The subscription-based iTunes
rumor has
been around for what feels like eons, and apparently, it's rearing its always intriguing head once more. According to a report over at
Financial Times, the suits in Cupertino are currently "in discussions" with major music outfits about a new model that could essentially "give customers free access to the entire iTunes music library in exchange for paying a premium for its iPod and iPhone devices." Reportedly, a distribution model similar to Nokia's "
Comes with Music" could be used on both iPhones and iPods, while traditional subscriptions would be reserved for the iPhone -- a device which has a monthly billing relationship already attached to it. As it stands, we're hearing that the major holdup is Apple's hesitation to pay big bucks in order to access the labels' libraries, but here's to hoping the iTunes buffet opens for business sooner rather than later. [Warning: Read link requires subscription]
posted Mar 18th 2008 10:29PM
Don't people already pay a premium for Apple devices? I like Apple hardware as much as the next person, but one thing it isn't is cheap.
Just like the "iPod Charger" that just has a USB port. It sells for $50. You can pick up a universal USB charger @ wal-mart for $10 and it works fine. That's a damn expensive Apple logo!!
Supporting Wal-Mart is never a good thing.
1. Unlimited music for iPods!
2. ?????
3. PROFIT!!!
1. Unlimited music for iPods!
2. PROFIT!!
Carl, you missed the reference.
To be fair, the USB charger is $29. Although I think it's higher at places like Best Buy because they tend to overcharge for the Apple-branded accessories.
no, i was actually making a reference to the fact that no matter what apple does they'll make a profit because of their devoted fanbase.
i get the reference.
I'm sure Apple's crunching a lot of numbers. On one hand, you have people who will never pay per-track for iTunes music, and on the other, those willing to pay $1 a track to fill their multi-gig player. A $100 premium nets you a gain from the non-iTuners, and a loss from those who would have paid piece meal.
i disagree with sinerasis, i dont mind paying more for what this potentially would give. but i will NOT repeat NOT repeat NOT repeat NOT NEVER EVER IN A MILLION YEARS consider it if this crap has DRM!
@a ham sandwich
HAH. "yes please download these 320kbps downloads for one monthly fee, but be sure to delete them when you cancel your service!"
NEVER IN A MILLION YEARS WILL YOU GET NON-DRM UNLIMITED DOWNLOADS LEGALLY.
First one! I hope apple does make the deals.
If I cry a little for you, will you cry less?
if by 1st you mean 4th, then yes, your 4th.
your not on the podium.
@wootman
If by "your" you mean "you're" then yes, you are funny.
Would I pay extra money up front for an unlimited, downloadable iTunes library? Depends how much extra.
Would I pay extra each month for an unlimited, downloadable iTunes library subscription? Again, depending how much extra, but I'd be more likely to go this option instead simply because it still allows me control whether or not to continue giving Apple money.
If the quality of the iTunes library goes downhill, I can end my subscription and save my money. If I pay it up front and the library goes down the toilet, Steve-O won't care, he's already got my money.
That depends. The access might be per device. So if you buy a new iPod, then you need to pay the premium up front again. In that case, even though Steve-O has your money, he wants to keep the library growing so that you pony up again when you buy your next-g ipod (dont even know what # they are on now).
The DRM license will probably expire when you stop paying.
I've already got "ALL I CAN EAT" on Limewire and Frostwire for the grand total of $0.00 per month.
or if your not a pirate, rhapsody.
ill take 10$ a month over 200+$ per ipod, ktnx.
Aren't LimeWire and FrostWire the very exact same thing? (except one is shareware and the other is freeware)
Anyway, I'm with you man... Pirate music FTW!
The legalized Napster is less than $13.00 a month, as well... basically guaranteed to be cheaper than an iTunes subscription, and it's got an amazing selection of music. Regardless, you also have options to strip DRM from media files in the form of DoubleTwist... thanks to DVD Jon. If you don't know what I'm talking about, Google is your friend... and it's worth a look. None of my paid music has any DRM crap on it, and I hope that it never will. :)
I bet they even use the tagline "Comes with Music" and play dumb.
Gotta love them Apple-sized balls!
But really, that'd be great 'cause I'm in the market for a new iPod. All you can eat music, well, that'd be better than having two cocks! Especially for you (you know who you are).
I know this is a little tough for everyone but I'd really like to go one day without having to read the words "cock","balls", "dick", "jewels" or any variation of such.
We could call it the engadget challenge and host it on the 5th of April. Everyone try to refrain from the use of any metaphors for cock or balls. Any takers? Any engadgeteers wanna make this official?
