Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Brings Back DRM
Barence writes "Microsoft yesterday unveiled its MSN Mobile Music service — and a surprise return to digital rights management (DRM). While companies such as Apple and Amazon have finally moved to music download services free of copy protection, MSN Mobile locks tracks to the mobile handset they are downloaded to. It also charges more than the other services per track, and offers no way to transfer your tracks to your new phone when you upgrade. The company's Head of Mobile UK spoke to PC Pro about the launch, but his answers are almost as baffling as the service itself. Best quote: Q: 'If I buy these songs on your service — and they're locked to my phone — what happens when I upgrade my phone in six months' time?' A: 'Well, I think you know the answer to that.'"
This guy's answers are hilarious. They only make sense in a universe where everything is inherently locked down, and your customers are idiots to be abused.
You don't really have to provide a "mechanism" if you just left the system open. If the files were non-DRM and the phone had an open interface (e.g. you plug in a USB cable and can browse/transfer files on it), then the transferring step is trivial.
Which, again, would be trivially easy with an open system. If the phone were open, I could download a track from Amazon and put it on my phone. So the only reason to use the MSN service is "because of lock-in."
And in response to the question:
Wow. Just... wow. That's impressive market research on their part. They are not sure how long people keep their cellphones. And they see no issue with requiring digital files to expire whenever the hardware does.
This overpriced and highly restricted product has a clear future ahead...
">I didn't realise phones were churning that quickly in the marketplace these days
How clueless can you be? This guy almost makes me feel good about the other news of the day (Microsoft to laying off 5,000)."
----
This jumped out at me as well. I suspect he was being both sarcastic and a little clueless. That was one of the last questions that was asked, many of them questioning the business model, pricing, DRM. This guy was looking for the "gee, what an exciting service!" kind of non-question. I suspect he was fed up with the questioner by this point.
I'm assuming he must understand the churn rate for phone, right? It's probably more than a year, less than two. But I can't imagine he would expect people to pay about $3.50 (1.79 pounds) for songs to throw away; at least he couldn't expect people to buy many songs at this price.
Perhaps he's counting on the phones being so locked down that you must buy the songs from MS?
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
Man it really is as bad as the summary makes it.
With the likes of iTunes and Amazon offering DRM-free music that you can play on any device, why would anyone choose the MSN Mobile service?
There may well be people who just want to listen to the track on their mobile alone.
Yeah and there may well be people with severe OCD who purchase music from your store and then immediately delete it because the bits didn't download in the right order, but I wouldn't bet the farm on chasing that demographic.
Jesus, they seem to be basing the whole thing on the hope that they can trick people into thinking they have to buy music from the MSN store if they have a Windows Mobile device. What the hell is that shit about "loyal to MSN". What? If anyone uses MSN it's because it came up by default in IE and they're too stupid to figure out how to change it. My mom might use MSN, but you can be damn sure she's not going to be buying music for her mobile phone anytime soon. Way to know your audience there pal.
Good grief, someone needs to post a 24 hour guard by this guy, Ballmer is going to disappear his ass posthaste.
In what way is Xbox Live better than PS network, which is free?
I have very intelligent friends, usually over 30, that just have no idea about computers, and frankly don't care. It's as interesting to them as how their toaster works. They come to me with their computer issues and the phrase I hear often is, "I hate this. Technology is supposed to make life easier."
They're frustrated and rightfully so. Some will undoubtedly buy into crap like this, and not understand why they can't have their music anymore. They'll get frustrated, angry, or cry, and try silly things to put the music on their computer or new phones. Another phrase I hear often: "I was up half the night trying to get this to work."
The people who sell things like this are putting out a product they know to be inferior. They rationalize it with ideas like, "people have a choice" and "people may actually prefer this layout and never realize the drawbacks."
But in the end, my friends would have a bought a better product for less if this crap hadn't been around. And when they can't do what they thought they should be able to do, they don't know why, and they get very upset. Crap like this ruins the days of many, many people. It's avoidable and it's the fault of people who put plans like this into action.
They're screwing people over to make a buck, plain and simple.
I'm no PR guy, I'm an engineer. And if I were put into Hugh Griffiths' shoes, I'm not so sure I'd have answered the questions any differently. He knows the product sucks: It's more expensive, non-transferable, and behind the times technically. He's probably IMMENSELY frustrated that they could only release this crap given the building products they have to work with. So, he grits his teeth, does an interview, and does his best to not say anything negative. But you can just tell he's disappointed.
If I were him, actually, I wouldn't have done the interview. That's probably his big mistake.
my blog