Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

MySpace Buys and Then Takes Down Imeem

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the do-what-i-meem dept.

Businesses 165

Conchobair was one of several users letting us know that Myspace has snapped up free music streaming site imeem. Visitors to the imeem site are being sent to a MySpace redirect page, which states that they are "working to migrate your imeem playlist to MySpace Music." Currently there is no way to access imeem music or playlists or to make use of imeem apps on Android or iPhone. The AP reports that the deal was done for less than $1M — not bad for 16M subscribers — noting that the music startup was running out of cash. PC Mag notes: "Last week it was announced that Apple had purchased Lala, and now MySpace snaps up imeem. Are Pandora and Rhapsody next?"

cancel ×

165 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Myspace is fast losing relevance (4, Insightful)

mcrbids (148650) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374768)

The combination of crappy layouts, shoddy design, counter-intuitive interface, and juvenile audience are all working together to render Myspace irrelevant. I just checked my myspace page, apparently for the first time since May of this year.

Nothing's changed...

Re:Myspace is fast losing relevance (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30374798)

However, MySpace did provide people with free email addresses at MySpace as a ploy to get them to use the MySpace interface on a regular basis.

Re:Myspace is fast losing relevance (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30374814)

Niggers.

Re:Myspace is fast losing relevance (2, Insightful)

DreamsAreOkToo (1414963) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374828)

Slashdot should employ the use of a new filter. If you are posting anonymously, your post should be rejected if it contains any racial slurs or other obvious flaming.

Re:Myspace is fast losing relevance (1)

quangdog (1002624) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374882)

I second this.

Not that my vote counts for much....

Re:Myspace is fast losing relevance (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30374886)

Slashdot should employ the use of a new filter. If you are posting anonymously, your post should be rejected if it contains any racial slurs or other obvious flaming.

|\|1gg3rs.

Re:Myspace is fast losing relevance (2, Insightful)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374936)

Accidentally banning "13375p3ak" is a plus in my book.

Re:Myspace is fast losing relevance (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30374960)

Great, publish you home address so we can discuss this in person. Or are you just another Internet douche that is not willing to stand up for anything?

Ever heard of the "lameness filter"? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30374994)

They've tried. It's called the lameness filter. Basically, it ends up banning people from posting example code while the trolls have their 100% alphanumeric ASCII art of goatse.

So no, the filtering doesn't work very well.

Re:Myspace is fast losing relevance (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30375726)

I should've known Obama would have the CIA crack my Facebook password!

-Sarah P

--
Palin/Beck 2012
Palin/Limbaugh 2016
Palin/TBA 2020
Palin/TBA 2024
Palin/TBA 2028
Palin/TBA 2032
Palin/TBA 2036

Re:Myspace is fast losing relevance (1)

stonedcat (80201) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374934)

Censorship you say? Not the kinda thing slashdot was built on.
No matter what a person wants to say, censoring it is not the answer... ever.
As much as I might take offense or disagree with someone it doesn't give them any less right to say what they wish.

Re:Myspace is fast losing relevance (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30374944)

Slashdot should employ the use of a new filter. If you are posting anonymously, your post should be rejected if it contains any racial slurs or other obvious flaming.

Eat a dick, slutbag asshat doucheface fartsicle!

Re:Myspace is fast losing relevance (1)

nametaken (610866) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374874)

MySpace sucks, and if they're smart they'll stop buying companies and work on a complete overhaul. Facebook ate their lunch and MySpace still does nothing to fight back.

Re:Myspace is fast losing relevance (2, Insightful)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375066)

The horrible thing is that, like IM and file formats, there's a strong network effect. There's a strong incentive for everyone to use the same site, pretty much regardless of specs, functionnality, reliability...

Hopefully someone will come up with some kind of Social Web standard and filters, that will let us import/export content and contacts between sites, maybe set up front-ends on several sites but point them back to our own site...

Re:Myspace is fast losing relevance (1)

commodoresloat (172735) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375194)

friendfeed.com perhaps?

Re:Myspace is fast losing relevance (1)

Gerzel (240421) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375876)

Yeah but if the companies allowed that they'd lose their customers.

