Slashdot Mirror
Disney Buys Pixar
BlueDjinn writes to tell us that it appears a great deal of speculation over Disney's buyout of Pixar Animation Studios is in fact true. From the article: "[Pixar] is set to meet tomorrow to approve the company's $7bn (£3.9bn) takeover by Disney. The all-share deal will make Steve Jobs, the chief executive of Apple, around $3.5bn and the single largest shareholder in Disney. Jobs created Pixar in 1986 when he paid $10m for the computer animations division of Lucasfilm, owned by Star Wars creator George Lucas."
Nobody deserves a few billion bucks more than he does, the way I figure it. If he manages to pull Disney out of their spiral of mediocrity, he'll have earned every penny...
Now we will see Nemo 2, Nemo 3 (dvd only release) and a Nemo tv series, with each one getting a little crappier. Same for all other Pixar films.
Disney will milk the IP till the cow dies and will probably not fund development of new IP.
1) Buy Pixar
2) Milk IP
3) Short-time profit
IAAL
It will be interesting to see to what extent Jobs tries to "bundle" products, with the new market-power. For instance, will Disney-related animation software for children be available only for the Mac platform? Will a Disney DVD be included with the future iMac mini PVR/media box/whatever? etc.
Let me be the first to say...
NOOOOOOO!
Hopefully they won't do away with that Pixar lamp, I kind liked the little guy.
x86, oh yes, I'm pro.
...tells me that pixar is for sale in 10 years for 10m.
on a sidenote, what happens to renderman?
As slashdot sees Disney as mostly evil, it should be noted that most of the sceptical activities of Disney can be attributed to one man: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Eisner.
I have a good feeling about the new CEO http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Iger
Read up on these completely different management styles and then take a look at Disney again. Iger was responsible for talks to continue with Pixar, so its no suprise that it might lead to this.
The parallels here are almost amusingly similar to when Apple bought NeXT, ten years ago. Because so much of NeXT's advanced technology essentially displaced Apple's own struggling and dated codebase for the Mac OS to become Mac OS X, and Steve Jobs' own idea of a trimmed and stylish product line replaced the beige box Power Mac (insert four-digit number here), many industry analysts joked that 'NeXT had bought Apple for negative $400 million.'
Look at what's happening now! Like NeXT, one of Steve's projects, was bought by Apple, and its technology incorporated into the company to revamp its product line, Pixar, again a project of Steve, may very well save Disney. For the purists that either hate to see Disney's long-lived traditional animation replaced by computer 3D rendering, or fear that Disney will mishandle Pixar's talent and resources and bring an unfortunate end to the latter studio's remarkably successful run of films, consider two facts: since this isn't a hostile takeover, clearly the folks in charge at Pixar, Steve Jobs included, believe that this will be as good for Pixar as it will be for Disney. They wouldn't be doing this if they thought that Disney was going to ruin them. Also consider now that Steve Jobs is the largest shareholder at Disney. That really carries some weight. Steve has a reputation for getting what he wants, and I also don't doubt that he made this deal without knowing he would have a significant say in Disney's direction.
So really, guys, calm down! Just imagine the headline read, 'Pixar buys Disney for -$7 billion.'
Take off every sig. For great justice.
He now might have the single largest share in Disney, but does he still have enough shares to become a factor? Over at Pixar, he controlled a little over 50% of the share, which meant his vote overrides the other shareholders' votes. will it still be the same at Disney or will he become a non-factor in making decisions?
Steve Jobs will begin designing rides at Disneyland. You know there will be an acid trip ride, something Alice and Wonderland style. I can't wait.
This is quite a development! I suspect that Pixar will continue to operate (largely) autonomously, but there will undoubtedly be a good deal of knowledge sharing between Disney and Pixar. John Lasseter has often expressed his admiration for Disney's animators and their pioneering role in developing the medium. While there might seem to be a lot of enmity between the two companies, I suspect there's also a lot of mutual respect between the artists at both studios.
People may not like the management decisions made by Disney (which have often dictated the direction of their films) but the company still employs a great many talented artists. And of course, Pixar continues to benefit from Disney's considerable marketing muscle - few other companies know how to so thoroughly milk their products for every cent they can get (and I don't say that as praise).