Welp, good job criticizing them for something they haven't done yet and aren't going to do.
Prediction: tomorrow, farfisa is going to kill a baby. What a bastard, you shouldn't kill babies.
@ Zorque -- Well, I don't have a history of killing babies, but apple sometimes likes to take names and things that other people have come up with first and claim them as their own... You know... if you'd been following.
http://www.engadget.com/2007/07/05/apples-little-problem-with-ripping-off-artists/
http://www.tuaw.com/2006/01/11/apple-intel-ad-not-so-original/
http://www.engadget.com/2007/09/07/ipod-touch-vs-htc-touch-apple-trademark-dispute-round-2/
...had to leave out the Cisco iPhone thing and the Touch ad that uses a tune from a Zune ad, but you get the idea.
"Welp, good job criticizing them for something they haven't done yet and aren't going to do."
Am I missing something here? I mean are you making a joke or something because farfisa does, in fact, use both the words balls and cocks in his comment... Either that or your reading comprehension is TERRIBLE.
Never mind... With farfisa's reply I notice the comment was aimed at him, not metal. I suppose I failed that.
Does acknowledging the failure negate the actual failure?
Two lefts don't make a right. But three do.
Not quite, but at least it keeps people from farming me. (I like to think of the Engadget comment system as an MMO, as I don't get to play those anymore.) Does this count as my third left?
please for the love of god dont do it!
nobody likes having to pay for the same music over and over each month(cough zune pass)
just keep the nice you pay you have it forever method
Yeah, nobody likes subscription models!!
except Netflix subscribers...
or Gamefly subscribers...
or Napster subscribers...
or Rhapsody subscribers...
or... Zune Pass subscribers.
Hmmm, pay 15 dollars a month for zune pass, or 10 dollars for every album I've downloaded? I could probably pay for 10 years of the zune pass with all that money if I bought all the albums.
I don't think I'd put a music subscription service in the same boat as netflix/gamefly. With them you're renting physical media with the intention of returning. With a music model you "keep" it and then it just "stops working" when you don't pay.
And considering how Napster has been doing in the past and probably still recently, I don't think that would be the greatest example. Rhapsody mostly does OK b/c of Best Buy and I have no idea why anyone would use a Zune, so I can't comment on that part.
While I wouldn't say "no one wants a subscription service" I also wouldn't say your examples entirely prove that point.
Subscription may be an all you can eat buffet, but at the end of the day you're only renting your food.
In my understanding: you have unlimited downloads, but DRM automatically removes and restricts the content. There goes the suckers who will pay for DRM.
Why do they have to make it so complicated? I want it to download and just play and play and play without some crap ruining it. I think this is the reason why some peeps resort to Frostwire and Limewire for their music: It's easy and it won't fess you up with DRMs. It's a kind of "path of least resistance" thing that we all like.
wow. that is possibly the best metaphor ever.
Just when you thought we were killing off DRM, "BOOM!" a possible breathing of life into the bastard concept. IF the rumors are true, anyway. I'd rather pay on a per track/per album basis.
Also interesting is that Nokia's "Comes with Music" model referred to in the above article was lamented while I detect no such sentiment when Apple is rumored to be implementing a similar model. Hmmm...
Subscription/rental models have DRM in it to make sure users don't keep it after the rental period.
Since it's a 'rental', you're not supposed to keep it forever. Just for the time you paid for.
It's like renting a car for a week for a pretty small flat fee. Then when the week's over, you have to return it. You can't just keep it with you and take off with it.
The music giants put DRM to make sure that the music isn't going anywhere after that period. In subscription/rental models, DRM actually does make sense.
Though for buying, I agree - DRM shouldn't be bundled with music you bought legally. But for rentals, it makes sense that way.
except music isnt a consumable.
@wootman
That's the point he is making. It is a ridiculous thought to rent your food simply BECAUSE it is a consumable. The idea being you don't rent music and you shouldn't have to.
Sure, the buffet owner can have the food back right after I've been to the toilet...
That was a really clever metaphor the first thousand times it was used. Now it's just hackneyed. Here are the arguments against it:
"The food still tastes good going down."
"If you don't like subscription programs, buy the damn music. No one is stopping you. This is just another way to consume that suits some people better."
"It is expensive to discover new foods one expensive meal at a time. Better to sample everything at no additional cost"
"You're paying for access to a library, not eating food. Your metaphor is dumb"
the list goes on and on.
