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!

Apple Announces 25 Million Song Downloads

pudge posted more than 10 years ago | from the over-n-million-served dept.

Music 579

Tweder writes "On Apple's iTunes site, Apple has announced that music fans have purchased and downloaded over 25 Million songs from the iTunes Music Store. It seems the launch of the ITMS on the Windows platform has boosted sales tremendously." I suppose this is where I am expected to say something along the lines of, "I thought the recording industry said that this business model wouldn't work, that people won't pay for what they can download for free?" So, there you go.

cancel ×

579 comments

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

Credit Where Credit's Due (5, Interesting)

TPIRman (142895) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742895)

I suppose this is where I should say something like, "The iTunes Music Store wouldn't exist without the cooperation of the recording industry, so even if the music companies had little to lose, they deserve some credit for having faith in Steve Jobs' business model."

Of course, Jobs already said as much himself [slashdot.org] .

Re:Credit Where Credit's Due: The Jihad (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7742925)

Anti-slash [anti-slash.org] deserves a lot of credit for standing up to slashdot's editors.

Re:Credit Where Credit's Due (2, Insightful)

black mariah (654971) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742929)

What's your point? A lot of shit wouldn't exist if it wasn't for something else. MP3.com wasn't going to work either, remember?

Why do we need the recording industry? (3, Interesting)

Adolph_Hitler (713286) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742966)


I'd support Itunes if it were its own industry, with its own music, like mp3.com. The problem with Itunes is it takes the flawed recording industry and extends their monopoly. This would be like steve jobs releasing a version of Microsoft Windows for the Mac, and expecting us all to use that. Its bullshit.

If I wanted to support the RIAA I'd buy buying CD's right now. Take a hint!

Support Itunes(RIAA)> [downhillbattle.org] but not the artists?

Re:Why do we need the recording industry? (5, Informative)

Dominic_Mazzoni (125164) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743055)

The problem with Itunes is it takes the flawed recording industry and extends their monopoly.

Guess what? The iTunes Music Store has hundreds of thousands of songs from independent labels. Labels that are not members of the RIAA. Including many labels that give their artists much better deals.

I'm a jazz fan, so one of my favorite labels is Concord Records [concordrecords.com] , with such artists as Poncho Sanchez and Karrin Allyson. Go ahead, log on and listen to them, you might enjoy it. And supporting them doesn't support the RIAA!

RIAA Radar [magnetbox.com] is a neat site that lets you search for your favorite artist or label and find out whether they're RIAA-free or not.

Re:Why do we need the recording industry? (0)

Adolph_Hitler (713286) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743087)

What good is hundreds of thousands of songs from independent labels when the RIAA is still on the service? The only way independent labels can compete is with the RIAA's off the service. Why not support a service which boycotts the RIAA and just supports independents like magnatune?

Re:Why do we need the recording industry? (5, Insightful)

jazman_777 (44742) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743060)

If I wanted to support the RIAA I'd buy buying CD's right now. Take a hint!

I always bought music because I liked it and wanted to be able to listen to it when I wanted to, over and over again, not to support the RIAA.

Re:Why do we need the recording industry? (5, Interesting)

all your mwbassguy a (720029) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743071)

#1. iTunes features many indie artists. hell, i just got the shaggs first record on it. #2. iTunes is showing the major labels that its a waste of money to record a whole album with a talentless artist when all anyone really wants to buy is a single. this will leave more money for acts that can put out albums worth of songs and develop over time. #3. if the music sucks, it still wont sell.

Re:Credit Where Credit's Due (4, Informative)

Kircle (564389) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743086)

Well, Jobs talks a little about that in his interview [rollingstone.com] with Rolling Stone Magazine. One of the most interesting quotes I think from the article relates to how he convinced the labels to go along with his idea of a music store:
When we first went to talk to these record companies -- you know, it was a while ago. It took us 18 months. And at first we said: None of this technology that you're talking about's gonna work. We have Ph.D.'s here, that know the stuff cold, and we don't believe it's possible to protect digital content.


Of course, music theft is nothing new. Didn't you listen to bootleg Bob Dylan?

Of course. What's new is this amazingly efficient distribution system for stolen property called the Internet -- and no one's gonna shut down the Internet. And it only takes one stolen copy to be on the Internet. And the way we expressed it to them is: Pick one lock -- open every door. It only takes one person to pick a lock. Worst case: Somebody just takes the analog outputs of their CD player and rerecords it -- puts it on the Internet. You'll never stop that. So what you have to do is compete with it.

At first, they kicked us out. But we kept going back again and again. The first record company to really understand this stuff was Warner. They have some smart people there, and they said: We agree with you. And next was Universal. Then we started making headway. And the reason we did, I think, is because we made predictions.

