Slashdot Mirror


MP3 Winners and Losers for 2003

An anonymous reader writes "Richard Menta over at MP3newswire.net just posted his annual winners and losers list in digital music for last year. The big winner is Apple for dominating MP3 portable player sales and the dramatic success of its iTunes service. Napster savior Roxio and the small independent record labels also made the winners list. The losers list include SonicBlue and MP3.com. Interestingly, Ogg Vorbis made the losers list, not because of the codec per se, but because iTunes has both catapulted the AAC format to number two and stimulated Microsoft to pour more of its efforts ($$$) into WMA and the iTunes clones, leaving little room left for the open source alternative. The 2001 and 2002 winners list are worth a look too and each have links to that year's losers list."

14 of 408 comments (clear)

  1. True to a point... by tempest303 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One thing to keep in mind, though, is that one of the original arguments against Vorbis adoption was "But all the MP3 hardware out there uses a dedicated MP3 decoder chip, so they can't just 'upgrade the firmware' to support Vorbis", along with countless other arguments that deal with the fact that in any given project, 1 codec is easier to deal with than many.

    Well, because we now have MP3, AAC, and WMA, all becoming popular, that means that instead of hardcoded support for 1 format, any company that's serious about making music software or hardware is probably going to want to support a plugin style architecture, which means that supporting a 4th, 5th, 6th, etc, format becomes much easier, so things like FLAC and Vorbis have one more barrier to entry removed from their paths.

    1. Re:True to a point... by Lshmael · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, but if no online music stores are using Ogg Vorbis, it is unlikely that consumer demand will increase. As a result, most of the music player companies will not have the impetus to make a Vorbis plugin, hindering it in the "Codec Wars."

    2. Re:True to a point... by AstroDrabb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly. That is why there are many players that support OGG Vorbis now. Neuros, Rio, IRiver and a buch of others. I personally do not want to be locked into a proprietary format like wma or Apple's AAC. And I would never buy an iPod that limitis what I can do with music I buy. I personally don't understand the Apple Fan Boy mentality. On one hand they cheer Open Source and screem how Apple is now BSD on the inside. Though they over look all of the proprietary Apple formats that are attempts to lock comsumers into Apple. Quicktime, Apple's AAC, their restrictive iPod and iTunes, and just about every product they put out. I personally am sick of companies trying to control what I can do with a product I purchase to further their profits. I will stick to buying a CD and legally ripping it to OGG and playing it on a portable player like the Neuros that supports it. Read this quickly, because soon Apple Fan Boys will be along and wet their pants and mod this as a troll.

      --
      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
      it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
  2. big losers by Savatte · · Score: 5, Funny

    In my opinion, anyone who downloaded Creed was a loser, not just for this year.

  3. NAPSTER? by larry+bagina · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I don't know how they can be considered a winner. Quite frankly, the only think they have going for them is their logo. Everybody and his uncle is setting up a store to sell WMA downloads, and Steve Jobs has stated that profits are almost non-existant.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  4. Not surprising that OGG was turn down. by Krapangor · · Score: 5, Insightful
    DRM is coming.
    Yes, we'll all start to whine and complain but there is no way to stop it.
    Without DRM to whole business chain of the entertainment industry is fucked. So they'll enforce it.

    With this background fact, you won't wonder that OGG was turned down. The encryption shemes will make sure that the song only play on certificated players. However a player which supports formats which can be used to illegal copies will never get such a certification. So the manufacturers will avoid these formats at all cost.

    When you watch this development the original movitivation of the OGG development team seems to very naive and economically clueless. While there might be some niche applications for OGG, it will be useless for the downtrodden masses. Basically the development of OGG has merely an academic value.