Keep in mind that the Disney empire also includes ABC, ESPN, the go.com network, as well as a bunch of movie studio (Touchstone, Miramax, Dimension) and record company imprints. Several of these operate somewhat autonomously, but Jobs will have some say in things as the single largest shareholder in Disney. Gates wants to control the living room. Jobs will control the living room.
This guy's the limit!
This deal doesn't make Jobs $3.5bn, as the article claims. It barely makes him any money at all.
Pixar's market cap is just a hair under $7bn, about half of which Jobs owns. Disney is buying all $7bn worth of Pixar stock with $7bn worth of Disney stock. So Jobs isn't making any money, he's just changing the name on part of his stock portfolio (Disney's buy is a bit above market value for Pixar, so he does make SOME money, on the order of 1% of the $3.5bn the article mentions). He's also going from being a 50% owner of a $7bn company to a 14% owner of a $50bn company.
So maybe Jobs thinks he can get in and infect Disney with Pixarness and save it. Maybe he just wants to cash out and do something else, and figures he can sell 14% of Disney a lot easier than he can sell half of Pixer. Could be he thinks Pixar will do better with Disney behind it than with Disney as an enemy. Possibly there's another explanation. Let the speculation continue - we'll know in a few years what the plan was and whether it worked or not.
High-speed Road Trip (18.000KPH)
Is Disney going to keep selling PRman and PRman for Maya plug-ins? Will Catmull continue on with them? What's this all mean for Renderman? Will the software side split off into their own business?
I should say that the golden age of CG movies are now over. Now come the crap movies...the "me too" movies.
Honestly, has anyone really seen anything coming out that even remotely looks interesting? Chicken Little(already out last year)? Ice Age 2? Cars? Open Season? Over the Hedge? Any of these really grabbing you? How about Valiant(also out I believe...or did it go straight to video)? Or The Ant Bully? These are all coming out in the next few months. Have I missed any? Oh, forgot Hoodwinked, and Monster House.
Ah, the old Hollywood adage. If you can't make a buck with quality, then make it with quantity. "Teh peoples want teh CG! We gives them teh CG!"
"Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
Although people might bemoan the takeover of one of the brightest purveyors of mainstream American filmmaking by the almighty Mouse, I can' help but think this is a good thing for all involved. Pixar has reached the pinnacle of their influence in the industry through a series of (mostly) brilliant hit films. I'm sure Jobs and Lassiter think the only way for their company to grow is to grow outward - take over the Mouse and whip it into shape. Jobs performed miracles with Apple. I really hope he and John LAssiter can bring intelligent and fun pop moviemaking back to Disney. And I would think this puts his other venture, Apple, into very sure waters in the content distribution marketplace. With whom does Disney partner now? I'm damn curious to see how it all shakes out!
If it weren't for the assholes at Disney (and the *AA), you'd already be able to have Steamboat Willie on your iPod, for free!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
I don't think much of the success of Pixar is due to Steve Jobs.
Rather, the main man over there is John Lasseter, the legendary animator directly responsible for some of the companies most memorable movies. Would Pixar be anywhere today wasn't it for the brilliant movies?
Jobs is just this one guy who sees ahead better than most and invest in people who can make it happen, like Lasseter or Wozniak...
I don't feel like it...
Loaded. In his house is a giant walk in wardrobe with a long line of turtle-neck sweaters, you fight through it all and at the back is a snow filled landscape where iPods grow on trees.
You see Steve Wozniak talking to a CGI lion on the technical production of blue boxes. In the background is a giant Intel factory, where little orange men are packing new iMacs into crates marked Nigeria...
Task Mangler
So, is Disney buying Pixar to incorporate their technology and mine their library of characters for licensing, or is Pixar infecting Disney with their understanding of the need for story to take priority over marketing? Given the nauseating uses to which Disney has put the Muppets, I am betting on the former. *sigh*
:-)
An apocryphal comment that I heard years ago: the "flavor" of Disney's corporate products was so numbing and restrictive that creative types within Disney referred to the place as "Mauschwitz."
Oops, does Godwin's Law apply to SlashDot? If so, the discussion is over, move along to the next article, nothing to read here....
Market caps of Pixar is $6.95bn. There will be no $7bn takeover. Maybe a $10bn takeover, but not $7bn.
