Slashdot Mirror
Best Buy, Real and SanDisk To Launch Music Service
M00NIE writes "Best Buy has announced it's going to join forces with Real and SanDisk to launch a new online music store. The new technology apparently makes use of Sansa music players that support Rhapsody DNA subscriptions." From the article: "As far as technical details go, Best Buy's new service is going to be identical to Rhapsody's current offering of WMA-protected audio files with the additional features provided by Rhapsody DNA. Rhapsody DNA is based on Real's Helix DRM and gives users the ability to access their content across different types of devices, and provides what RealNetworks describes as an "end-to-end music experience" similar to the closed ecosystem approach that Apple uses and Microsoft will be using with the Zune."
Real and WMA? I think I'd rather just stab myself with an icepick. What the hell is wrong with these morons? More restictive DRM attached to EXTREMELY crappy players is going to somehow take the web by storm, despite all historical evidence to the contrary?
Too many idiots are buying into the Zune hype.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
Are the helix files easily translated into more standard files that I could play on my existing hardware/players? There's no way I'm going to pay for crippled files that hardly play on anything.
Where were you when the voynix came?
Knowing BestBuy, they will be heavily pitching (or shoving down your throat) extended warranties on their music, since your backups will probably be rendered useless by their DRM.
yes, the more mutually exclusive DRM systems, the better.
So let me get this straight-three minority players in the online music market think that by combining physical stores, codecs people despise, and mp3 players nobody buys will produce a winning service? Start shorting those stocks now, folks.
...I get twice the DRM for twice the price! What a deal!
"This is America... where the will of the few outweigh the outrage of the many..." - Unknown
I agree. There's more to this story than meets the eye.
According to this article, the underlying hardware is based on the e200 series of players. That's interesting because the e200 's most distinguishing feature is its support for both MTP mode (yuck, Media Transfer Protocol means "works on XP only, and you can only transfer files by politely asking WMP10/11+ for permission") and UMS (woohoo, USB Mass Storage, it mounts like every other USB drive on every OS in the world) mode.
There's also been rumors of interest from Sandisk in working with the Rockbox folks.
I speculate that Real is paying Sandisk a small fortune to place Real-branded (and Real-DRM-infected) firmware on the existing Sansa e200 hardware. The branding of the player "Sansa Rhapsody" doesn't stomp all over the "Sansa e2x0" series. Sandisk makes money off Real's licensing fees and the hardware even if the programme flops flat on its face. Sandisk, after all, is in the business of selling flash memory, not MP3 players - hence why the e200 is flash-based and has an expansion slot for MicroSD. If you're a flash manufacturer, high-capacity flash-based MP3 players are a great means of not just driving sales, but for boosting profit margins.
It's never about need... It's about money. It's probably not hard to put one together and maintain and they'll probably make a good amount of money. They also have quite a bit of leverage for promoting it along with anything they sell. "Buy an mp3 player from us and get 10 free song downloads!" The music store doesn't even have to be the main selling point when free songs might be the deciding factor on where to get your mp3 player.
Reality is nothing but a collective hunch.
Exxon only works in Chevrolets, and Chrysler owners must seek out Citgo stations.
It's always been that way. That's what made American oil companies and American automakers so successful.
Consumers love being asked to guess which product to buy, knowing that there's only one chance in three they'll be able to use the product five years from now.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
no, the worst way to accomplish anything is to put a restrictive DRM on it and then market the crap out of it. shooting is a distant second.
[an error occurred while processing this sig]
Seriously, it's like the Voltron of crap.
I am truely proud to be old school.
My mooosic player plays old fasioned MP3's and I pay $10 a month for a good news group subscription.
