Business Models: Napster to Go vs. iPod

CNet offers an interesting comparison between Napster to Go and iTunes. For $15 a month, Napster to Go offers over 1 million songs (access to which lasts as long as subscription is valid), while songs for iPod must be purchased and last 'forever' (but it takes about $10,000 to fill an iPod). Is Napster to Go the future of digital music distribution? Would moving to an all-you-can-eat model hurt iPod business and balance the power among authors, studios, hardware makers and consumers?" It might take $10,000 to fill an iPod with songs downloaded from iTunes or with music converted to MP3 from newly purchased CDs, but there's a lot of downloadable and legit free music out there, not to mention Griffin's RadioShark.

Comments

ALL THE MUSIC YOU WILL EVER NEED

[chevman]

It's free, damn good, and legal:

http://bt.etree.org/
http://www.archive.org/audio/etree.php

Re:The thing no one ever seems to mention

[Zico]

Good comeback. If you could refute anything I said in my post, I'm sure you would have. Remember who it was who told you that Apple would copy Napster's model, and tone down on the bitterness when you're exalting Apple's own subscription service. :)