We said: These [music subscription] services that are out there now are going to fail. Music Net's gonna fail, Press Play's gonna fail. Here's why: People don't want to buy their music as a subscription. They bought 45's; then they bought LP's; then they bought cassettes; then they bought 8-tracks; then they bought CD's. They're going to want to buy downloads. People want to own their music. You don't want to rent your music -- and then, one day, if you stop paying, all your music goes away.

And, you know, at 10 bucks a month, that's $120 a year. That's $1,200 a decade. That's a lot of money for me to listen to the songs I love. It's cheaper to buy, and that's what they're gonna want to do.

They didn't see it that way. There were people running around -- business-development people -- who kept pointing out AOL as the great model for this and saying: No, we want that -- we want a subscription business. We said: It ain't gonna work.

Slowly but surely, as these things didn't pan out, we started to gain some credibility with these folks. And they started to say: You know, you're right on these things -- tell us more.

first (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7742896)

first!

FROST PROST!!!!! (-1, Offtopic)

billybob (18401) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742898)

omg rofl!!! :D

rofl

rofl

old news isnt it? (-1, Redundant)

anthony_philipp (710666) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742899)

i thought i saw this a few days ago on the nytimes website.

First Post (-1, Offtopic)

rapjo (211658) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742900)

First Post!
iTMS Rocks!

yay fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7742901)

yay fp!!

DRM (1, Insightful)

seanadams.com (463190) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742902)

Why treat your paying customers like (prospective) criminals, when the pirates will simply continue to use uncrippled formats?

25M sales is great for Apple; bad for music lovers. The fact that a million people or so have jumped on this new thing does not mean it's the future of music.

Total music sales will continue to slump, and piracy will continue to run rampant until the industry offers a legal alternative which is free of DRM and hardware/software lock-in. eMusic was a nice try - next time give it a shot with popular bands - they're all on Kazaa anyway, so what do you have to lose?

Re:DRM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7742950)

How does DRM treat customers like criminals? I don't see how Apple's DRM infringes on my fair use. I have bought several albums from iTMS and have found their DRM very unintrusive. Copyright holders should be able to protect their copyright.

Re:DRM (3, Insightful)

seanadams.com (463190) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742962)

How does DRM treat customers like criminals? I don't see how Apple's DRM infringes on my fair use. I have bought several albums from iTMS and have found their DRM very unintrusive. Copyright holders should be able to protect their copyright.

It treat's you like a prospective criminal. If you were an honest consumer, you wouldn't even think of playing that music on a non-apple product or sharing it with a friend. You'd just buy another copy!

Re:DRM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7743032)

your lame sarcastic comment still does not answer the question.... While being locked to apple hardware (though you can make cds that will work on 99.9% of the cd players out there) maybe a vaild claim, it still doesn't explain how you are treated as a criminal.

MOD PARENT DOWN: TROLL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7742963)

"Anonymous Coward" is a notorious troll

Re:DRM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7742964)

or are you just upset that it doesn't work with your mp3 player and you are afraid that closed DMR standards would put you out of business?

Re:DRM (1, Offtopic)

seanadams.com (463190) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742977)

or are you just upset that it doesn't work with your mp3 player and you are afraid that closed DMR standards would put you out of business?

No, business is going great - Slim Devices [slimdevices.com] has always opposed DRM, and our customers generally appreciate that.

I'm bitching only as a music enthusiast.

Re:DRM (2, Insightful)

mOoZik (698544) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742969)

No, but it does mean the consumer is slowly adapting to on-demand media, and if it is determined that DRM actually inhibits sales, then it will be taken away, but you'll still have the customers with their wallets in hand, standing in line to buy music online. That's what matters.

Re:DRM (5, Insightful)

richcoder (539438) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742997)

I disagree.

Must people, like me, who were big buyers of retail(brick and mortar) music went to downloading music online for free because it was easier than heading down to the local music store.

It wasn't that I wouldn't pay for the music, it was just that it was easier to download it with a better selection of music. Now there are even easier ways to download music such as iTunes and other related services. I prefer to use them now than battling with file sharing systems. So now that it is the easiest meathod for me, that is what I use.

Re:DRM (5, Interesting)

ryanw (131814) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743008)

Total music sales will continue to slump, and piracy will continue to run rampant until the industry offers a legal alternative which is free of DRM and hardware/software lock-in. eMusic was a nice try - next time give it a shot with popular bands - they're all on Kazaa anyway, so what do you have to lose?
First of all, there are plenty of "ME" out there. I am first mostly lazy, secondly make enough money where $0.99 doesn't really take me very far these days, and lastly lazy. With iTMS I have enjoyed the freedom of sampling songs that I have never heard (nor never wouldn't have heard) and buy a song or two every day that will stay in my music collection forever.

