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

Re:another way to look at is AAC Vs WMA

[Logicdisorder]

Cause Apple is better than MS. NAHNAHNAH My dad is bigger than yours. That is right I have brough this down to the School yard level.

ALL HAIL APPLE AND AAC!! For they shall set us all free!!!!!

I would also like to point out that if most of the people who work as MS use iPods over WMA based players then there must be something to say about how good AAC is over there own format. Grant I would say most of them would have MP3!!!!!

LONG LIVE THE MP3

"BING BING BING" And once again WMA hits the mat without even getting a punch in, MP3 wins by clear KO!!!!

My cats called Zero and he KICKS ASS :P

Re:You can fill it for free.

[syrinx]

If you're going to get music illegally, just get it for free like everyone else --- no reason to pay allofmp3.

Re:You can fill it for free.

[Leo McGarry]

You live in an interesting world where you can so easily draw a line between crappy commercial music and good free music.

I wonder, if confronted with one of the thousands of really good commercial records or one of the thousands of incredibly bad free ones, would your head just asplode, or what?