Umm... perhaps you're missing things here. It's the record labels that are pressuring for higher prices. They're just greedy, and don't realize that when they raise prices, people will STOP BUYING, so the total revenue from iTunes will fall.
Steve Jobs has basically said they are greedy, and is sticking to a flat price.
Why was it posted like this? To get attention. To create a reaction. Typical journalism having to spin everything to get more response. Slashdot is no different. How boring it would have been just to post "Record label exec believes apple should do something in the best interest of the record labels". That's no good, see?
Apple provides a viable way for record labels to transition from media-based distribution to an on-line model, and the labels in turn slap Apple in the face and say they're not making enough money.
At least they've dropped the "think of the starving artists" plea and are going right for the obvious "we want more money".
1) The title of this seems to indicate that it is definitely happening. This is a greedy record label exec who is claiming this. OF COURSE he wants higher prices. This "article" has been around on blogs for days now and everyone seems to declare this as if it already taking place.
2) Higher price = I jump ship and stop buying. $0.99 is the boundary. More than that and it's worth either buying and ripping the CD or just going back to filesharing. The record labels just can't stand to get all this free money for doing nothing. They really are trying hard to screw up digital downloads.
Sorry, but the cynic in me just realizes the fact that people are too stupid to know what's going on, so before we know it all media and computers will be DRMed. Say goodbye to using media as you wish (portable players, computers, etc) and also hobby coding on your computer. Only "approved" software will run. But it will creep in as "protection" from virus, malware, etc.
People are idiots, and won't know what's going on until way after it's too late.
Sure, the few of us that get it can boycott all we want, but everyone else is still buying rap "music" and britney spears albums. They don't care what rights they have to give away in return.
IF??? Surely you are joking. It's already upon us with the whole Trusted Computing thing with Intel in bed with Microsoft to make us all safer. Think of the children!
I feel sorry for CS students and other folks interested in tinkering with software and hardware. In five years, it will be so difficult as to not be fun, and be far from a learning experience anymore. You will have to use Trusted Software and only do things that The Man wants you to do.
"I really hope people don't take too much advantage of this"
You pretty much answered your own posit here a little later:
"Then again, there are a lot of idiots..."
So here is what will happen:
1) Users discover this "new" concept (even though it only works with a PVR, and if the people had the PVR, they could record and watch these shows later for free). 2) They start using it. 3) The Man uses this as an example as to why fair use should go away (see? people will pay multiple times for the same content). 4) TiVo and traditional PVRs die a horrible death because of Broadcast Flag Bill II: The Revenge. 5) You end up paying The Man to time-shift on their terms. 6) Innovation, freedom of content, fair use are history.
That is their plan in a nutshell.
That being said, they can pry my MythTV box out of my cold, dead fingers.
"Movies are movies. You shouldn't require a cinematic experience to watch them. They are not one-in-the-same."
Oh man, does this statement sum up all that is wrong with today's theaters. It's a shame you feel this way, but I guess that's what most people think, too. That's why nobody cares. They just want more explosions and sex in their movies.
There are people in my office that just refuse to use Firefox for some reason. The rest of us explain the benefits: you can import bookmarks from IE, tabbed browsing, popup blocking... but for some reason they refuse. I'm sure it's just laziness or perhaps for spite. I don't know, but I just don't understand. There is something better! Why not use it?
All of this is a moot point. Consumers will not be buying the next-gen DVD discs for the following simple reasons:
1) DVD has not even been in the market for ten years. It came out basically in 1997. People are *just now* buying more DVDs than VHS. I think people know the industry is just trying to put out a new format to get them to buy the same movies all over again.
2) The HD-DVD does not offer enough benefits over DVD. The transition from VHS to DVD was easy (better picture clarity, form factor, don't have to rewind), but the advantage of HD-DVD over DVD is just better resolution. Most idiots look at a DVD playing on a plasma and say "wow, HD!".
I don't care that theater owners hate this idea. In fact, that makes me love this idea. Anything that will force the theaters to change their ways is a great thing. I don't go out to the movies because 1) they charge way too much, 2) they show commericals, and 3) they let the annoying audience members get away with talking on their cell phones, making way too much noise, and just being all around jerks.