Kazaa sure has a LOT of music out there. But it is not in a quick accessible format like the iTMS. I can search, sample, and buy hundreds of songs very quickly. Each and every song is complete and prefectly encoded to my satisfaction. I don't have to download entire songs just to see if I like them or even see what genre the songs fit in. I don't have to screw with too many people downloading from one person and sit "in a line" to get the song. I don't have to worry about only getting 10kbytes/s while my connection is 100kbytes/s.

With iTMS I can find things quickly, easily, without a hitch at the cost of only a few bucks a day. Thats cheaper then some people's smoking habbits. It's something I will have around with me always, sitting on my iPod, etc..

A quick comment on the iTMS vs Napster/Others. A feature that a lot of people overlook that I have found quite pleasing is the integration of your purchased iTMS songs with iMovie & iDVD. I don't believe Microsoft's WMA stuff is able to integrate into their "Movie Maker" program. With iMovie I can just drag purchased songs onto tracks, same with iDVD..

Re:DRM (4, Interesting)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743056)

Why treat your paying customers like (prospective) criminals, when the pirates will simply continue to use uncrippled formats?

Because they have to?

Do you seriously think the music companies would agree on letting a company distribute non-DRM'ed music?

But the option could of course be to not sell music. But maybe Apple wish to sell music.

Re:DRM (4, Insightful)

All Names Have Been (629775) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743062)

piracy will continue to run rampant until the industry offers a legal alternative which is free of DRM and hardware/software lock-in.

I love the tone of statements like these. They make you sound so sure that this will happen. We already have an endless stream of DRM-less music available at your local music store. It's not DRM that keeps people downloading from Kazaa, it's ease of use. This is why ITMS is working so well. One click and it's done. Just like Kazaa except that you don't have to try 45 downloads to get a good copy of Justin Timerlake singing a hip hop version of "Truckin'".

Of course, that doesn't address the primary users of Kazaa, kids with no damn money. It's not a coincidence that you hear of kids getting sued by RIAA. No matter what, DRM or no, these people will trade music because they can. It's too easy not to, and they can spend the $20 they save on fucking McDonalds.

next time give it a shot with popular bands

Someone did. And it's working very well. If you'd stop downloading from Kazaa for a couple of seconds (because you're protesting DRM, I know..) you'd see ITMS works very, very well, and is a good compromise between fans and the record companies. There is a reason why everyone and their damn brother is copying ITMS pretty much feature for feature. Because it works.

kazaa vs. itunes (4, Insightful)

meta-monkey (321000) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742909)

Pudge, I've got several Macs. I use iTunes. I just bought an album off there about an hour ago. But let's not kid ourselves. So, there's been 25 million downloads off iTMS in the past, what nine months? There's probably been 2.5 billion downloads off kazaa in that time. Orders of magnitude, dude. Orders of magnitude.

Re:kazaa vs. itunes (5, Insightful)

black mariah (654971) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742940)

So? There's probably more people that copy friend's CDs than buy their own and I don't see anyone bitching about that anymore.

Re:kazaa vs. itunes (1)

billybob (18401) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742948)

Excellent point. Someone should mod this mafa up. He knows what the F he is talking about. F.

Where does your money go? (0, Flamebait)

Adolph_Hitler (713286) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742976)



When you purchase an Album from Itunes, where exactly does your money go? IF you don't know, why are you throwing money down the toilet? Afraid of getting arrested? Are you paying because you are a coward?

Re:Where does your money go? (2, Interesting)

ryanw (131814) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743065)

When you purchase an Album from Itunes, where exactly does your money go? IF you don't know, why are you throwing money down the toilet? Afraid of getting arrested? Are you paying because you are a coward?
Uh, I think most people know exactly where the money goes. For a $0.99 song apple gets $0.30 to cover bandwitdh and server charges, about $0.65 goes to the labels and $0.05 goes to the artists. Of course the last two things vary depending on the contracts signed for each artist.
The more money labels make from the selling of music online, the more money they will be able to kick back to the artists in the end as new contracts are written up. Until the labels see big changes in the cash flow, things will stay the same.

Re:Where does your money go? (2, Insightful)

Adolph_Hitler (713286) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743078)

s. For a $0.99 song apple gets $0.30 to cover bandwitdh and server charges, about $0.65 goes to the labels and $0.05 goes to the artists. Of course the last two things vary depending on the contracts signed for each artist.

Where do you get these figures? From what I've heard Apple doesnt make a penny. Artist's dont make a penny. Just the RIAA.

show me where on the Apple site this is stated, show some proof.

The more money labels make from the selling of music online, the more money they will be able to kick back to the artists in the end as new contracts are written up. Until the labels see big changes in the cash flow, things will stay the same.