What I am concerned about is how the deal will affect the Studio Ghibli/Disney distribution deal. For many years, Disney has had wide distribution rights over Ghibli works. Sometimes this has worked out for the better (the heavily promoted Spirited Away), and sometimes not so well (Miramax requested, but was denied, many edits in Princess Mononoke).
A closer connection between Pixar and Disney will probably not harm Ghibli. It was noted that John Lasseter (founder of Pixar) had given very strong support to Spirited Away, and was a key driver of what success that movie had in North America. A closer connection between Pixar and Ghibli will probably result in an even stronger benefit.
Now, on notes of pure speculation, how might the Pixar/Disney merger benefit Ghibli going forward? Could we expect Miyazaki-animated short films (currently limited in distribution to the Ghibli Museum in Mitaka City, Tokyo) put on sale on the iTunes Video Store? Or maybe distribution of older classic Ghibli films? Imaging having a copy of Gauche the Cellist on your iPod to perk you up on those cloudy days of life. Or how about strong promotion and wide distribution of the forthcoming Tales from Earthsea? With the combination of a a imaginative and sensitive director like Goro Miyazaki and effective marketing, I can't imagine how Earthsea wouldn't become a major blockbluster.
What else would you like to see come out of the Studio Ghibli/Disney/Pixar deal?
---
patiwat
My gripe with the Disney company is that the current management promised that they would invest more in motion pictures than animation.
Roy Disney where one of the last in the Disney family that was still in the studio and he wanted to push animation forward. He was also the first one to oppose the management suggestions to drop Pixar and let them "off" to sail their own sea. Big mistake, Roy knew it - and due to the management maximum age policy got laid off. Another big mistake.
Not more than a year later - the Disney 2D department where subject to severe reduction and closedowns, 80 percent of the animation staff where dismissed due to the decline in success for 2D-animated feature films, strange - when you think of that they just dismissed Pixar back then.
Now the management realize they have made a BIG boo-boo and desperately hook into Pixar again.
See why I worry? With management like that - and as an Animator myself - I do worry!
What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
Just an aside: my daughter is a bit older, and I picked up a copy of "The House at Pooh Corner" for her. It (the original book by AA Milne) was so much better than the simpering Disneyfied versions you see in hundreds of illustrated books. Easy to read, yet full of subtle humour and wordplay. This I've found is a general rule: Disney cartoons are fine, but avoid their literature; go to the source.
That's a very good point to bring in. Perhaps if Disney produces new material, quality material, they will not depend so much on the old, and that would be one thing out of the way for a push for a public domain oriented reform of copyright law.
Content companies are beginning to understand what having a good reputation as corporates citizen means. That is certainly one thing Steve Jobs knows, and the board who decided to buy Pixar have taken decided so in full knowledge on what effect this style of management had on the fortune of Apple.
I actually agree with you, antz and bug's life are two very diferent movies, with one thing in common they both use ants and insects as characters. I like them both, but in defending the grand-parents, I could bet that antz only got out of the paper because dumb big money "we should do only what is certain" producers thougth that this was kind of going in the same direction others (pixar) are going to.
The people who give the "green light" to movies are business people, much like those suits you see in your company and I would bet that with very little exceptions they are dumb, very little creative and understand very little of what people really want to see. If we do get an ocasional very good blockbuster like the lord of the rings or the spiderman series and other is only because there are very good directors, screen players and other people that are very briliant and are willing to figth those guys.
[]'s Victor Bogado da Silva Lins
^[:wq
What now? It's Chinatown!
... and then they built the supercollider.
They don't want him to leave.
I'd be surprised if there is significant change at Pixar.
If there is, you can count in seconds how long it would take for someone to offer John Lassater an animation studio of his own. Heck, with the profits from this, Lassater can probably finance his own movie if he really wants, and he'd drag half Pixar's crew along with him.
That's why things won't change. Well, maybe they will. I'm betting everyone gets raises.
Steve Jobs is a great man, but in Pixar his primary responsibilty was negotiating great contracts. Let's hope this is another one of them.
As for Steve taking over Disney, I don't think it's impossible, but I'm hoping he keeps focus on Apple, where - as we all know - he's been doing great.
I do think Steve's likely to become an influential advisor and board member, but probably not CEO. Remember, John Lassater and friends basically ran Pixar, which is why Jobs could be CEO of two companies and preserve excellence. I don't think he could do that with Disney.