The only way is for you personally to use sites other than those that you dislike or else nothing will change. Users have to move away from the sites, because if the users don't show themselves to be mobile the sites won't improve.

Re:Myspace is fast losing relevance (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374926)

I wish...

For some reason many / most(?) of interesting new music bands choose to use Myspace as their homesite.

I'm really torn; great new music (yes, there's plenty of those if you care to look around) versus crappy nature of Myspace.

Myspace = airheads only (1)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375318)

For some reason many / most(?) of interesting new music bands choose to use Myspace as their homesite.

And where else will the bands (or their marketing managers) find such a large collection of malleable young airheads, all eager to be commanded what to think, what to buy, what to talk about, and what to do, so they'll appear all grown up and cool?

Re:Myspace = airheads only (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375342)

Yeah, supposedly the arguments "it was better" are mostly about feeling better past primetime...

Anyway, independents (not some genre; mode of action) are most plagued by the error of choosing Myspace. Local bands (yes, even in countries where Myspace doesn't exist otherwise), real jobs, no managers, little side money from small number of CDs & concerts.

yeah but (1)

commodoresloat (172735) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375202)

imeem was kind of cool.

Of course, no more. I'm sure "Tom" will put an end to that.

Re:Myspace is fast losing relevance (2, Insightful)

rolfwind (528248) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375284)

Sounds like the geocities of this decade.

who streams music? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30374774)

In this day and age, who the hell would even need/want to stream music?

I'm glad I have all of my music on my hard drive. I'm not about to let some external party control what I listen to or when I listen to it.

Re:who streams music? (2, Interesting)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374794)

You'd be surprised. I know a few people that use Pandora constantly, even though they have their own large mp3 collections. A couple of others I know that uses streaming music do it because they're not computer literate enough to rip their cd's to mp3 and set everything up properly.

Re:who streams music? (1)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375010)

Do your friends need reminds about when to breathe? Seriously, you need either smarter friends, or you need to set them up with a different computer.

Insert CD. iTunes opens. Asks if you want to rip this. Click yes. Plug in your iPod. Click the button that says 'yes, sync this ipod with this computer'.

I assume Windows offers similarly easy functionality these days, even without iTunes. C'mon, we aren't talking about the days of looking up command line switches to Lame.

Re:who streams music? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30375116)

Do your friends need reminds about when to breathe? Seriously, you need either smarter friends, or you need to set them up with a different computer.

Insert CD. iTunes opens. Asks if you want to rip this. Click yes. Plug in your iPod. Click the button that says 'yes, sync this ipod with this computer'.

I assume Windows offers similarly easy functionality these days, even without iTunes. C'mon, we aren't talking about the days of looking up command line switches to Lame.

If your friends have an IPod product and/or use ITunes you need different friends.

Re:who streams music? (1)

BrentH (1154987) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375800)

Takes about 10 minutes per CD. Streaming is instant. Streaming wins.

Re:who streams music? (1)

SomeoneGotMyNick (200685) | more than 4 years ago | (#30376002)

I have a Zune, you insensitive clod!!!

Re:who streams music? (3, Interesting)

NoPantsJim (1149003) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374878)

I hate listening to the radio, so for awhile I tended to miss out on most new stuff. A couple of times, my absolute favorite bands released a cd without me even knowing because I wasn't paying attention.

Pandora fixed everything I hate about normal radio. Now I enter in all my stuff, and still get recommendations on new music. If I don't like a new song, I just skip it. Pandora has introduced me to many new bands which I love.

And yes, I have a massive cd collection, all ripped to mp3 and carried on my iPhone, so streaming does make sense for people with a large collection.

Re:who streams music? (0, Flamebait)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374904)

Your CD collection is barely above trivial if it fits on an iPhone, and certainly not 'massive'.

Re:who streams music? (4, Funny)

PhantomHarlock (189617) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374922)

Hipster fight!

Re:who streams music? (1)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375104)

Hardly. My taste in music is about as square and mainstream as it gets.

Re:who streams music? (1)

Lemmy Caution (8378) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375492)

Does classical music still land you in a hipster fight?