Yeah but why would they kick anything back to artists? This is like saying "If we buy more music from the RIAA the prices of CDs will go down"

When has any of this ever been true?

Re:kazaa vs. itunes (1)

Llywelyn (531070) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743022)

Money made for each download on Kazaa's networks: $0. Possible secondary benefits (album sales) from sampling.

Money made for each download on Apple: 99 cents (a little less thanks to album sales). 2/3rds to record company, 1/3rd to Apple. No secondary benefits from sampling, but secondary benefits (to Apple, not the music companies) in iPod sales and possibly in mindshare.

Now, without being able to analyze any sides costs, this seems like a functional business model from this angle. Downloads on Kazaa are irrelevant so long as enough people (continue) to use iTMS.

Re:kazaa vs. itunes (2, Interesting)

Artifex (18308) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743069)

No secondary benefits from sampling, but secondary benefits (to Apple, not the music companies) in iPod sales and possibly in mindshare.


Why no secondary benefits? Don't you think people may try a song because, hey, they heard about it and it's less than a buck, and, hey, it sounds pretty cool, so one click or three away from buying the whole thing?

A non-evil competitor. (5, Interesting)

Thinkit3 (671998) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742910)

Suppose there was a competitor that didn't give us the garbage x.99 cent "marketing price". In fact, the fee paid was variable! So the extra amount is equivalent to a tip. Some might say that tips make sense with digital goods, where the marginal cost is near zero. Cynics (plentiful and uncreative) at this point just walk out of the room after delivering a few loads of regurgitated garbage. So, the option is $5 to $18. Do you think $5 is the choice taken most? Look here [magnatune.com] .

Re:A non-evil competitor. (2, Interesting)

beakerMeep (716990) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743028)

interesting...but is there any way to make this work on a per song basis? I mean without the scarieness that is micropayments. Great Idea they've (you've) got there though.

Now for the next step (1)

Maskirovka (255712) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742912)

Once they hit 1 billion they should start a record label. In that event, they'd either fail miserably, or become the microsoft of music distribution. Or something.

Re:Now for the next step (1)

zapp (201236) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742945)

And just what artists would they have on their label? All the artists they have now are already signed to the major labels. Sure, they could start signing on indi artists, and compete with magnatune [magnatune.com] , but honestly most people don't dig indi artists, atleast not the kind of people who buy an iPod (the trendy people).

Re:Now for the next step (1)

drquizas (681020) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742947)

Now IANAL, but I'm pretty sure that would violate the settlement with Apple Records. I mean, they were pissed about the iPod, let alone a freakin' record label.

Re:Now for the next step (1)

Holi (250190) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743034)

Heck they sued over the Itunes store on July 4th [chinadaily.com.cn]

Exactly (1)

Adolph_Hitler (713286) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742995)


But they cant start a record label until they ditch the RIAA labels. Once they ditch those labels yes they can do that. I'm sure the RIAA will sue them though like they sued Mp3.com out of existance.

The RIAA hated Mp3.com and hates competition. Mp3.com was actually very successful

Re:Exactly (1)

mOoZik (698544) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742999)

WTF are you talking about? MP3.com was *bought* by CNET. No one sued them.

Re:Exactly (1)

Adolph_Hitler (713286) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743072)

Do your research. Michael Robertson owned Mp3.com. They wered sued by the RIAA, an RIAA company purchased Mp3.com in a hostile takeover. Then they sold Mp3.com to Cnet.

Re:Now for the next step (1)

AxB_teeth (156656) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743045)

Yes, and their close friends Apple Records [wikipedia.org] would be delighted too.

Where my niggas is at (0)

lamery (598414) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742913)

$25 million, aka a drop in the bucket. P diddy has more in diamonds on his maids.

Re:Where my niggas is at (1)

Shut the fuck up! (572058) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742980)

P diddy

Funny you should mention P Diddy. He'd fit right in here, what with all the tracks he's stolen.

snow (0, Offtopic)

endx7 (706884) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742917)

Let it snow, let it snow...

Re:snow (1)

endx7 (706884) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742934)

How is this off-topic?? RTFA...wait, there is no article.

This [macobserver.com] may help.

greetings (2, Funny)

natefanaro (304646) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742918)

I for one welcome our new download what you want for a buck overlords.

You fail it! (1)

Call Me Black Cloud (616282) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742970)

Apparently you didn't get the memo...please complete the quote. Your paraphrase does not meet spec. Here's the template:

And I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords. I'd like to remind them as a trusted TV personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground sugar caves."

For full compliance you could have written something like, "as a trusted slashdot poster, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground bargain music caves" or something funnier.