D
If we do get an ocasional very good blockbuster like the lord of the rings or the spiderman series and other is only because there are very good directors, screen players and other people that are very briliant and are willing to figth those guys.
And let's not forget that Disney had the opportunity to do LOTR, but passed on it...
Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
for particularly large values of 7.
Does this mean that Disney cartoons will only have one mouse?
;)
No, they'll still have many mice, but Mickey's red shorts will only have one button.
I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
At the end of the day, Disney has no class. At one time it did have a lot of charm, and that made up for the lack of class, but under the last decade of Eisner's rule, it lost its charm, so that now it's a tacky, charmless uber-company that makes shitty, low-brow, uninspired entertainment. The real question here is whether or not Pixar will be left alone to do what it does best, or whether the imagination-stunted accountants that run Disney will indeed simply try to milk it.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
I think what will happen is that we will see John Lasseter take overall control of all Disney animation divisions.
This is actually a GREAT idea, because the hallmark of Pixar is the great storytelling of their movies. Lasseter could even help Disney revive traditional animation at Disney, too.
I think people forget that unlike Michael Eisner, Robert Iger tries to be as much hands off as possible, letting each Disney division run by their own managers. This means Mr. Lasseter will have free reign to rebuild Disney's animation tradition. (big thumbs up)
But they can't vote yet. At least not officially.
Walt's anti-union activities in the 30s is the stuff of evil, IMHO. His collaboration with the House Un-American Activities Committee was pretty despicable too.
When will our savior come?
All too soon, say Christian analysts. The EU constitution treaty was signed in Rome. Once it passes, the Roman Empire will be back, and once it grows to 666 million people, watch out. Read the prophecies of Daniel and Jeremiah and The Revelation of Jesus Christ for details.
One thing I'm not seeing being discussed in the press is the fact that Bill Gates and Ballmer over at Microsoft must be pissed over this. They want to take over the living room, but now Jobs is part of Disney, who owns ABC, ESPN, Miramax, etc--he IS the living room. So he's got the content, and Apple will provide the means. Microsoft's road to the living room just got even tougher.
I wonder if Ballmer will Fucking Kill (tm) Disney over this.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Gotta bound, bound, bound and rebound.
"Curiosity killed the cat, but for a while I was a suspect."- Steven Wright
If you want your life to be different, live it differently.
I hate to break it to you, but Corporations were given "personhood" (human rights) a very, VERY long time ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood
Let's get some basic math resolved. Steve Jobs owns 50.6% of a roughly $7 Billion publicly traded corporation, PIXAR. Assuming this rumor is fact and that the combined valuation of the merger is $60 Billion (Disney at $54 Billion + $7 Billion in Cash--no stock swap) then Steve owns no matter how you swing has (.506 x $7 Billion) / ($60 Billion Valuation at time of merger) = 5.9 % of DIXSNAR's/PIXNEY's total company value. If it is a stock swap then it becomes .506 x 7 / 53 = 6.68%: close but no cigar.
Both Steve being majority owner and 7% as highest individual stock holder are incorrect. What is most pitiful is the fact that PIXAR built a brand new corporate headquarters a few years back, became the powerhouse in Software Animation Films for both content and presentation, publically denounced their partnership with Disney and publically focused on a new roadmap for this highly creative and technically sound corporation all just to merge with the enemy? Pathetic. Disney has everything to gain and PIXAR has everything to lose. Distribution channels that everyone brags about with Disney are overvalued, especially in the emerging distribution mechanisms gaining ground today--Podcasting/videocasting, etc.
What I find most disturbing is the many enthusiasts discussing Steve Jobs becoming Disney's CEO and steering them like he has done with Apple. Get something straight. As Steve said, "Apple is my old girlfriend I haven't seen in 20 years but I want to give one more shot." PIXAR never was Steve's main focus. It was either NeXT or presently, Apple. He loves making the big partnerships but much prefers driving the mechanisms and tools that let the Producers produce over attempting to drive Producers and retool them into his Vision. He's best when he gives the creative minds the means to be their most creative, period. The day Steve would rather give a Keynote about "Goofy in the 21st Century" over "OS X Lion" will be when they take him away to the Insane Asylum.
Oh, I'm sure Steve has thought about the deal very, very carefully. The one reason why Pixar makes such great films is STORY, and Jobs knows it. (Compared to that other studio, SKG which churns out volume in the hopes of having a hit. No, really, Mr. K. said just that in an interview).