Re:who streams music? (1)

The_mad_linguist (1019680) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374924)

By "massive CD collection" he means "Laserdisc collection".

Re:who streams music? (1)

NoPantsJim (1149003) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374948)

I have the 32gig iPhone 3gs. Currently there are over 5400 songs on it, spanning 15 solid days of music. Maybe it's not "massive" in your eyes, but it's enough to keep me entertained.

Re:who streams music? (0, Troll)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375076)

So what you're saying is that it looks big to you? That comment carry water with your girlfriend? I always go with "it's not the size of your axe, it's how you swing it" but whatever works for you.

(I had another reply written, but it's still Tuesday where I am. Suffice it to say that 5400 songs ain't much. 500 albums? Puh-leeze.)

Re:who streams music? (2, Insightful)

NoPantsJim (1149003) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375096)

I'm not sure I understand, what made you decide to turn this thread into some absurd superiority battle over who has more music? My initial post was trying to explain to someone else why streaming still makes sense in this day and age, and you turned it into a dick measuring contest. Go troll someone else.

Re:who streams music? (0, Troll)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375392)

I'm bored, and wasn't up for another hour of the Leonard Maltin Game (seriously, played for an hour or so each of the past two nights). You made a simple, silly statement, and I chose to pick at it.

Re:who streams music? (1)

NoPantsJim (1149003) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375424)

Well thanks for playing the game, but getting snarky because you disagree with the adjective I chose to describe my music collection is a little over the top. Lets just agree to end it?

By the way, did you register a username? I'm obviously NoPantsJim...

Re:who streams music? (1)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375456)

I don't get relieved for work for another 20 minutes, but I grow weary of this, so I'm about done with the trolling

I hadn't registered yet, but probably will next week (I don't browse slashdot from home, and I'll forget about it until then).

My only complaint is that it doesn't seem to grab movies from a wind enough range of years. I need to look and see if there is more info in the 'about' page, but I suspect some of the things that tend to annoy me are either design choices that are valid, expressing preferences that don't matter in an objective way and/or the source material forces certain choices.

Re:who streams music? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30375326)

500 albums

You spent MORE than $7,500 on music (averaging ~$15/album)? (Perhaps you bought them off iTunes, which would be just short of $7000 at $1.29/song)? I wouldn't even have the patience to sit down and buy all that music, let alone the disposable cash..

Re:who streams music? (1)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375384)

Ripping CDs, a collection I've been building since 1985.

Re:who streams music? (2, Informative)

tagno25 (1518033) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375154)

Try 80GB of "legal" music. In ~80GB (could be larger by now) I have ~4 months of never hearing the same song twice, unless you use "random" and then you hear the same song multiple times in a day.

Of course I am nowhere near "normal", I have a 1TB (SI) drive that is 91% full of ONLY anime in Japanese with English subtitles. I am also building a 6TB RAID6 network storage server.

Re:who streams music? (1)

NoPantsJim (1149003) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375168)

Again, I was never trying to claim that I was the king of having digital music, nor that I have more than any other Slashdotter ever. I was saying that streaming digital music still makes sense for someone who has all the music they already want at their disposal.

Re:who streams music? (1)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375410)

No, you just claimed your collection is massive. We are trying to disabuse you of that notion.

Re:who streams music? (1)

xaxa (988988) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375586)

Try 80GB of "legal" music

I have 120GB (or so) of music, about 12GB of it is legal (~100 CDs, which is 1-4 per month bought since my first job).

It swelled my e-penis, but it got to the point where I realised I was choosing to listen to the same things all the time as I couldn't remember what I had, or whether it was any good. Using "random" meant I'd hear too much crap that I didn't really like. Using "play similar songs" (e.g. using Amarok) had a tendency to drift towards more popular artists. I've been going through and deleting albums in the last few months, so far I've removed 30GB of stuff and it's much better now :-).

I also have ~30GB in my downloads folder, which I haven't listened to yet. I don't seem to have time.

(PS Anyone suggesting I should spend more on CDs is welcome to see my collection of gig tickets.)