    --
    Owner of a Mensa membership card.
    1. Re:Not surprising that OGG was turn down. by dotwaffle · · Score: 5, Interesting

      OGG is not an academic project. It really is very efficient and very nice sounding, far better than WMA or MP3. I admit, I have not tried AAC. And DRM may be coming, but it sure as hell isn't going to stay. Look at Region Coding... It's being phased out as people realise that it is in fact a way for companies to weasle money out of people when they could in fact buy the same product, from the same manufacturer and artist, several months earlier in the case of the UK, and at a lesser cost. Needless to say, DRM will be a bad idea, as it restricts not only where the user may use the data, but when, and also from which agent they purchase it - they will HAVE to get an authorised version from the publisher of the music, and have to get permission to copy it to a CD, or their iPOD or the tape for their antiquated car stereo (yeah, I still have a tape deck). I will go out of my way to buy a higher quality CD rather than a rubbish quality MP3 off the internet. 128Kbps MP3's really are awful if you have spent more than a fiver on your speakers. 192Kbps OGG (equiv to at least 256Kbit MP3, or maybe more) preserves almost everything, and until companies get real and start providing lossless music downloads, I'm sticking to buying CD's. Sure, I may still download music, but as I think the radio is awful quality, and the adverts are sheer annoying waffle, I feel good knowing that by downloading (I admit, pirating) these tracks, I am exposing myself to their music, and consequently may purchase more.

      Take four star mary, I got interested in them back in 2000. I listened to one of their tracks that came on a compilation album. I liked it, so I downloaded a track or two more. Still, I liked it, but wasn't happy with the quality. Knowing they are a small time band, I went out and bought an album. I now own both the albums, and some merchandise, and have seen them live. I'm sure this rings true with other too. Downloading one or two tracks doesn't harm the artist or the industry, downloading an entire album when you like their music and could have afforded buying the CD DOES. It's down to the guilt of the involved party on whether they should contribute or not.

      It's all about what people deserve, and if the recording (and indeed, movie) industry want to force us to pay through the nose for it all, they're going to have egg all over their collective faces when users start looking for alternatives. iMusic only works because it's cheaper than buying CD's, and doesn't force you to commit to one format - Microsofts way would more than likely commit to WMA.

      To go back to my original point, with the right word of mouth techniques, OGG could go far. Really far, especially as it can't be stifled like WMA. You know what I mean, and you know it makes sense. It's not bad business, it's good business. Trust your customer, and they're more likely to make a return visit!

  5. mp3.com by nnnneedles · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I once visited mp3.com when they we're still going strong. They had something like 400 employees and very luxurious buildings with graffitti on the walls and everything.

    They were having a talent show there, and I expected to see some of the thousand of bands they had signed up performing. Unfortunately, it was the employees themselves who were the talent. With the bosses performing their own poems and so on.

    I feel sorry for the guys working there, as you could smell the money being burnt everywhere you went, and they probably had no idea they were already dead.

    This was almost 3 years ago, and back then they had already been working for six months on the next generation music-selling tech that they are currently advertising on their site.

    The point to all this is: Don't employ 400 people unless you are generating huge amounts of cash.

    --
    Will code a sig generator for food
  6. Re:ITMS is the true winner by fastidious+edward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the article:

    The big winner is Apple for dominating MP3 portable player sales and the dramatic success of its iTunes service.

    The dramatic success is Apple using its iTunes service to promote its iPod. iTunes has made a miniscule amount, purely a leader for the iPod. The iPod was here before iTunes, iTunes was envisaged as a way to make iPods more successful. iTunes was as much as a breakthrough on the music distribution scene as MP3 players were on the musical device scene were, but iPod deserves the praise, if iTunes weren't here another would have filled the gap, iPod and other MP3 players created the inertia and it is them that should get the praise.

    --

    karma karma karma karma karma chameleon, you come and go, you come and go.
  7. I know who loses... by vudufixit · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The consumer - we get sued, screwed, and DRM'd out of our right to enjoy the music we purchase the way we want to.

  8. ogg has a special place in my heart by bryerton · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As a game developer, using ogg vorbis as a royalty free, open source audio decoder rocks. I can use it on the two platforms I care about (mac and pc) for free. Booyah.

  9. Proposition for a portable device by Mr+Smidge · · Score: 5, Interesting

    But all the MP3 hardware out there uses a dedicated MP3 decoder chip

    I have an idea. How much sense would it make for a company to make a Vorbis-only (or perhaps Vorbis/FLAC-only) hardware player? Before you all scream, here is my line of thinking of why it might be a good idea:
    * Primarily, no expensive license issues.
    * Vorbis-decoding can be done using only integers (FLAC too?), which must save some hardware costs.
    * It popularises the Vorbis/FLAC formats.