Really though, a subscription model for music makes sense to some users. Think of it like satellite radio but with an unlimited number of channels. You can get any song you want at a moment's notice, and listen to it right then and there. You never BUY the music, true. But you're not paying "purchase" prices for it either. I can download way more than 15 songs in a month, so I'm clearly not paying purchase prices. If I only listen to 5-10 new songs a month? Clearly the subscription model isn't for me, I should just buy my music piecemeal.
At the risk of being downmodded:
Engadget, WTF? This is breaking news? It's a rumor! I'm not one to get on this bias flame war unless I feel like there is something. Don't put it in "BREAKING NEWS" unless its a fact and is a big deal. Your vista coverage dose not exist and a rumor is breaking news? Come on.
/end rant
Correction: An *Apple* rumor is breaking news. Hell, anything Apple is breaking news around here.
noob its all in the punctuation
There are significant advantages to a subscription method, namely, actually paying for large amounts songs by the song or album is prohibitively expensive. You can always just pirate the music but I prefer a model that pays the people I listen to.
It's because of the zune pass that I actually own a zune. That and the fact that three computers and three zunes can share one account/bill so I'm splitting the cost with my roommates.
Well I'm pretty sure that violates the terms of service, but hey, apparently illegal stuff is an option around here for acquiring music.
How much is a Zune Pass? I can't seem to find it on their site without signing up...
sinerasis: It's $15 per month. The price of one CD a month.
ZunePass is such an awesome deal, and I also split it with my dad back home. It's one of the most under-rated things for the Zune eco-system that everyone doesn't seem to either know about, or care.
Wow, that's surprisingly reasonable... I might have to look at around a little...
Violating the terms of service isn't usually illegal, it just gives the company in question grounds to terminate the service.
yeah... this isnt very novel. i have the zune pass too and its great. My gf and i live in different parts of the world and share the same account. its funny how no comparisons are drawn, yet if the reverse situation had occured, the ridicule would have been heard 3 days into next decade.
Direct link to ZunePass : http://www.zune.net/en-us/support/usersguide/zunemarketplace/zunepass.htm
Subscription music is basically rental music. Rent it for a month for a flat fee (in Zune's case : $15 a month), and have access to a large database of online tunes. There might be a 'few' where some companies won't allow rental music, but most tunes work for the most part.
It's great if you want to discover and hear new music all the way, but it's NOT great if you actually want to keep it. Like renting a car, you pay a small sum to use it, not keep it with you after time has passed.
I love how Zune Marketplace at least "offers" two options : buy or rent. You can go either ways.
Eddy, you are being too nice. This is a typical Engadget-style post. No mention that this is even similar to the Zune pass. I love the overall engadget coverage, but sometimes this sort of blatant fanboyism just makes me sick.
New title: "Apple contemplating the next features to be stolen from Zune"
Where exactly can I sign up for the Zune's unlimited, one-time fee option?
@DT
any one time fee giving you all the music you could ever want, forever, is going to be damn high.
Direct link to ZunePass : http://www.zune.net/en-us/support/usersguide/zunemarketplace/zunepass.htm
Subscription music is basically rental music. Rent it for a month for a flat fee (in Zune's case : $15 a month), and have access to a large database of online tunes. There might be a 'few' where some companies won't allow rental music, but most tunes work for the most part.
It's great if you want to discover and hear new music all the way, but it's NOT great if you actually want to keep it. Like renting a car, you pay a small sum to use it, not keep it with you after time has passed.
I love how Zune Marketplace at least "offers" two options : buy or rent. You can go either ways.
Wanted to clear that up again.
Presumably the lifetime iTunes would be tied to the lifetime of the iPod. The most similar thing I can think of like this would be when Sirius offered lifetime on their radios for about $500. Now, if Sirius offered it for $500, for streaming satellite service, how could Apple POSSIBLY offer unlimited downloads that you can pick and choose, for the life of your iPod, for a measly 20 bucks (20 bucks is the amount being bandied about, as per the article). No way will it be that cheap.
Sound like it will probably be full of DRM, and who likes that? If it was DRM free I would support it, otherwise, not so much.
Correction: An *Apple* rumor is breaking news. Hell, anything Apple is breaking news around here.
Ok, check this out.
Vote me up if you've ever been screwed over by the commenting system like here.
Vote me down if you haven't.
You just have to be careful and make sure the "replying to [insert blue username of person]" thing is there.
I don't like Engadget's commenting system either. I don't think I have any other site that requires me to check my e-mail just to put up a comment, only having to worry about it landing in the right spot.
