Slashdot Mirror
Portable MP3 Hardware Sales Up
prostoalex writes "In December of 2002 only 12% of US music downloaders owned a digital music player, while for this year the number has increased to 17%. Jupiter Research expects the sales of the digital music players to double this year, while another research agency notes a remarkable shift towards paying for music. Even the music industry tends to agree that online music stores are a boon and expects the Web sales to really take off in 2004." (And the sales of Ogg-capable hardware are up, too, since there finally is some.)
I don't think its all that surprising, really. I'd have to believe the biggest reason most only listen to their music on their computer is because the entire library is available at any given time. You don't need to swap CDs. To most, that's a very attractive option.
Funny how the music industry changes its tune as soon as the money starts rolling in.
...while the RIAA locks and loads the lawsuit cannon for yet another salvo.
"Oh yeah, the Internet, it's the latest thing!"
I wonder if customers will be as easily confused?
Subscribe for free to my show!
So let me get this straight:
In 2002 only 12% of people downloading music owned MP3 players
In 2003 17% of people downloading music owned MP3 players.
So we're talking percents of percents here. 12% of however many people were downloading music (on that'd be less if we're talking people who've paid for their downloaded music). Has this number increased, decreased?
Thankfully in the new 2003 Jupiter Research consumer survey, 6 percent of online adults said they would be buying a portable music device in the next 12 months. What's an online adult, am I an online adult?
Uhuh? Anyone else confused? They seem like numbers just for the sake of numbers to me...
The music industry corporations made a bundle by changing the format of the media that they supply. There were millions made when the CD replaced the LP and millions of older releases were sold to people who already had the album.
The shift to a portable digital format has been made outside of their control and now they are struggling to catch up.
The lack of willingness by the younger population (12-17) in this study to purchase music points to the fact that they may have already missed the boat.
" It shreds the iPod in every way. Plays WMA and OGG like the iPod doesn't. 20GB drive, records standard like the iPod doesn't, has built in radio as the iPod doesn't, mic input (yes it records standard) true SRS surround sound, USB2.0 like the iPod doesn't, digital and analog audio out, the sexiest case on a portable music player ever, and all for $370."
Unfortunately it doesn't come with a Job's Reality Distortion Field (JRDF), so it's not as good.
What the music services need to do now is provide a web based interface to their music library. I really hate it that itunes and napster require you to instll their software before seeing if a particular song/artist/album is avail. If I'm only looking for a particular song/artist/album then I don't want to install some random piece of software first. Granted most people are going to pick and use one service as their primary, ie iTunes for me, but I'm not adverse to using others if they carry music I can't get through my primary.
"Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
It is great that MP3 player sales are up, but I don't think that there is necessarily any sort of relationship to online music sales.
Now maybe there *is* a relationship to increased use of P2P services by the public...
Correct me if I'm wrong....
"Ripping" is a pretty specific term, and you have to have performed the task yourself and have some knowledge of what is going on. Most user-friendly software that converts CDs to MP3s do not call it "ripping".
I don't think that most people over the age of 30 would be able to tell you what "ripping" means.
And even a lot of those people that are computer literate are not necessary to the level where they know all of the "lingo".
Free your ecomony and enact the FairTax
What about the interface? Does it have an elegant easy to use interface like the iPod, or is it more like most MP3 players with some horrible hack job of an interface?
I read the internet for the articles.
As an alternative, how about getting over your distaste for Apple and just buy the iPod? It really is an amazing device for how simple it is. Plus, if you are in the habit of losing/breaking expensive things, maybe your alternative is some homeowner's/renter's insurance. (Alternatives to the iPod cost several hundred dollars themselves.) Just a thought. PS- A bluetooth player would take *ages* to transfer music to. BT might be cool for controlling the device, but not for sending music to it.
Boom Shanka
"It shreds the iPod in every way."