(+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
* More affordable -- $120 to $180 a year for virtually all the music you want (that's the equivalent of perhaps 20 CDs from iTunes)
* More affordable -- my time is too valuable to spend it ripping my extensive CD collection into MP3s or a lossless format and organizing it ... a couple of clicks and my existing music is "added" to my Rhapsody library as I want to listen to it
* More flexible -- I can add a artist's entire body of work to my Rhapsody library, listen to it several times to decide if I like it and delete it if I don't ... and it doesn't cost me anything beyond my basic monthly subscription fee
* Protection from "obsolescence" -- the current sampling rates used by iTunes, Rhapsody and the others aren't exactly CD quality, but they are good enough. If iTunes decides to improve the bit rate in 2 years, you'll likely have to buy the tracks all over again, but with Rhapsody they should just be there automatically
* Buy It, too -- if you want to buy a Rhapsody track and burn your own CD, you can do it just as you would with iTunes ... each track is generally only 89 cents.
I realize that the subscription model isn't right for everyone, but I think many of the comments here don't consider the positive factors. I view it similarly to a Sirius or XM monthly subscription. For a very modest price each month, I have access to all the music I could ever want and I certainly do a lot more exploration of new artists than I have ever done before. I also have the option of buying the tracks outright at any time just as with iTunes.
Finally, I've long been a critic of Real's software and their invasive installation tactics. I was therefore genuinely surprised at how clean the Rhapsody install was and the absence of the typical Real antics. Best of all, Rhapsody's integration with Sonos is simply elegant -- no PC involved at all -- direct access to the entire Rhapsody music library. channels and radio stations from the Sonos wireless remote. It has been a true pleasure.
I bought a 512 meg sansa 230, or whatever the older model # blue one is. It was $40, and the dufus at the register gives me the service plan pitch. I say no. He adds "You do know that those are known to have battery issues, don't you?" I smiled and said, "Yes, but I'm willing to absorb that risk," then walked out laughing my ass off.
The player takes a friggin AAA.
Sweet informative mod.
"The only way to beat Apple is to make something thats more compelling then an ipod."
It's not the iPod or the iTunes Store that are compelling. It's iTunes itself. Until a competitor produces software that makes managing your music collection and getting it from your computer to your music player easier than iTunes does, there'll never be an "iPod killer", regardless of features, price, ease of use etc. The ease of use of iTunes made the Store possible, and it is that ease of use of the service, not the iPod, that is the real key to Apple's dominance in the legal download market. The point that most people are missing by focusing on the iPod is that Apple is already looking beyond it. Competitors who focus on the device, and not on the service ecosystem it represents, are fighting the wrong battle.
The iTunes Store is cluing in the average consumer (i.e., the multitudes who don't know or care that Slashdot exists) that buying digital content from the Web is an easy process, and when they're used to the idea, it won't matter to Apple if an "iPod killer" exists or not. They'll be too firmly entrenched in people's living rooms to give a damn, and a hell of a lot more people own TV's than own digital music players. With the prices of LCD TV's falling, how difficult would it be for Apple to stuff the iMac's guts and iTV functionality into a television and position it as THE Next Big Thing? Especially if Disney, through Jobs' connections, provides some marketing muscle? I can easily envision Apple sweetening the pot by offering free Disney classic on DVD or via iTunes Store exclusively with the purchase of a new "iHome" entertainment system.
Let me start by saying that I am definitely an iPod guy. I have owned several iPods (3G, 4G, Photo, Video, Shuffle). I develop iPod compatible software and have been heavily involved in reverse engineering the iTunes database formats.
That said, the e200R and Rhapsody 4.0 actually appear to be a decent alternative to an iPod/iTMS, not to mention Microsoft's Zune. I know, I know - BestBuy and Real (along with Microsoft WMA) sound like a match made in hell, but the features posted on Wired actually sound interesting - especially "My Rhapsody Channel" (sort of like Pandora for portable music players) and "Dynamic Playlists" (same idea, but featuring new releases).
Regardless of what you think of Real, you can't argue that they are doing some innovative things here (we'll have to see on how well it is executed). And while I haven't even touched a Sansa, they are the 2nd most popular MP3 player and do get decent reviews.
I'm thinking that for people who are interested in renting music, as opposed to the $0.99 per-track iTunes model, this sounds a lot more compelling than any of the PlaysForSure alternatives. If they would just subsidize the player and sell it cheap ($99 or less) with a 1 or 2 year service commitment, I think they could do very well.