Give me a great movie experience for the $10 you're charging me. Make sure your theaters are CLEAN, and try hiring people with an IQ above 50. Please be sure to also have at least a few actual projectionists, too. When the movie starts without sound or out of focus, I should not have to leave the theater and try to flag down that 15-year-old "manager".
Theater owners are in the same group as the RIAA: hanging on to an old business model while trying to charge more and deliver less. No thanks.
Most people do not want to carry a cell phone, an mp3 player, and a digital camera around with them all day.
Then all you have to do is not carry those things. Who says we need to carry all this stuff with us all the time anyways? Before the camera-cell phone thing, did people really carry around a digital camera all the time?
I'm not sure what you're getting at here. I can replace my car radio and upgrade it independently from my car. It's a great example of how it's a device that does one thing, and it can be upgraded at my leisure.
Maybe I'm in the minority, but I specifically do NOT want a device that does more than one thing. In my history of owning devices that do multiple things, it is always the case that they do each poorly. It is less than the sum of the parts.
Also, sometimes I want to invest more money into one device (say, MP3 player), but don't care as much about another device (I actually don't use my mobile phone much at all, so I don't care). I want separate devices so I can upgrade independently and invest where I want more out of one device.
So maybe the market is moving away from someone like me, and perhaps everyone actually wants one device that does everything, but I don't. To me it's no surprise that the reaction to the ROKR has been poor, because it's a poor phone coupled with a poor MP3 player (100 song limit?). How is that supposed to result in a great device?
"I mean, who really needs a countdown timer to the next episode of Battlestar Galactica just one keypress away at any moment?"
Me! I love that widget.
"I have yet to find a use for Automator, and from what I can see from the rather uninspiring selection of Automator Actions people have created, neither has anyone else. Its a nice idea, but in practice not a very useful one."
Now I agree on that one. I love Tiger, but I have yet to use Automator. I started it up once, but didn't find the interface very intuitive. Agreed, great on paper.
Then I would simple answer that you did not exactly find the right new opportunity. And there is no way I'm trolling. I'm actually being quite logical.
It was your choice to not maintain work in your field, and you must reap what you sow. It is that simple. Don't blame anyone else (or play the "economy" card... most of us are doing just fine).
So that means we should just give them something for free? Cry me a river. I worked hard to get where I am. It's called the American way. People seem to think they are entitled to everything now. Get off your butt and get a better paying job if you can't afford something as important as health insurance. Else you take the risk of not being to afford medical treatment. It's your choice. Not my problem.
Music executive: "Hey, we're making a ton of cash money without any distribution or production costs. In fact, we don't really do anything at all, and get rich. I know, LET'S SCREW THAT UP."
Have you actually played any DS games? The touchscreen is not a gimmick, but a cool new way to play fun games.
You spent a lot of words there pointing out supposed negatives about the DS. Why not try listing advantages of the PSP? Like be sure to list the huge amount of popular games. And be sure to bring up sales numbers that must be spectacular because it's better than the DS. Oh, wait...
The DS is far from a gimmick. What's really going on is Sony is shocked that their "superior" handheld device isn't selling so well at all (latest numbers for last week show the DS selling more than all other game systems combined in Japan, where Sony *should* be doing better).
It's kinda like why the iPod sells so well over the competing MP3 players. The iPod plays music. It does it well. No need for all these other "features". In the same way, the DS lets you play really fun games. That is all. It doesn't try to be everything to everyone like the PSP. And we see the results...
I don't *want* to watch movies on the go. I don't want to run Linux or whatever on the go. I want my handheld gaming device to just play games.
And now the DS is only $129. What a bargain, IMHO. Oh, and Nintendogs is just plain *fun*. Just wait until WiFi networked Mario Kart and Metroid Hunters. Oh man, what a time ahead for us DS owners...
Slashdot Mirror
Umm... perhaps you're missing things here. It's the record labels that are pressuring for higher prices. They're just greedy, and don't realize that when they raise prices, people will STOP BUYING, so the total revenue from iTunes will fall.
Steve Jobs has basically said they are greedy, and is sticking to a flat price.
