More Apple Music
- Robb Beal:
- “Apple users? Huh? You mean Mac users.” Bingo.
- “A revolutionary system would be decentralized (i.e., Web-like) and artist-centered (i.e., artists would have ultimate control). Apple’s system is neither.” But didn’t Apple have to work with the big companies because they own the rights?
- “What an embarrassment…that we continue to see stories written that idolize a single person rather than…the diversity of contributions being made. Does anyone find the idol stories interesting, or believable?” I agree with the first part, and perhaps the stories are exaggerated, but could Gil Amelio have pulled this off?
- Bill Bumgarner: “In other words, as my purchased music library grows, backing it up becomes quite the serious inconvenience.” And, apparently, iTunes’s backup feature doesn’t help you segment the library.
- Steven Frank: “The major negative is of course the Digital Rights Management.”
- Nat Irons: “I distinctly remember what happened to my music purchasing patterns the year I was using Napster most heavily. I’d buy ten albums a month without even thinking about it.”
- Chuq Von Rospach: “A lot of the anti-piracy seems to me like the attempt to move speed limits to 55: too many Americans simply didn’t agree and didn’t buy into it. so you can either try to put a policeman on every highway, or you can raise the speed limit.”
- Dan Wood: “If Apple wanted to do something and revolutionary, they could have done something much more extraordinary that would have not only included the big names, but also allowed the ‘little guys’ to make their music available over iTunes.” I think getting the big players on board is a necessary first step to getting the concept accepted. It reminds me of Don Norman’s story about how Edison’s phonograph lost. And Rhapsody. The current system is a big enough step forward for 1.0.
No Comments »
No comments yet.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