Re:who streams music? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30375788)

Why is this rated 'informative'? It's some dude boasting about how many (totally hardcore, really!) animes he has. It's not informative, it's silly.

Re:who streams music? (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375028)

Let's say an average song is 3 minutes, and you're using a bit rate of 192 kbps. That's about 4.2 MB per file, which means you can fit about 7800 songs on a 32 GB iPhone. With an average of 15 songs per album, that's 520 albums. Sure you need some space for other stuff as well, but it's still safe to say you can carry about 450 albums around.

So I wonder... is this the sort of amount that's "a trivial CD collection" to you? I know I don't have that many albums, and I think of myself as a music lover.

Re:who streams music? (1)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375070)

Let's say an average song is 3 minutes, and you're using a bit rate of 192 kbps. That's about 4.2 MB per file, which means you can fit about 7800 songs on a 32 GB iPhone. With an average of 15 songs per album, that's 520 albums. Sure you need some space for other stuff as well, but it's still safe to say you can carry about 450 albums around.

Now consider that albums sell from $10 to $25 dollars a piece.
450 albums is worth $4,500 to $11,250.
That's not trivial to most people.

Re:who streams music? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30375112)

Only if you bought those albums all at the same time. Most people slowly accumulate their music libraries over many years. My own collection of 500 some CDs date back 20 years, so let's apply some real numbers.

500 * 15 = 7500 (I have never had to pay more than $15 for a brand new CD)
7500 / 20 = 375

So if you buy an average of 25 CDs per year, you are spending about $375 per year. That is trivial.

Re:who streams music? (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375216)

How the hell is doing something for 20 years trivial by any human standard?

Re:who streams music? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30375316)

That's what SHE said!

Re:who streams music? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30375382)

Yeah, because most people only enjoy music for a couple years of their lives and then give it up completely.

Re:who streams music? (1)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375408)

When you're old enough to drink, we'll tell you.

Re:who streams music? (3, Funny)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375638)

For someone who has both Jesus and John Lennon in his signature, you sure seem cynical.

Re:who streams music? (1)

NoPantsJim (1149003) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375258)

I tend to buy music on eBay. I find tons of cds still wrapped in their original cellophane, but with a slightly cracked case that keeps them from being sold in stores. I buy the cds (usually under $5) and then replace the jewel cases with ones I buy in bulk. Much cheaper that way, I still get a disk that is in perfect condition that I can rip to my own specifications, and no stealing online.

Re:who streams music? (1)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375440)

So the crux of the matter is that you are young enough to have a different perspective.

Looking through the thread, it seems that you were not yet in elementary school when I got my first CD. That gives me an extra ten years. So, ten years from now, if you maintain an interest in music, look back on the size of your collection today, and you'll see that it isn't much.

I look at my father, who has been collecting vinyl since somewhere in the mid 60's (I don't count 45's from before that). If 500 albums seems like a lot, I can only imagine that you'd faint at what he's amassed over 50 years.

Re:who streams music? (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375830)

So, ten years from now, if you maintain an interest in music, look back on the size of your collection today, and you'll see that it isn't much.

No, in 10 years, 500 albums is still a lot for someone who hasn't been collecting as long as you have.

You are correct in saying that the size of a collection can be called small or large relatively to the time someone has been collecting. This automatically means that if you don't know how long someone has been collecting, you cannot make any judgement on how large or small someones collection is to them.

So don't critize someone for saying his collection is huge, because it is not huge for you. It could very well be huge for him.

Re:who streams music? (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375842)

Also, please don't criticize me for misspelling criticize.

Re:who streams music? (1)

DarkOx (621550) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375622)

450 albums is worth $4,500 to $11,250

  450 albums cost $4,500 to $11,250 new; just try and resell them you will find out what they are worth and I can tell you its going to be less than $4,500; unless you lucked into something very rare and considered important.

Re:who streams music? (1)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375404)

I'll judge my numbers from 2000, as I haven't bothered to look closely since then. At the time, I had roughly 500 CDs amassed over 15 years which works out to 34 per year, far less than one per week. Average price was probably about $15, so $7500 spent, again, over the course of more than a decade. This ignores the gifts from family and friends.