Why was it posted like this? To get attention. To create a reaction. Typical journalism having to spin everything to get more response. Slashdot is no different. How boring it would have been just to post "Record label exec believes apple should do something in the best interest of the record labels". That's no good, see?
Apple provides a viable way for record labels to transition from media-based distribution to an on-line model, and the labels in turn slap Apple in the face and say they're not making enough money.
At least they've dropped the "think of the starving artists" plea and are going right for the obvious "we want more money".
1) The title of this seems to indicate that it is definitely happening. This is a greedy record label exec who is claiming this. OF COURSE he wants higher prices. This "article" has been around on blogs for days now and everyone seems to declare this as if it already taking place.
2) Higher price = I jump ship and stop buying. $0.99 is the boundary. More than that and it's worth either buying and ripping the CD or just going back to filesharing. The record labels just can't stand to get all this free money for doing nothing. They really are trying hard to screw up digital downloads.
Sorry, but the cynic in me just realizes the fact that people are too stupid to know what's going on, so before we know it all media and computers will be DRMed. Say goodbye to using media as you wish (portable players, computers, etc) and also hobby coding on your computer. Only "approved" software will run. But it will creep in as "protection" from virus, malware, etc.
People are idiots, and won't know what's going on until way after it's too late.
Sure, the few of us that get it can boycott all we want, but everyone else is still buying rap "music" and britney spears albums. They don't care what rights they have to give away in return.
"what if Intel and AMD both DRM there chips?"
IF??? Surely you are joking. It's already upon us with the whole Trusted Computing thing with Intel in bed with Microsoft to make us all safer. Think of the children!
I feel sorry for CS students and other folks interested in tinkering with software and hardware. In five years, it will be so difficult as to not be fun, and be far from a learning experience anymore. You will have to use Trusted Software and only do things that The Man wants you to do.
"I really hope people don't take too much advantage of this"
..."
You pretty much answered your own posit here a little later:
"Then again, there are a lot of idiots
So here is what will happen:
1) Users discover this "new" concept (even though it only works with a PVR, and if the people had the PVR, they could record and watch these shows later for free).
2) They start using it.
3) The Man uses this as an example as to why fair use should go away (see? people will pay multiple times for the same content).
4) TiVo and traditional PVRs die a horrible death because of Broadcast Flag Bill II: The Revenge.
5) You end up paying The Man to time-shift on their terms.
6) Innovation, freedom of content, fair use are history.
That is their plan in a nutshell.
That being said, they can pry my MythTV box out of my cold, dead fingers.
"Movies are movies. You shouldn't require a cinematic experience to watch them. They are not one-in-the-same."
Oh man, does this statement sum up all that is wrong with today's theaters. It's a shame you feel this way, but I guess that's what most people think, too. That's why nobody cares. They just want more explosions and sex in their movies.
"Watching movies on "cell phone" is contrary to everything I hold dear about the cinematic experience."
But more inline with *today's* cinema experience, now the annoying teens can talk on their cell phone and watch the movie. Now that's convergence.
There are people in my office that just refuse to use Firefox for some reason. The rest of us explain the benefits: you can import bookmarks from IE, tabbed browsing, popup blocking... but for some reason they refuse. I'm sure it's just laziness or perhaps for spite. I don't know, but I just don't understand. There is something better! Why not use it?
Hello? It's NBC... As in MSNBC... As in Microsoft. You can bet that it will only play on Windows and will be in some Media Player format.
No thanks.
All of this is a moot point. Consumers will not be buying the next-gen DVD discs for the following simple reasons:
1) DVD has not even been in the market for ten years. It came out basically in 1997. People are *just now* buying more DVDs than VHS. I think people know the industry is just trying to put out a new format to get them to buy the same movies all over again.
2) The HD-DVD does not offer enough benefits over DVD. The transition from VHS to DVD was easy (better picture clarity, form factor, don't have to rewind), but the advantage of HD-DVD over DVD is just better resolution. Most idiots look at a DVD playing on a plasma and say "wow, HD!".
I don't care that theater owners hate this idea. In fact, that makes me love this idea. Anything that will force the theaters to change their ways is a great thing. I don't go out to the movies because 1) they charge way too much, 2) they show commericals, and 3) they let the annoying audience members get away with talking on their cell phones, making way too much noise, and just being all around jerks.
