extra $0.79 to $0.99 per track.

My Sansa music player has ~1800 commercial audio tracks with this service. Rhapsody also has specialized channels for each genre, as well as dynamic playlists. These playlists update with new sngs every time I plug the Sansa into my computer. For example, it syncs the top 25 Rock/Pop tracks and top 25 New Age tracks for that week.

For a customer that wants to listen to music on their home PC, work PC, phone, and a few music players, subscription service makes a lot of sense. All your playlists are available online, and you have the choice to store the music files on the device, or stream them via the Internet.

[Keith S. @ Apr 13th 2007 4:14PM]

b Wrote "You have got to be fraggin kidding. Why would I want to 'rent' music, when I can own it. "

Because, you can rent a whole lot more songs per month than you would want to own.

Renting does not prevent you from owning (unless Apple stops selling songs, not likely).

Renting does help you find the things you'd really like to own.

It is a suppliment to, not a replacement of buying music.

It's like subscribing to cable, vs. buying every show on DVD.