It ain't that hard.

Re:who streams music? (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375616)

If you've been collecting albums for over 25 years, then it makes sense you have a lot of them. But that doesn't mean that a few hundred albums is suddenly "trivial", because you don't know the age of the guy you're saying it to. That fact that you are over 40, doesn't mean everyone is.

Don't project your standards on others.

Re:who streams music? (1)

xaxa (988988) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375698)

I'd say 500 is a moderate amount for a serious music fan, but a large amount for a normal person.

I have roughly 100 CDs, bought since April 2007 (2.75 years ago, when I first got a job), which works out to a CD bought... wow, every 10 days. I'm surprised, I didn't think I bought that many... (((100.0/(2.75*52))**-1)*7?)

A friend of mine is only a year older than me, and has over 1000 CDs. Another had twice that many when I was 18, he probably has 5000 by now. Most people I know with a serious interest in music probably have 50-200.

Re:who streams music? (1)

NoPantsJim (1149003) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374980)

Someone just posted the following to another thread of mine: "I moderated in the myspace thread, so i cant comment there, and you don't have your email listed, but 5400 songs is what i had after a two years of dialup on napster/audiogalaxy back in my high school days. i think 30 gigs for a "serious" music collection is pretty small given all things considered." I think we've gotten to a point where quality takes a back seat to quantity in these mp3 hoarding days. Honestly, I can't say for certain that I really love every single one of the 5400 songs on my iPhone. I could probably stand to delete quite a few, and I'm sure anyone who claims 30 gigs isn't a sizable music collection probably has tons of stuff they could easily delete without missing.

Re:who streams music? (-1, Troll)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375098)

And you'd be wrong. When one's musical tastes span 50 years, even of mainstream music, the collection could grow quite large.

Perhaps the difference is that you were busy stealing songs because they have no value to you, while some of us buy music because it IS worth something.

Oh, and to continue the dick size metaphor from the other thread, now you're saying you're glad you have a small pecker because you'd probably just hurt someone if it were any bigger.

Re:who streams music? (1)

xaxa (988988) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375718)

anyone who claims 30 gigs isn't a sizable music collection probably has tons of stuff they could easily delete without missing.

Music lovers tend to collect complete albums, and wouldn't want to delete odd songs.

Re:who streams music? (1)

Rennt (582550) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374908)

I'm not about to let some external party control what I listen to or when I listen to it.

Pfft. Its not about control. Its music as a service.
Streaming music replaces and improves on radio, not your private collection. I have an extensive mp3 collection but enjoy my last.fm subscription when I want something to listen to I haven't heard before. Being able to listen to personalised streams from anywhere with a connection has come in handy many times too.

Re:who streams music? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30375008)

Yeah and that worked out real well, didn't it? I'm still sitting here listening to my music while everyone who relied upon Imeem is now screwed.

Cloud computing at its finest.

Re:who streams music? (2, Informative)

Rennt (582550) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375236)

You seem to have the wrong idea about how these services work. It's not YOUR music stored in the cloud. Its just a internet radio station.

Maybe this revision to the original statement will illustrate my point. "In this day and age, who the hell would even need/want to stream video? I'm glad I have all of my video on my hard drive." - It's non-nonsensical. It does not make sense.

As an Imeem user you have not "lost" anything except access to a cool service. Shit happens, but not to worry - there are other suppliers

Re:who streams music? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30375692)

Keep telling yourself that shit and you might start to believe it.

In the meantime I am STILL enjoying my music while those who rely on Imeem are STILL screwed. Make all the excuses that you want, it won't change that fact.

Re:who streams music? (1)

Rennt (582550) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375734)

Yeah, thanks for playing, dickwad [penny-arcade.com] .

Re:who streams music? (1)

imakemusic (1164993) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375978)

In this day and age, who the hell would even need/want to stream music?

Lots of people.

I'm not about to let some external party control what I listen to or when I listen to it.

Then use spotify or pandora and stream what you want, when you want.