+1
I got my reply attached on to the wrong post (usually the next one) and I got flack because they say I was Post-Jacking. No, it's the commenting system that attaches my replies to the wrong ones!
Everytime I hammer a person who says "FIRST!" the comment disappears, leaving my reply in the open. I got more flack from that.
I can't log in my profile so I can't colorize my icon.
it happens most if you've just replied to someone, and you try to reply again. The 2nd reply never works without refreshing the page.
Whoa. Wouldn't that be copying the Zune and what other online music stores have at least "offered" for quite some time now?
Oh wait. It's Apple, Apple never copies good ideas that people just want.
Just joking. :P
Yeh, but Apple might actually make some money from doing it instead of losing money. It's not who did it first that matters, it's the one who's doing it the best and iTMS will being doing it the best. At least for a while, anyways.
Wow. That's what I always say when someone goes "But Apple did it first, M$ copied it!".
But how can you be sure iTMS will 'do it better'? This is a rumor, and Apple has done mistakes in the past before.
yeahhh I know (and used to be one) a lot of zune owners and the majority HATE the zune pass. music is a lot different from other industries. you dont constantly watch movies. its like comparing music to rental cars.
Werd.
Pshh, who cares? I buy a few songs off of iTunes per month. My music library is near complete and most of it came from CDs I bought.
You must be close to the end of your life or a really, really boring person if your music collection is "near complete". I hope that I never stop discovering new music on a weekly basis for the rest of my life. I don't love paying a fee every month to listen to music, but if I paid $1 for every song I listened to I would be bankrupt several times over.
Apple used to have this way of doing things a certain way and then convincing everyone that it was good for them. As their fan base grows in numbers it also grows in diversity. Not everyone is a blind sheep and many, many want a subscription based music service. So much so that they use Rhapsody which is quite literally the worst program I have ever paid money to use ever. Apple is either living in the past if they think that a subscription service isn't what people want or they are intentionally stating obviously incorrect assessments because they know their current model makes them more money. I love my iPhone, but Apple is a corporation like any other trying to make every nickel and dime they possibly can.
Jeremy, I like how you insinuate that people who don't want a subscription based service are stupid. That's very open minded of you. Personally, I don't have any interest in renting music. I really don't. I'm sure some people do, and that's just peachy for them, but I like to own my music and not have to give it back.
Zak, that wasn't my intent. I'm just incredibly annoyed by Steve Jobs regularly stating "people don't want to rent their music" when it's just flat out untrue. Because of the success of the iPod, iTunes has become the biggest player in the new frontier of music distribution. Apple has all the control and they're dictating that the only way they'll distribute is by pay-per-track and/or pay-per-album.
I just don't understand how Microsoft can get sued for being a monopoly by Netscape for not bending over backwards to support their browser when iTunes has thousands upon thousands of exclusive songs that can ONLY be listened to on an iPod. This blows my mind.
Until these companies are willing to realize that their distribution models are broken they're going to be mass numbers of people stealing from them. iTunes and Rhapsody are a good start, but the current scheme is just not enough.
I think they should hurry up and make on-the-spot video downloading for this before they even start with an unlimited music service.
Hell,while we're at it,let's increase the capacity on the Touch and iphone again and try to lower the price Apple.
Is that too much to ask?!?!?Poor people like their music too ya kno!!
Dude, poor people make the music... rich people sell it, and the regulars are just lucky to have a listen once and a while.
How about Richard?
Why should you care if someone says "First"? It shouldn't bother you that somebody is just having some childish fun. It doesn't really harm anyone. If they waited two weeks and commented "Last", would that also bother you?
no, i was actually making a reference to the fact that no matter what apple does they'll make a profit because of their devoted fanbase.
i get the reference.
dammit, it didn't do a reply.
Apparently, many iTunes users don't care for subscription services. They want to own their music and not have it disappear at a future date. I'm personally not interested in this service as I've got about as much music as I ever dreamed of having, but if it can boost Apple's stock price, then good for Apple. This is probably just a rumor, but if it ever does take place, I sure hope it doesn't backfire and mess up iTMS standing with the music industry.
Unlimited? Yep I would bite
AND I DONT MEAN COMCAT UNLIMITED... truely unlimited i would buy in
I prefer buying individual tracks and albums to subscriptions. There are already too many subscriptions I must feed each month.
I'm torn on this type of deal.
One one side I'm thinking, "Yeah, that sounds great! Pay a fee to have WHATEVER I want that is available in iTunes!" I figure that this is only good for me right?