Oh, and all jokes must now use the new cover sheet...

Profit? (5, Interesting)

AIX-Hood (682681) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742921)

The real problem is that Steve Jobs mentioned that Apple isn't making any money on the iTunes venture; that they only see profit through the sales of iPods. I'd be interested in knowing what they plan on doing that will change this, as we've all seen too many neato tech ideas go belly up when the investors started wondering where their money went.

Re:Profit? (1)

wangotango (711037) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742971)

Ultimately, I believe the end result will be a lot of companies in the pay to play download business, with not a buck to be made. It's going to be little more than an advertising tool for most of the players. MS, AOL, Dell, and the others are going into this not with the intent of making huge profits but with the intent of driving customers into areas of the their business that contain profit potential. While my crystal ball is not working as the to long term of paid music downloads; It's somewhat safe to say the only parties to not get so much as a taste of the cash are the vary artists who should be getting the bulk of it.

What Apple can do is remove all RIAA music (1)

Adolph_Hitler (713286) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742987)

Remove all RIAA music from the service so that its just Apple, independent labels, and artists. Apple can become an intrim music label, having artists sign up to them and even pay them a fee to put their music on Itunes. This would make Apple money. Then Apple can use their marketing powers to sell the artists music.

Re:Profit? (3, Informative)

Llywelyn (531070) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743070)

There are no plans to change this. Over time they hope to break even on iTMS and make money almost exclusively on iPod sales.

On iPod sales. This bears repeating.

So long as they are making money as the result of iPod sales, there is no "wondering where their money went"--there is a net gain so long as that, as a result of iTMS, they sell enough iPods to make up the difference.

According to their recent report iPod sales increased enormously thanks to iTMS, so they can afford to take a small loss in one area (that they hope to break even in one day) to boost another.

RIAA & CRIA (1)

OPTiX_iNC (691070) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742923)

What are they going to do for the people who download the songs on iTunes, then strip the headers, and put them on a p2p? Does the RIAA just go by filename?

Amen (1)

Starve (672909) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742924)

I think its good, It proves the point that Apple still has selling innovation and that no matter if your using Feur Von Gates's software you can still get a little warmth and cheer!

Around and around we go (5, Interesting)

beakerMeep (716990) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742927)

I suppose this is where I am expected to say something along the lines of, "I thought the recording industry said that this business model wouldn't work, that people won't pay for what they can download for free?" So, there you go.

if you dont have anything to say...don't say it.
if you think the story isn't worth posting...dont' post it
seriously do we really need a story every time ITMS reaches a nice number? 10 million, 20 million, 25 million...

It's popular we get it.

The real question is how is this affecting sales of ipods since it has already been determined that Apple doesn't make much if any money off of ITMS.

Re:Around and around we go (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7742974)

Um, take a look in any major city or any college campus and I think that answer is pretty obvious - the iPod, for whatever reason, is kicking total ass right now. I suspect it's more the image that iTMS gives the company (and the favorable press coverage) that has boosted iPod sales than iTMS itself...but then again, that may have been just part of Apple's plan.

Re:Around and around we go (1)

beakerMeep (716990) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743002)

Oh I definitely agree with you. I just think that if there were some data about the two we could really get a good idea of exactly how much of an effect ITMS is having. If we had a graph of ipod sales next to one of ITMS it would open up a whole new way of looking at it.

25 million? (4, Insightful)

geekychic (732496) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742928)

Chump change in the pockets of a multi-billion dollar industry. Besides, they'll somehow make it sound as if they actually lost money on this...

Say what? (1)

Call Me Black Cloud (616282) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742931)

I suppose this is where I am expected to say something along the lines of, "I thought the recording industry said that this business model wouldn't work, that people won't pay for what they can download for free?" So, there you go.

I'm sorry, I didn't hear a thing. Could you speak up? And do it soon, I'm getting ready to hit the sack. Thanks.

Wrong model. (4, Insightful)

ActionPlant (721843) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742932)

It was the subscription model that was doomed. iTunes works inarguably. Subscription services may have been decent theories, but I think we just saw their end, and know who was right all along.

Um, yeah. In case you didn't get that, the winner is Jobs.

Damon,

Re:Wrong model. (0)

anthony_philipp (710666) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742941)

from what ive read the subscription services are the only ones who make money. and in the cases of the new napster among other they use this to subsidize straight out selling. anthony

Not a troll. (1, Interesting)

nertz_oi (596157) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742935)

Its cool that an online music store has taken off, but this still propagates the Record industry's business model [downhillbattle.org] .
Its time for all of those who flame at the riaa but at the same time praise Apple to step up.

Nothing has really changed, it just looks prettier with an os x theme.