This Sucks (2, Interesting)

Conchobair (1648793) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374812)

I work behind a firewall and I can't install or upload music files. This was my wonderful go to on a shitty day of work, that I could listen to anything from Nirvana to Ennio Morricone, from NWA to Neil Young.. for the love of god someone, do you have something that is just as good?

Re:This Sucks (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30374970)

There are a ton of sites that are much better than imeem, but the one i've really started to like is grooveshark.com. lots of people like last.fm or spotify, but grooveshark lets me listen to any song ondemand, without downloading an external app, which is a must for listening to music at work.

Leave Pandora Alone! (3, Funny)

cowtamer (311087) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374844)

Really. Does the name not mean anything??? :)

Re:Leave Pandora Alone! (1)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375108)

Judging by the lack of replies, I'm guessing /. posters are not well versed in the classics.

Re:Leave Pandora Alone! (2, Insightful)

zullnero (833754) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375252)

Or else they are, and just don't care about the reference enough to bother replying. Doesn't seem like the kinda place for heated discussions about Greek myth.

Re:Leave Pandora Alone! (1)

temcat (873475) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375320)

OK, "imeem" means "we have" in Russian, so what?

Re:Leave Pandora Alone! (1)

imakemusic (1164993) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375998)

It's ok, you can download it - it doesn't come in a box.

Yet another free business going bust (3, Interesting)

AcidPenguin9873 (911493) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374860)

Business charges $0 for its product, runs out of cash due to lack of viable revenue. Details at 11.

Unless you're Google and can sell tons of ads, "free" is not going to survive.

Re:Yet another free business going bust (1)

Dumnezeu (1673634) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374876)

Business charges $0 for its product, runs out of cash due to lack of viable revenue. Details at 11.

Unless you're Google and can sell tons of ads, "free" is not going to survive.

Yes, I'm sure that none of those millions of websites that survive only by ads revenue will go down any day now, including one of my pet projects that hasn't been updated since last year and still generates over $200/month from [non-Google] ad clicks.

Re:Yet another free business going bust (1)

c.r.o.c.o (123083) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374950)

That's the perks of being omnipotent, you earn cash out of thin air. But I was hoping that God* made more than $200/month in revenue from any one of his ventures.

*Parent's user ID...

Re:Yet another free business going bust (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30375162)

$200 isn't enough to buy a week's worth of groceries.

In any case, internet advertising is going to drop off once ad-blocking becomes more popular. Annoying the shit out of people is a stupid business plan, and once people realize they don't have to put up with it, they'll stop putting up with it. Just like they do with spam.

Re:Yet another free business going bust (1)

tagno25 (1518033) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375186)

$200 isn't enough to buy a week's worth of groceries.

It is plenty, where I live you can buy a week's worth of groceries for four for ~$150.

Re:Yet another free business going bust (2, Insightful)

drsquare (530038) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375972)

Maybe $200 a month isn't a lot when you're actually paying for content. You know, like licencing all that music. Internet ad revenue is pitiful.

Re:Yet another free business going bust (1)

Sylak (1611137) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374906)

Actually, iMeem had a VIP service it charged for, as well as a cut of music purchased through the site through the stores it linked to.

Re:Yet another free business going bust (1)

N0Man74 (1620447) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375020)

Yeah, remember that old technology they tried where they used to broadcast electromagnetic waves into the air and allow people to use archaic devices called "Radios" to pick up the signal and listen to music? They didn't charge the listeners and it was a total flop. Nobody even remembers it anymore.

It's impossible to have a business model that involves not charging the users of a service a subscription fee.

Sarcasm aside... (2, Interesting)

N0Man74 (1620447) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375052)

The problem with a business like Pandora struggling is not it couldn't make it's model work originally, but the fact that new regulations were put in place to stop it from working.

In the US, we actually tried to create regulations to prevent music publishers from paying radio stations to play their songs for free to listeners. The funny thing is that they find ways to skirt these rules and pay the radio stations anyway.

On the other hand, they trying to stop internet radio at all stops and squeeze them harder for royalties than what even traditional radio broadcasters had to pay per audience member. (At least that's how it was looking the last time I checked, unless this was changed!).