But then on the other side of things I keep thinking, "But then I'm paying a monthly fee forever (or, for as long as I want to listen to this music, which should be until the day I die.)" I don't really want to be stuck paying a fee to listen to my music. If I come on hard times or need to save a little cash, I want to be able to cancel and keep listening. I don't want to cancel and then have all my music disappear.
If iTunes is able to make the subscription like eMusic where once the music is downloaded then I can keep it DRM free, THEN I would bite.
Obviously it couldn't be unlimited then though, because then people would sign up for one month, download everything they possibly could, and then cancel with a much enlarged music library, only signing up when there is enough new stuff to warrant the one month cost again.
Hmm... sorry, I was replying to a different post... seems there have been some problems with the commenting system.
This commenting system is screwy... if you get this in the order I think you'll get it, it will be a reply to a comment saying that Engadget messed up where it stuck the post, which was a reply to (but somehow is before) the original longer post I made, which shouldn't have been on this thread in the first place.
I give up. Engadget, fix your commenting system.
No, the analogy (although clever) is wrong. Music is not a "consumable". A consumable is something that goes away (is consumed) once it is used. Food and gas are consumables. Books, movies, and TV shows are not consumables. Music falls in the latter category.
Food and gas are subscription services. Yes, that's right, subscription. You constantly pay for those products, and you constantly receive those products. If you ever stop paying for them, you stop receiving them. Food and gas are subscription services BECAUSE they are consumable; i.e., if they were not consumable, there would be no need to buy them over and over again.
Not so ridiculous, huh? Now, with any subscription plan, things like music and movies become "consumable", in the sense stated above. But, if you BUY the music (no subscription), it is no longer "consumable", but it is owned. You get to keep it forever, or as long as you care to keep it and are able to keep it.
But, the whole reason anyone would buy a music subscription is this: millions of songs are available, with no per-song fee. If that floats your boat, do it. If not, pay per song and keep it forever.
I'll pay a monthly fee for unlimited music on my iPhone. I already have a subscription to Yahoo Music. I'll probably switch to Rhapsody when Yahoo Music dies. I occasionally buy music from iTunes and Amazon, but I can't afford to buy everything I would like to. So a subscription model makes perfect since to me. I already have subscriptions to Netflix, XM, & Tivo. One more monthly fee isn't going to make much difference. I would definitely give my money to iTunes, since they make getting music so easy.
It's not that big a deal to rent music. If I stop paying for Netflix, DVDs stop coming in the mail. If I cancel XM, my radio stops getting music from space. If I stop paying for cable, I don't get TV either.
At least with the iTunes subscription, I'd get to keep the songs as long as I'm a subscriber. However, I have to send the DVDs back to Nexflix before I get new ones.
iPods will still continue to work as usual. I guess it depends on how much an iTunes subscription would be. I'll be paying $100 a month for cable and $80 for a cell phone for the rest of my life... Subscriptions are a way of life.
Considering I already have Rhapsody, but I have Mac and an iPod, I would not mind paying the same for the iTunes subscription.
aside from the larger music availabilty, the Zune's All you can eat wins my vote for the fact that the music is in WMA which means it works in WMP11 which allows you to sync to other devices that have superscription music support. that would be one benefit over itunes
wow i really expected that comment to be on here days ago...oops!
Oh, let me guess, guys, this is a New© and Revolutionary© iDea™ from our beloved Apple™? Forget Zune Pass- that never happened!
Well gee whiz, I don't know. Can you show me where anybody said that? No really, show me where Apple or anybody else said that this was a new or revolutionary idea.
In other news, stop being a dumbass.
Zak, its so like you to not get the point.
Maybe you should take your own advice?
Well gosh, let's see. Your post is insinuating that Apple believes it's being new and innovative with a subscription service. My post is asking you to show me where you got the idea that Apple believes that. Because let's face it, if Apple doesn't really believe they're being "new and innovative", then your post doesn't make much sense, does it?
So rather than dodging the question this time, let's see you prove it. Go ahead, it should be easy right? Since Apple is so arrogant and everything. Go ahead and prove that Apple believes that a subscription service is something totally new.
Yeah, because I'm referring to Apple, right Zak? I couldn't possibly be referring to Engadget or all the Apple fanboys 'round here, could I? No, because that would make sense, right? I mean, its not like Apple's products aren't the pinnacle of innovation around here (around here being the proverbial alternate universe where things that couldn't possibly be, are).