Mod parent up (1)

jdifool (678774) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743011)

Fuck, this is one of the truly original approach to that problem. I thought I was alone to think that artists were fucked up all over.

If ever this line got mainstream, things would be different. Very different.

Activism!

Regards,
jdif

but what does the RIAA think? (1)

hobbs (82453) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742936)

Although it seems like more music companies are getting directly involved in the online music biz, I haven't seen any reports on what orgs like the RIAA really think about these commercial online music offerings.

I do know they still want to sure more people. Just today the papers in Canada were running articles that the Canadian version of the RIAA plans to start suing file swappers. This comes just days after they added more taxes to MP3 players to fill the coffers of the same organization ...

Sigh (3, Insightful)

ctr2sprt (574731) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742937)

I suppose this is where I'm expected to say something like, "We're capable of forming our own opinions, pudge, so why don't you just post the stories and leave the editorializing to us?"

This is Slashdot. You don't need to put a slant on a story. No matter how unbiased the submission is, rest assured that we'll find a way to turn it into a Microsoft conspiracy of some sort.

Breaking even yet? (5, Insightful)

mrshowtime (562809) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742938)

Yah, 25 million songs is VERY good, which works out to be about 2.5 million albums, but is Apple making any profit yet? My understanding was that Itunes was designed to sell Ipods and is making very, very, little profit due to all of the fees it has to pay to the RIAA and the owners, etc.

Re:Breaking even yet? (3, Funny)

wrinkledshirt (228541) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742953)

Yah, 25 million songs is VERY good, which works out to be about 2.5 million albums...

Actually, with the quality of music released these days, 25 million songs probably works out to be about 25 million albums.

This business model wont work. This is marketing (1, Insightful)

Adolph_Hitler (713286) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742944)

Apple does a nice job marketing. 25 million downloads is not alot of downloads at all. Kazaa gets that many downloads in a few days. The flaw with the Itunes model? No one knows how much money actually goes to artists. Its legal but most people using Kazaa don't give a shit about the law. So you have a situation where someone like me who currently boycotts the RIAA has no intention of ever supporting Itunes simply because Itunes hurts artists. Artists don't make a penny. Customers get robbed paying $1 for a low quality audio rip. You don't see that you are still paying the RIAA $1? I support Magnatunes, I supported Mp3.com, I even support Emusic. I'll never support Itunes, I will never pay for music on a per song basis unless at least 50% of my money goes to musicians. I will not pay $1 a song, songs should be priced by the market and not buy record execs. If you want to continue to pay content owners, go ahead and waste your money. If you want to save the music industry and help the artists and yourself Itunes is not the answer. Here are some alternatives Magnatunes [magnatune.com] Weed [weedshare.com] The Itunes business model will never be mainstream. When TV was invented, pay TV was not the mainstream and while cable did make money, most people had reguar TV.

Re:This business model wont work. This is marketin (0)

anthony_philipp (710666) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742961)

"The Itunes business model will never be mainstream. When TV was invented, pay TV was not the mainstream and while cable did make money, most people had reguar TV." didnt you contradict yourself? most people have some sort of pay tv now. anthony

Re:This business model wont work. This is marketin (1)

The Unabageler (669502) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742982)

i think the point may not be that it's still only a fraction of what is traded "illegally," but that the growth rate of sales on ITMS is pretty darn good. kazaa didn't quite take off overnight either, but free trades will always outpace paid purchases if the products are the same.

Re:This business model wont work. This is marketin (1)

Adolph_Hitler (713286) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743007)



Itune sales are just average. Mp3.com was doing a billion times better than Itunes but never put up articles every month staying how they were doing. Ah a million downloads. Ah 10 million downloads. Ah 25 million downloads. Thats marketing.

E-music is doing pretty good. Magnatunes is off to a strong start. Napster is actually doing fine also and catching up to Itunes. I expect Napster to surpass Itunes by far simply due to brand recognition.

The difference? Napster wont announce numbers until they are number 1, Apple will announce numbers even if they are in last place. Thats good marketing but its not real. It does not prove a business model is working. Apple has not made a profit at all off Itunes and is losing money on this. The RIAA is the only one profiting from this while Apple, Consumers, and Artists lose money.

Re:This business model wont work. This is marketin (1)

neeraj_iitd (306912) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743013)

The number of downloads cannot be compared. Kazaa lets anyone to download but ITunes is available only to US users :P

Re:This business model wont work. This is marketin (1)

Sage Gaspar (688563) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743075)

Not only this, but only to users with credit cards or access to credit cards who are willing to pay for their music. Excluding the pre-teen and most of the teen market, which are those who I'm guessing make up at least half of the downloading market.

Re:This business model wont work. This is marketin (2, Informative)

Dominic_Mazzoni (125164) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743074)

I already posted this above, but it needs repeating.

