Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Developing iPod, iTMS Competitor
Software writes "Reuters reports that Microsoft is developing an iPod and iTunes Music Store competitor. Few details are available, but it's known that Robbie Bach (the man behind the Xbox) is heading up the project." From the article: "Most iTunes rivals charge monthly fees to access a catalog of entertainment, but some allow consumers to buy individual songs for about $1 each. Microsoft's service will emphasize the pay-per-download, or a la carte, model, the sources said. A subscription component will also be offered, according to early accounts of the planned service. One source, who has seen a demonstration of the service, said it was an improvement over iTunes."
All a new commer has to do is to talk Apple's customers into give up their iPods and around $2bn of purchased content, after that they can sell on the basis of better devices and new sales/subscription models.
Now that the market is almost saturated... why would I bother to switch from iTunes and my video ipod (which I just bought with my Macbook Pro) to an MS service? Are they going to seriously undercut prices? No.
Does anyone seriously disagree with me that Windows Media Player is a bloated piece of shit? Ever since like.. version... 6.4? MS has been trying to add every possible little thing to it... they are trying to make it so that it is the ONLY program you will ever need to run on your PC... personally I am all for decentralization but I realise there are some users who want to open up one program and then start typing an e-mail and buy movie tickets within the same app (a few years off in WMP)...
Buying tunes through XBox live marketplace, and transferring them from the box to the player would open the door to a huge untapped group of consumers who don't have (or want) a PC, but probably have (or wouldn't mind) a game console.
I would be shocked to find out that this isn't the route MS plans to take, the 360 being your entertainment-hub and all.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
No wireless. Less space than an iPod. Lame.
The AAC lock-in is the only thing I hate about my iPod. It's supposedly possible to play AAC's on Linux, but I haven't been able to get it to work, even after downloading gtkpod, faac, faad, xine, amarok1.4, etc. And you're right that AAC lock-in makes 'plays for sure' a joke.
Not that microsoft lock-in'd be any better, but what if Microsoft were to write a utility to seemlessly convert and/or copy your exisiting iTunes library from AAC (including DRM-AAC) to WMA?
DRM laden AAC is no different form DRM laden WMA, except for the base file format. Each can exist in a form which has no DRM, but the people selling you the music, such as iTMS add it there. If you can remove the DRM appended onto the AAC file then it should play anywhere. Don't forget AAC ( Advanced Audo Coding) is the audio encoding format that is part of MP4, and the licensor is Dolby.
For a given bit rate AAC is actually superior to MP3. I have AACs encoded with iTunes (not iTMS) that play quite happily with Winamp. I won't tell you how to remove the DRM from AACs because I don't know how to, and should testify having as much issue with WMA in this form.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
What they'll produce is a second rate player and service. It will attempt to be all things to all record companies and not be all that great a service. What you have to understand is how much Apple pushed the music companies in order to get them to support ITMS.
Remember the major record producers originally had their own "stores". They charged a monthly fee, charged for downloading, and then your music couldn't be transfered to other devices and would expire after two or three months. For some strange reason, it wasn't very popular.
Remember that iTunes and the iPod came out before the ITMS. Apple used it as a demonstration on how popular an MP3 player could be, and how easy it was to copy songs from CDs and share them with friends. There was *no* DRM on the original iPods. Jobs turned around and negotiated the store. He insisted that they sell all music for the same price, that the music wouldn't expire, and that users would have some means of sharing it. In return, Apple created FairPlay which made the record executives a bit less nervious about selling electronically.
Apple also made ITMS "Mac Only" as a demonstration product. This way, the music executives could see how it might actually be good for the industry. Once they were satisfied about the security and sales, they allowed Apple to ship the Windows version of iTunes.
Apple recently again did battle against the record industry. Remember a few months ago that the industry wanted to do away with "one price" pricing? Apple insisted that 1). All music would be the same price, and 2). That it would remain under a dollar.
Does Apple do this because they love us? Nope, it's because Jobs has a clue of what people want, and has a vision how things should be done.
Microsoft will simply try to overload the player with features, then use its Windows monopoly to push it upon the market. All PCs will come with the software, and the service. If you put in a CD, the service will be the default way it will play. The Microsoft designed music players will be unhappy on any machine, but Windows, and will insist upon Windows Vista. They'll come up with the service specs, and will design, but not necessarily produce the system. They will put pressure upon their "business partners" to produce the players, and to bundle them with their PCs. You will get the Microsoft approved device and you will love it.
This is a bit old, but explains why Microsoft couldn't make an iPod: .