Originally posted by poorlulu, err Markie:
Math, not add. Does not compute.
RIAA or the record companies, surely the later. 20 something cents isnt so bad when you get millions of them. As long as it pays for marketing, as you say, then its free marketing for the whole apple brand.
[/b]
Don't take my word for it, ask your friend
Jobs.
Originally posted by poorlulu, err Markie:
Bullshit. that is a very blinkered view. Based on ultimate storage capacity being the be-all and end all. Only people who post on internet chatboards really need to carry more than 100 CDs worth around at a time. If I had to get a new player if the old one died tomorrow. I would get the mini. I dont mind just putting 4gb on shuffle. 40gb is more annoying...Oh it goes on sale tomorrow and they have 100,000 pre-orders. So if that is all they sell, well it wont be a failure. Plus It is close to the $200 gift price point.......
You'd be a fool to buy it at that price, but then again, I always thought you weren't the smartest Brit I've ever met. Is the spared quater of an inch-squared really all that important to you? Maybe it's the pretty colors you like....oooohhh pretty colors....ooooohhhhhh.
Oh and news flash, just because you have 40 GB doesn't mean that you have to use all 40 GB. Of course if you access to the entire library of iTunes, maybe you'd want 40 GBs, which brings me to.....
Originally posted by poorlulu, err Markie:
I didnt know you could put the tunes on your portable, without buying. That is super cool. But if I didn't know about it, well napster needs to spend money on marketing.
No argument from me on the marketing of the subscription plan. You're not the first person I've told that to that said "Wow, why don't they market that better" The truth is, I don't know. But I have reaffirmed the fact that you don't read much of what I write because I have said this about Napster at least 3 times in previous posts.
And to answer Kosmo's questions: With Napster I can Stream, Download and listen to the entire Napster collection on up to four devices that support WMA-9 for $10 a month. The only limitation is burning - no burning allowed. As soon as I stop paying, the license to listen is revoked. I must listen to 3 dozen new albums a month and buy about a dozen of them on CD afterwards.
And it's not Napster that is the problem for the Mac OS. The question is when is the Mac OS going to support WMA, or even more importantly, when is the iPod going to support WMA? And the answer is...again, I don't know.
If Markie's right, that iTunes is just a marketing ploy for the iPod, then why not support both WMA and AAC and have the best, most versatile portable Media player on the planet? How long do you think it will take for other MP3 players to support the
Open Source AAC? Even Fred Anderson, Apple's Chief Financial Officer, feels the same way: The iTunes Music Store for Windows is thought to convince people to purchase iPods and -- over time -- Macintoshes.
Source for GGW Oh I see, iTunes makes people buy iPods, which makes people buy Macs and it's all based on an Open Source. When will they learn?
This "us against them mentality" with AAC is exactly why the Mac is regarded as a superior machine to the MS based models and has less than 10% market share. The Ipod is on its way. And believe me, if HP changes it's mind and supports AAC and WMA (as expected), it will surpass the iPod.
However, if they want to have the best music store, then keep the iPod as is and burn in effigy as the rest of the competiition supports a different format that plays on about 200 different and competitvely priced MP3 players. And nobody thinks this is the case. Apple wants to sell computers, pure and simple.