I'm sure he makes sure he still has control over at least the Pixar unit. Pixar will be the only profitable unit and he knows it. What this does give him is control over Disney's vast media library.
iTunes + Disney (guess which TV station Disney owns + many films which are not directly under the Disney name) content.
Is it Disney buying out Pixar? Or Steve Jobs taking over Disney?
Hahaha! World Domination!
I'm sure that, since you own stock, you're joking and do understand what will happen. But in case anyone doesn't understand this --
Disney wants to acquire Pixar. Pixar's board (who nominally represent the shareholders) have said they're cool with this. There will be a shareholder vote. Since people in favor of this deal own A LOT of the Pixar stock, the deal will be approved and your Pixar stock will go away. In its place, you will be given Disney stock. You really won't have any say in the matter.
And Jobs did it with one thing: Quality. And Marketing. Ok, two things.
They invested a ton of effort to get an easy human computer interface, which got them the MAC. Jobs re-did that success to a degree with NeXT, which didn't pay off right away but got him even more money when NeXT becamse OSX. He bought Pixar while it was struggling, and helped drive it into one of the most creative, quality-focused entertainment companies in the world. The iPod was designed and re-designed and recieved constant feedback from Jobs himself... when was the last time you heard about Ballmer getting dirty in the trenches? Same with iTunes.
Years ago Jobs and Apple realized that quality and clarity commanded a premium, and have been working dilligently to create and milk that. MS's strategy has been to crush the competition from a business legal standpoint. The former has made Jobs and Apple welcome in new areas and businesses, while the latter leaves Microsoft having an uphill battle every time it enters a new market.
MSNBC was an interesting idea, but it didn't do anything better or more original than the competition.
I'm glad to see that sometimes quality is rewarded.
The ______ Agenda
Go and have a history lesson youngling. The activity of unions in the late 19th and first half of the 20th century brought you many of the things you presume to call rights in the modern era. Unions in the 30s were fighting against what would these days often be considered criminal neglect and exploitation. Your bias against modern unions is (probably) based on a very different kind of unionism to what Uncle Walt was against during the depression.
All available data suggest that regardless of any of this, the sun will still come up tomorrow.
No. It was like Nemo and Sharks Tale. Dreamworks decides to do a movie in the same theme as a contemporary Disney movie, but does so much much better but aimed at an older audience.
:)
I've seen both "Finding Nemo" and "Shark Tale", and I deeply and truly wish I hadn't spent the time seeing "Shark Tale". I understand that there's room in the world for all sorts of tastes, but I honestly don't see how anyone enjoyed "Shark Tale" more than "Finding Nemo".
Antz was one of the first big non-Disney cartoons, and as such didn't do very well.
Antz earned $75 million in domestic release, even more from DVD. It's done much better than it deserves (I don't care for late Woody Allen, nor did I think much of Antz).
As an aside: until now, Pixar films have not been Disney films. Just like Miyazaki films are not Disney films. For Pixar films, Disney has been in charge of distribution (theaters and DVD's) and selling plush dolls, themed pajamas, and action figures. They haven't had a say in the movies, and that's probabaly been for the best.
The last really good Disney animated film was "Lilo and Stitch" (4/5 Disney 2002).
The rest has been dreck (and I include the very successful recent "Chicken Little" in that assessment).
Here are my personal opinions on the movies of Pixar and Dreamworks Animation:
Pixar:
"Toy Story" just incredible and still fun to watch (5/5 Pixar 1995).
"A Bug's Life" story, characters, great humor (young and old) (5/5 Pixar 1998).
"Toy Story 2" a sequel better than the original (5/5 Pixar 1999).
"Monster's Inc." more for kids than adults, still smart (4/5 Pixar 2001).
"Finding Nemo" absolutely amazing (5/5 Pixar 2003).
"The Incredibles" freaking awesome (5/5 Pixar 2004).
Dreamworks Animation:
"Prince of Egypt" good if you're into religious apologism... (1/5 Dreamworks 1998).
"Antz" uh... well... I got nothing here. (1/5 Dreamworks 1998).
"Chicken Run" off the charts hysterical (5/5 Dreamworks 2000).