Not all music labels are members of the RIAA. Just the big ones. Lots of great artists are signed with independent labels, many of those labels don't screw their artists, and many of those good independent labels are on iTunes.

Wondering whether your favorite band is RIAA-free or not? Click here... [magnetbox.com]

Pressure to work with non-iPod devices (1)

richcoder (539438) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742946)

It will be interesting to see if Apple bows to any pressure to support devices other than iPod as the competition heats up.

Re:Pressure to work with non-iPod devices (4, Interesting)

DrLudicrous (607375) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742994)

Well, history might tell us something. They didn't bow to the pressure of Microsoft when they came out with their Mac/GUI competitor, Windows, increasing the PC's viability and ease of use. But they didn't suddenly try to increase market share by allowing OEMs. Will things be different this time around if competition heats up?

I suppose this is where I should say... (2, Interesting)

mumblestheclown (569987) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742949)

"what makes you think that 25 million is a large number compared to the alternatives?"

Let me guess, you're one of those people who routinely blasts the media for their context-less use of figures as well.

0 from me thanks to DRM (2, Interesting)

InfiniteWisdom (530090) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742958)

I'd gladly have bought several songs from them if it was DRM-free. I want the freedom to use it on whatever device I want, with whatever software I choose.

Re:0 from me thanks to DRM (1)

Down8 (223459) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742996)

download song > burn to CD > rip to DRM-free mp3 > enjoy

Of course, I agree in practice, as this eats CD-Rs like mad, and adds at least $0.02 per track, not including time-costs.

-bZj

Re:0 from me thanks to DRM (4, Informative)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743043)

download song > burn to CD > rip to DRM-free mp3 > enjoy

Of course, I agree in practice, as this eats CD-Rs like mad, and adds at least $0.02 per track, not including time-costs.


Seems like that's all the copyright police are really demanding. Not that it be impossible to de-DRM stuff, or even hard to understand, just annoying. You can't even say that this is an analog hole attack, because that entire path starts digital and stays digital.

Quality loss? Nope... just byte bloat in that path. You could make a perfect copy to an uncompressed .wav from the CD with no loss. You compress to a higher-quality-than-you-ever-had-in-AAC bitrate MP3 with no loss. If you're already using 128kbps MP3s, you've already said you're willing to trade a little quality for bit savings...

So really, saying you're boycotting anything that has any DRM at all is throwing a baby out with the bathwater. This is DRM that's so easy to defeat you can't call it a respectable hack.

Re:0 from me thanks to DRM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7743019)

Good for you. What do you want, a cookie?

Re:0 from me thanks to DRM (4, Informative)

droleary (47999) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743046)

I want the freedom to use it on whatever device I want, with whatever software I choose.

God I hate all the moronic comments along these lines every time this topic comes up. YOU DO HAVE THAT FUCKING FREEDOM! At least as much as you do with a CD. Or are you one of those people who wants the freedom to use a CD on whatever device you want? News flash: a CD is also a form of DRM as well as a type of compression (called digitization). It's just that you're so familiar with it and the methods used to access the music that you don't think twice about that stuff. Apple has, by far, the least restrictive online music distribution scheme and all your bitching isn't producing anything better. I'd thank you to put up or shut up.

Re:0 from me thanks to DRM (0)

InfiniteWisdom (530090) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743077)

Do you have to check with apple ever few months to ensure that you can still use your CDs?

Re:0 from me thanks to DRM (1)

OO7david (159677) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743079)

I can understand and admire your vigilance on this, but at the same time I wonder just how necessary it is to by no means meet half way.

Yes, it is an issue of freedom in the sense of being allowed to use that for which you paid in the manner you wish, but at the same time, would a failed project send the proper message? Yes, the drop in sales would say that there is something amiss, but do you honestly believe that those in charge would link that to DRM as opposed to people still practicing in copyright infringement?

I know were I in their position, it would be far easier to say "oh, look, we did try, but they just don't want it legally" than to say "well, it must because we're greedy and controlling".

I think this attitude will doom freedom rather that uphold it simply because of how easy it is to misconstrue the data as we are certain they will. In fact, without support of those that come close, we are giving evidence to use against freedom.

I just don't know how prudent that is.

25 Million? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7742967)

I bet the slashdot readership alone has stolen at least 25 billion songs.

Sadly.... 25 Million is not that Much (2, Insightful)

Nazmun (590998) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742968)

I'd like to see this succeed as the next person but...

Apple is probably the largest seller of online music and 25 million doesn't sound like a lot compared to the billions that other formats like CD's make (sure they cost more to sell but the actual physical medium is worth a lot less then the $13+ amount they are sold for).