Give me a great movie experience for the $10 you're charging me. Make sure your theaters are CLEAN, and try hiring people with an IQ above 50. Please be sure to also have at least a few actual projectionists, too. When the movie starts without sound or out of focus, I should not have to leave the theater and try to flag down that 15-year-old "manager".
Theater owners are in the same group as the RIAA: hanging on to an old business model while trying to charge more and deliver less. No thanks.
... when we roll over to this version of MS Office.
It's interesting that you already have decided that you must upgrade. Why?
Most people do not want to carry a cell phone, an mp3 player, and a digital camera around with them all day.
Then all you have to do is not carry those things. Who says we need to carry all this stuff with us all the time anyways? Before the camera-cell phone thing, did people really carry around a digital camera all the time?
" You should have your car radio repossed..."
I'm not sure what you're getting at here. I can replace my car radio and upgrade it independently from my car. It's a great example of how it's a device that does one thing, and it can be upgraded at my leisure.
Maybe I'm in the minority, but I specifically do NOT want a device that does more than one thing. In my history of owning devices that do multiple things, it is always the case that they do each poorly. It is less than the sum of the parts.
Also, sometimes I want to invest more money into one device (say, MP3 player), but don't care as much about another device (I actually don't use my mobile phone much at all, so I don't care). I want separate devices so I can upgrade independently and invest where I want more out of one device.
So maybe the market is moving away from someone like me, and perhaps everyone actually wants one device that does everything, but I don't. To me it's no surprise that the reaction to the ROKR has been poor, because it's a poor phone coupled with a poor MP3 player (100 song limit?). How is that supposed to result in a great device?
Try one or two. Or zero. In my opinion is it's dead already.
"I mean, who really needs a countdown timer to the next episode of Battlestar Galactica just one keypress away at any moment?"
Me! I love that widget.
"I have yet to find a use for Automator, and from what I can see from the rather uninspiring selection of Automator Actions people have created, neither has anyone else. Its a nice idea, but in practice not a very useful one."
Now I agree on that one. I love Tiger, but I have yet to use Automator. I started it up once, but didn't find the interface very intuitive. Agreed, great on paper.
Then I would simple answer that you did not exactly find the right new opportunity. And there is no way I'm trolling. I'm actually being quite logical.
... most of us are doing just fine).
It was your choice to not maintain work in your field, and you must reap what you sow. It is that simple. Don't blame anyone else (or play the "economy" card
Stop it! You're just confusing him with facts.
That's so unfair.
So that means we should just give them something for free? Cry me a river. I worked hard to get where I am. It's called the American way. People seem to think they are entitled to everything now. Get off your butt and get a better paying job if you can't afford something as important as health insurance. Else you take the risk of not being to afford medical treatment. It's your choice. Not my problem.
Music executive: "Hey, we're making a ton of cash money without any distribution or production costs. In fact, we don't really do anything at all, and get rich. I know, LET'S SCREW THAT UP."
Have you actually played any DS games? The touchscreen is not a gimmick, but a cool new way to play fun games.
You spent a lot of words there pointing out supposed negatives about the DS. Why not try listing advantages of the PSP? Like be sure to list the huge amount of popular games. And be sure to bring up sales numbers that must be spectacular because it's better than the DS. Oh, wait...
The DS is far from a gimmick. What's really going on is Sony is shocked that their "superior" handheld device isn't selling so well at all (latest numbers for last week show the DS selling more than all other game systems combined in Japan, where Sony *should* be doing better).
It's kinda like why the iPod sells so well over the competing MP3 players. The iPod plays music. It does it well. No need for all these other "features". In the same way, the DS lets you play really fun games. That is all. It doesn't try to be everything to everyone like the PSP. And we see the results...
I don't *want* to watch movies on the go. I don't want to run Linux or whatever on the go. I want my handheld gaming device to just play games.
And now the DS is only $129. What a bargain, IMHO. Oh, and Nintendogs is just plain *fun*. Just wait until WiFi networked Mario Kart and Metroid Hunters. Oh man, what a time ahead for us DS owners...