The industry is losing relevance, attacking it's customers, it's promoters, takes their products that have diminished demand and then make them even less appealing by putting in even more restrictions, hijacking not just our media but our media playing devices, and then they have the audacity to start blaming everyone but themselves for losing market share.

They are so out of touch...

Re:Yet another free business going bust (1)

AcidPenguin9873 (911493) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375356)

Your sarcasm is more accurate than you think.

Broadcast media is funny - someone else controls the content, and they control the ads. As a result, broadcasters can reasonably guarantee that an ad would be seen by a certain number of people at a certain time, and the advertisers pay a premium for that opportunity.

A service like Imeem, with its on-demand, user-controlled content/playlists, is much more dynamic, and as a result, much more difficult to get a wide audience for any particular ad. The result is that ads for services like this don't cost as much, and thus bring in less revenue for the broadcaster. So the analogy to traditional ad-supported broadcast media is not quite right at best, and completely wrong at worst.

The problem for the future of ad-supported free content is that other than for live or near-live events (like a daily news program), broadcast media is dying. Broadcast media is not controlled by the end user, and end users want on-demand, I-control-the-content services. The traditional way to make that work was to make people pay for the *content*. Sell them CDs or MP3s or DVDs, and they can do what they want with them, watch them whenever, etc. I have yet to see someone make that viewer/consumer model work with ad-supported content.

Rhapsody? (1)

cbhacking (979169) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374870)

Unless there's another Rhapsody in the world of online music, it's already owned and operated by RealNetworks. Am I missing something, is Real finally en route to a long-overdue end, are they looking to sell Rhapsody, or is the summary just including pointless BS as usual?

I actually tried Rhapsody for a while... it's not bad as a subscriber, but for free online music I'll stick with Pandora, thanks.

Tried by IP address (0)

iamapizza (1312801) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374872)

Going by 208.72.33.133 in the hosts file doesn't help either, you get a 503. But then, I hadn't really ever used imeem before, so I don't know what I'm getting worked up about.

Sweet (4, Insightful)

HisOmniscience (1361001) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374930)

This site was great for trying out artists after a Pandora suggestion. Guess I'll have to go back to torrents for trying out new artists.

Re:Sweet (1)

tonycheese (921278) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375660)

Yes, because MySpace buying a site and transferring it over to them is great justification to start illegally pirating music.

Is your music taste some kind of weird obscure music that's actually easier to find on torrents than on youtube or one of the 20 other music sites?

Re:Sweet (1)

HisOmniscience (1361001) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375938)

1. Imeem was one of the few sites that let users listen to specific artists, not "stations."
2. Both Youtube and Myspace are shitty.
3. Who said anything about me starting to illegally download (it's not piracy) music? I already do that, but this site was a great way to avoid doing that.

Re:Sweet (1)

Fearan (600696) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375994)

You can try out Grooveshark [grooveshark.com] . It does what imeem did, but better.

Too late for for me to be upset.. (2, Informative)

dbcad7 (771464) | more than 4 years ago | (#30374984)

I had already dropped imeem in favor of Slacker.

I never liked it, anyway. (1)

adolf (21054) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375032)

I've been using my new Android phone for all manner of streaming audio in the car, and really enjoying the hell out of it. But I can't say that I miss imeem.

isn't that a bit sketchy? (2, Interesting)

Trepidity (597) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375092)

Clearly MySpace+Imeem doesn't form a monopoly in the area, so I can see why there'd be no reason to block the purchase. But don't companies that purchase their competitors have to at least pretend to be doing it for some reason other than simply to shut down and thereby get rid of a competitor? If the sole reason for buying a competitor is to get rid of them, isn't that roughly equivalent to paying them to leave a particular market, which would be illegal?

Re:isn't that a bit sketchy? (1)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 4 years ago | (#30375798)

MySpace says they are transferring all the playlists over as well, as well as the users... So they bought them for their customer list, which is legal as far as I know.

guy man (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30375226)

I think it's obvious that most /. users just download their fav new cutting edge music either from that band's own website for a modest and fair fee, or hit up their fav torrent site if their fav band happens to be an unfortunate signee of the RIAA.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>