"The Road to El Dorado" still searching for characters, plot, etc. (1/5 Dreamworks 2000).
"Shrek" damned funny, simple but solid story (4/5 Dreamworks 2001).
"Spirit..." not much for adults here (2/5 Dreamworks 2002).
"Shrek 2" to be gentle, abysmal (1/5 Dreamworks 2004).
"Shark Tale" unfunny lowbrow humor (2/5 Dreamworks 2004).
"Madagascar" had lots of laughs but the core story was weak (3/5 Dreamworks 2005).
"W&G Curse of the Were-Rabbit" smart and funny (5/5 Dreamworks 2005).
I think it's interesting to note the two best animated films that Dreamworks has made (IMNSHO) were both Aardvark productions, though the relationship between the two companies was different from "Chicken Run" to "...Were-Rabbit".
Not until lately have people realised that Disney now suck and Dreamworks rocks. I call it post-Shrek
Have to admit, I don't see it. Well, I understand that Disney Animation hasn't done anything decent in some time, but to say that Dreamworks has put up anything truly notable is a stretch. And Pixar has made substantially better films than either of them.
Regards,
Ross
Ye have a funny perspective on things... :)
:) Apple is one of the most recognizable brands on the planet. They've always had a major role in media production and once again are dominating many production areas, besides 3D. Suddenly happened with the iMac back in 98.. Now I'm just going to ramble.
:p It has been a huge sucess for Apple, for more than 4 years now and has by far outsold even Sony's Walkman.
Have you been sleeping for twenty years?
I for one love my iPod. It does exactly what I want it to do, without the BS like the horrid Sony device I own along with others that were utter garbage all around. So if owning a device that works absolutely great and makes it extremely easy to get my CDs onto it in a format I like, even the CD's own format, then I'm a Pod Person.
And if you were refering to running Linux on an iPod? It has been done and available for some time now; http://sourceforge.net/projects/ipodlinux/
Pixar has been around for 2 decades now and pioneered many of the 3D techs that are used in various software packages and video cards. Toy Story is considered a classic. Their story telling and quality of production is second to none and they've managed to produced some of the best movies over the past decade. So I hope that this merger means that Disney will regain some of the magic it lost well over a decade ago.
I for one would rather see Apple out front over most other companies. They do have their evil side, but they're not nearly as bad as others and have only made my life easier and more productive with their products. Consider the alterantive; Another company which has billions just to blow Balmer's nose has done very little to make our lives better and would eventually ilke to reach a point where we're all paying them a monthly fee and they're no longer innovating.
Blah, I'm done rambling.
<]=)
-Make the internet a cleaner place, stop browsing with Internet Explorer.
Zzzz -whazzit- I'm AWAKE! What did you say?
Oh. Well, there's a big difference between making cameras and making movies. Yeah, Apple has affected media production by selling tools, but now it's poised to cross the boundary in a somewhat more significant way than Buzzy Lightspeed, or whatever the character was called.
Jobs/Apple makes a brand new and very proprietary medium; Miniature TV sets. Jobs/Disney owns a behemoth of distribution plus a hundred and one property-rights. Hence, Mickey Mouse will be on iPods everywhere. Complete with adverts. Go, America!
I figure that, barring unforseen weirdness, it should only be a very short matter of time before the Pods will be part of the cell nets, with people eager to plunk down cash for high-speed access via microwaves. And then I'll have to shoot myself.
The prospect of a fast-cooked society of people walking around with their eyes and ears filled with the tender messages of the Beast at all times makes me feel all gushy inside, --though not so much in a warm & fuzzy manner as in a 'filled with worms' sort of way. I find it fitting that Apple and Disney are positioning themselves to be largely responsible fuzzing out the minds of the entire Western populace with electronic cotton candy. They're both happy-happy-bliss-bliss kinds of companies with too much shiny plastic and annoying function-removing fool-proofing. "Don't worry about our proprietary rights management system. You just listen to your music and we'll take care of everything for you."
Ugh.
And who the heck likes wearing head-phones anyway? No, seriously. . !
I never did like using Walkmans. They were certainly cool devices, but I could not stand having an artificial wall of noise separate me from reality. I only used my walkman because it seemed like the right thing to do after spending $200 on a portable tape player, but honestly. . . who actually feels good walking around in the world with their hearing deliberately rendered useless? Drove me bananas.
-FL