Note that I'm not discounting the ability of Apple to increase but this news story was not as amazing as the editorial seems to suggest. We all knew apple was doing well but so far $25 mil (25 million songs * 99cents) is not big in it self.

Apple Ads (-1, Offtopic)

mrpuffypants (444598) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742973)

On another apple-related thread, Forbes is running a story now where you can vote for your favorite and least-favorite Apple ads.

Check it out: http://www.forbes.com/2003/12/16/cx_ah_1216applead s.html [forbes.com]

Re:Apple Ads (0, Flamebait)

Excen (686416) | more than 10 years ago | (#7742989)

...you can vote for your favorite and least-favorite Apple ads

Uh, favorite Apple ads? I hope you didn't mean favorite i-[insert product or service here] advertisements, because that would be an oxymoron.

"expected to say something" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7742979)

I suppose this is where I am expected to say something along the lines of, "I thought the recording industry said that this business model wouldn't work, that people won't pay for what they can download for free?" So, there you go.

Or you cold just post the damned stories without adding your 2 cents.

Then if you felt like saying something else you could, oh I dont know, POST A COMMENT LIKE EVERYONE ELSE.

Heh, I'll post this as AC since the chances of it not being modded down are slim.

I've downloaded 25 million songs too! (5, Funny)

corebreech (469871) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743018)

What's the big deal?

cd sales? (1)

thenewnoise (668578) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743021)

what is this doing to cd sales? is the RIAA going to bitch about cd sales being lower.

That model (1)

porkface (562081) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743023)

That model hasn't worked. They're hardly making anything off iTunes.

It's all of the iPods Apple is selling as a result that is what's making it work for them.

All of these newcomers to the market are really jumping in without a dependable profit model once again.

P2P is not for everyone (4, Interesting)

mr_lithic (563105) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743025)

Despite the endless opportunities out there for peer-to-peer downloads and free digital content, your ordinary guy on the street would prefer to have his music centrally available and easy to access.

The P2P apps have come a long way since their inception but it is still a struggle for non-technical people to come to terms with centralised servers and clientids.

Apple has always enabled ordinary people to use computers. This does not mean that they "dumb down" the technology, rather they lower the learning curve to allow people to at least get on and and working before they need to start seriously learning.

iTunes provides that portal for easy access to online content and it allows people to pay for it. I am sure if Apple had a free peer-to-peer site, we would be talking bigger numbers. But the success of iTunes is part of the overall Apple strategy and design guidleines.

What amazes me is that Apple are not making any money from it and are using it simply to sell mp3 players. How much are the record companies raking in on this and yet still complaining about the death of the music industry?

Unfortunately The Industry Will Probably Say (1)

dcocos (128532) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743038)

Unfortunately what the industry will probably say is "Look using the RIAA to sue everyone because we don't know how to adjust our business model, has really paid off!"

Can iTunes stand on its own legs? (1)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743047)

"On Apple's iTunes site, Apple has announced that music fans have purchased and downloaded over 25 Million songs from the iTunes Music Store. It seems the launch of the ITMS on the Windows platform has boosted sales tremendously."

Jee, who could've known? :-)

I wonder if it has anything to do with platform usage.

However, this isn't that much when cosdering the rather low price / song. It's actually quite few. I wonder if Apple is making some money on iTunes *alone* in the end or if it's a way for Apple to get some PR and/or sell iPods? As some have said, it's pocket change to a company like Apple, and unfortunately probably to the RIAA as well.

Journey of 1,000,000 songs... (1)

Thargok (661682) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743058)

I keep hearing that this is only a small percent, and that it is insignifigant; but was it not said that a journey of 1000 miles begins with a single step? When I first started downloading music nobody heard of Napster or Kazaa, or even Gnutella, Scour Exchange, etc. but it caught on. And with 100 million free tunes from Pepsi coming up in under 2 months, this drop is going to become a waterfall.

Honestly.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7743066)


I'm sorry, but this doesn't strike me as anything significant. I'm glad for iTunes trying to compete with the rest of the internet. But you cannot compete with FREE no matter how hard you try. Even in spite of this supposed "working business model" the RIAA hasn't let up on suing people, or being a pain in the ass.

Choice (1)

johns713 (101843) | more than 10 years ago | (#7743088)

I like iTMS. It is pretty easy to find songs and get a copy. It is legal, which is nice, but there are things lacking. For one, I can not always find the song I want. Like if I hear a song I like on the radio and try to get a copy at iTMS. Well I might find a partial cd that does not have the song I am looking for. So it is back to p2p. Why would I buy some junk songs that I don't want? And anyone who even for a minute thought that having a legal way to obtain copyrighted material would stop p2p file sharing is severly mislead.

So yes there is a long ways to go, but just look at how far things have come.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?