    And for the burning issue of "what 99% of the population with music in other formats?". I would propose that the software frontend to this be able to transparently transcode your music from any format (using any software plugin available) to Vorbis (or FLAC if you don't want to lose quality), before copying to the device.

    Benefits to consumer:
    * Supports pretty much any format of music they might have.
    * Would be very cheap to buy.

    I don't think the loss of quality in transcoding will be so important, because after all this is just a portable device, not a portable studio. The only inconvience I could see to a consumer would be a slightly longer delay as audio is transcoded and copied, but at a suitable quality level, I don't think it could make that much of a difference. Of course, there wouldn't be any such extra delay if you were copying a Vorbis or FLAC file to begin with.

    Saving on the hardware costs like that, and using software to handle all the numerous different audio formats sounds like a good idea to me, and so the manufacturer could probably sell it for a lot less than other players. And of course, we all know that Joe Average quite commonly picks the cheapest electronic device that does what they want, rather than worrying about its technical specs.

    Any comments?

  10. Re:Define "little room" by kfg · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Buy a used CD. $5 bucks from locally owned store. You don't contribute to the artist that way I'm afraid, but you don't contribute to the RIAA either who would likely skim the artist's share anyway.

    You've contributed to the local economy and supported the contiued viability of the used CD market.

    Now you have a CD, a piece of property with attached rights that's worth. . . $5. You've reduced your liquidity but maintained net worth. You have acquired the music for free.

    Rip it to whatever format you like and put them on whatever devices you like. All legal like so long as you don't trade them or the original CD. If you only listen to rips store the CD safely as a backup source.

    Now, if you download 1000 ACC songs you've spent $1000 bucks and have a license. Not property. If things go badly for you in the future and you spend a year or two laid off you can sit around hungry and listen to your music.

    $70 gets you the same number of songs on used CDs. If things go bad for you in the future you've got an extra $930 in the bank and property which can be liquified fairly quickly to get another $50 bucks if you want.

    Whether or not you erase your rips is left to your own sense of ethics, so maybe you're sitting around still listening to your music too.

    If you don't mind old vinyl you can do even better. It's about 50 songs for a buck if you shop garage sales.

    KFG

  11. the *real* winner by alizard · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The RIAA record labels, at the expense of most of the rest of us.

    Apple chose to buy into the RIAA distribution model when setting up iTunes, and as a resul, is only breaking even on selling music and making its money back on selling iPods.

    Instead of buying Universal and being able to bundle a few dozen albums with each iPod free and sell tracks for .25 each at a profit and use their ownership of content as a tool with which to club the rest of the content industry when negotiating per-download proces, they chose to pay bridge toll to the entire record industry and by willingness to pay all of their net income after expenses to the RIAA, reinforced the RIAA's business model and boosted the net cap of each RIAA company.

    If they'd managed to leverage their content ownership into much lower download prices, they'd be selling all the downloadable tracks from other companies at a profit, and other computer companies would be using this to beat down prices when they bought their own major labels.

    The RIAA labels are very definite winners because their net caps went up. Their attempt to prevent independent competitors from using the Net for promotion via P2P and Internet Radio is a lot less important in the short term.

    Instead of spending some of the money they had in the bank, Apple turned digital downloads into a game nobody is going to be able to profit at legally.

    Apple belongs on the winners list... at #8. They could and should have been #1, the major consumer electronics players would be on the winners' list, the general public would be on the winners' list, and the suits at all the major labels could have been on the top of the lus3rz list.

    Will Apple stay a winner? How long can they sustain the iPod at the current inflated margins? If they can't subsidize iTunes because of shrinking margins, iPod turns from a win to a money-loser.

    All it takes are some good competitive products, and Apple hardly has a monopoly on good or even visionary consumer products designers.

    If Apple has to cut iPod prices to commodity levels to keep selling them, there go their margins and their ability to keep iTunes alive at a break-even or money-losing basis, more product sales mean more money-losing downloads and more red ink.

    If this happens, and I think this inevitable, their short-sightedness will have cost them not only money, but a chance to turn the downloadable music market into a benefit for everybody not an RIAA label executive.

    Apple could have made the consumer electronic industry a hell of a lot stronger and boosted their bottom line at the same time.

    Instead, there's a pretty good chance that iPod + iTunes in a couple of years will make Steve Jobs look like a dickhead, not a hero.