Hogwash. The The iHP-120 has some nice features, but like all MP3 players, it suffers from some disadvantages, such as:
- Mediocre button layout... no scroll wheel
- Edges not as curved as other players; not as comfortable to hold or pocket
- Mediocre menuing system
- Long startup time if using the DB to organize instead of sorting by directories
- Limited shuffling abilites (especially if organizing by directories)
Additionally, the iPod supports replaygain while the iHP does not does. Also, the iHP doesn't do gapless playback, FLAC, or ethernet (the Karma has all those things, and the Karma will be getting replaygain soon).
Hop into business mode for a second and read what you wrote there.
I see...
- a person who really, really wants an iPod
- a person who would want that iPod at a discount
- a person who sees cheaper offerings from competitors
- a person who does not intend to buy said other offerings because he is
- a person who really, really wants an iPod
Why lower the price ? Seems like in the end, if you can't find a cheaper deal, you'll cut your (monetary) losses and get an iPod anyway.
And even if you do go and get a competitor's product- don't worry, there's plenty others who will still get an Ipod.
Hmmm... Well, to each his own. I hadn't noticed this to be a problem. In my car I want good sound of course, but I think the bigger problems are attributed to the poor listening environment (engine noise, wind noise, driving distractions, etc...). Any limitations in FM transmission just has not been an issue for me in my car. But, I can see how that might be an annoyance for vehicle audiophiles. Good luck!
I wonder how many people are turned off of personal digital audio players by the compromised sound quality of lossy codecs? The price per megabyte isn't nearly so attractive for those that prefer lossless quality.
When MiniDisc was new (and expensive), manufacturers targeted audiophiles while the advertising emphasized custom mixes and sound quality (even though ATRAC is also lossy). With "MP3 players," the emphasis is usually on quantity, not quality. Being able to accomodate realtime filters like DFX might be a way to find some middle ground.
I realize that most consumers either tolerate or are unaware of the fidelity loss, hence the continued dominance of the now inferior MP3 format. Still, I think that in order for this market to grow more quickly, it should educate consumers about the options available to them with these devices: CD quality if you want it, or OGG (etc.) if you want more tracks per MB.
I'm surprised that with car stereos, we're still just seeing a lot of CD players that read MP3 CDs. I'd quite prefer to keep all my music in one place like an iPod (oh, how I wish I had one). I would actually like to see more car stereos with the audio-in so that I could use an MP3 player in my car too. I wonder why that hasn't caught on. It would sure double my incentive to buy an iPod (as if there weren't incentive enough).
Life today. Uncertainty tomorrow.
The referenced articles says "...the number of paying music downloaders doubled in the first half of 2003 -- coinciding with the [RIAA] announcement that they intended to begin prosecuting file-sharers ..."
How ignorant. The RIAAs litigious behavior has
nothing to do with it. Paying downloaders increased because
sites offering to sell music increased.
--tif
Weekend trips. If you can find me a PocketPC that holds a gig or 3 for under $300 USD, you might convince me.
:)
Now imagine a world where you can't predict to the song just what you're going to want to listen to days in advance.
I find I listen to a LOT more variety in my music collection now, simply because I don't pre-select what I'm going to carry with me that day. Also because I don't have to re-load the damn thing every day just to hear something new. It's amazing to re-discover an album you haven't heard in a decade, all thanks to the wonders of "shuffle"
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
With bittorrent you can easily get a movie in 2 to 3 hours. I think the main issue is quality. Playing MP3's through your stereo is mostly indistinguishable from the original. But watching a movie on your computer screen is NOT the same experience as watching it on the TV. Most people don't have their PC's hooked up to their TV's.
Or in their cars (many cars have MP3 capable CD players now, and virtually all OEM head units are MP3 capable
I would guess there are also a ton of people who simply download MP3'S and burn them to cd's as audio CD's. That's what I do, and I've been doing it for the last 5 years. Sure, CD's are bulky, but I can get them free after rebate any day of the week, and throw them out when I get tired of them - and they run in any cd player. I remeber back in '98 when I had to use WinAmp to convert them to WAV files before burning in EZ CD Creator 3, now Nero burns audio CD's straight from mp3's.
The funny thing is I actually own an iPod, but still use cd's in my car. I bought a Transpodder, but it was a pain and not very clear, and it's easier to hit skip on a car cd player than an iPod. And less likely to get stolen.
I have blog like everyone else