It's not about making money selling music, it's about changing the way the system works. The ancillary benefits to itms are that Apple gets mindshare which hopefully turns into marketshare.
I didn't say it wouldn't cost apple money, and as for the "why" because apple has an opportunity to turn the traditional music business upside down and help create a viable alternative to the current music industy. Bandwidth costs would essentially be only in the listing of songs and being appriased of transaction status for resold songs. The files would be transfered peer to peer, even from many peers to the purchaser. New itms songs would be handled of course as they have been. The biggest hurdle as I see it would be the legal ins and outs. Obviously there would be development costs, just as there were for the original itms, they're obviously planning to offset these costs with volume sales (no pun intended). Same principle as itms with a dash of napster. Also it's an opportunity for Apple to make money if people end up being comfortable purchasing music from other people. The key is that for the listing of said music apple gets a cut like ebays listing fee for brokering the deal as I explained earlier.
Or we can just go on stealing music pretending we're doing nothing wrong and not suggest any alternative.
Your grocery store analogy is flawed. I'm not selling my music to a business, I'm selling it to an individual at a reduced price because I no longer want or need it. I'm not saying it's a perfect solution, just one that could work.
Well, I dont think bidding would be involved at all in my vision of the system. You would arbitrarily set prices and behind the scenes at apple they could calculate the depreciation of a song pehaps weighted on popularity or some similar condition. There would be a bottom floor price that one could not dive under in order to satisfy Apple's costs on a transaction anything above that lowest price would go to me, perhaps ala google adsense checks being cut once I reach a certain dollar amount, or even credit towards music in itms.
The problem of smaller profits would be negated by the fact that it gets paid for once by the originial purchaser through itms, once sold again I would no longer have access to the song. Which means either we can cut out the record company cut or cut it down significantly and pass a micro-piece of the transaction to Apple. Yes I suppose technically they'd loose a little money considering the opportunity cost of another duplicated purchase through itms, but the system still holds true for user created music.
I think it could work, if given the proper time to sort out the details.
They would create an ebay like system directly in iTunes that would allow me to sell my music to other people. Both music I created and music I've purchased from itms. They provide the audience, I provide the bandwidth and content, Apple would get a cut which would go towards paying the artists and record label if one were involved. The rest goes to me, and lets say for each sale of an individual song the overhead of label costs would decrease for each time the song is sold. Obviously the centralized listing of sellers would have to be seperate from itms, but I think it could work. Think napster with a twist.
Every morning before school, Mr. Wizard would blow my mind with some crazy experiment. Remember his house and what not, well imagine if Mr. Wizard was just some guy who did experiments without a TV show or anything. I bet Mr. Wizard would get a visit from the fbi for all those chemicals he was buying. Or maybe the local law enforcement for all the kids coming and going from his house. I'm off on a tangent now... anyways, Mr. Wizard was an excellent show.
I think it would be interesting to be able to have 40 year chunks of your life doing different things. So really I could be a dock worker, a rockstar, an artichoke bronzer and a shrimp boat captain in a lifetime.
You're pretty much alone on that because the cube was the biggest commercial flop since the next cube. Lots of thought went into it but you can't sell something for $3000 with an almost non-existant upgrade path and a cloudy target market. If you put a G5 in it, it's going to cause the same confusion that the cube originally created. Who is this machine for? Consumers? Prosumers? It certainly won't be for the high end market of the current G5. It just doesn't fit well with Apple's current offerings. With portables selling like hotcakes in both pc and mac markets the most room for advancement in design and technology lies there me thinks.
The stones actually dont make any money until about the halfway point in the tour. They do still make money though. The stones travel in luxury and put on a massive (expensive) stage show. They could ride by van and skip the theatrics and probably take in twice as much but they probably feel they've earned it.
MMORPGs could serve as a test bed for the study economic conditions. If players were given a strictly enforced set of rules the data it generated could actually be useful to someone. The only problem is a lot of time would have to be spent in different seperate games tweaking the environment so that it more closely approximated conditions that happen or can happen in the real world.
Maybe you missed that little documentary called star wars. Basically what happens is this kids father builds a planet destruction device out in space and the rest is well documented factual history.
I agree, it will even be a more compelling product once the 970 comes out and we see improved io with very large memory configurations.
Re:More to transactions than number of coins.
on
Making Change
·
· Score: 1
I'm not a member of the check generation. What really really grinds my gears is when someone that's shall we say youthfully challenged decides to write a check for their depends or whatever it is they're buying which would undoubtedly be faster with the swipe of a debit card.
But you don't need altivec for a next gen chip that's so much faster than it's predecesor that no one would notice. There is a huge disparity in the performance of current G4's and whatever they're gonna call the 970 based machines.
In all likelyhood it is, we just figured out that apple already has the tools in place to acomplish something like PoE with hardware and software they've already created. It would also provide lots of bandwidth (which curent wireless standards can't utilize) for future standards or other devices which might utilize it/
Slashdot Mirror
It's not about making money selling music, it's about changing the way the system works. The ancillary benefits to itms are that Apple gets mindshare which hopefully turns into marketshare.
Unemployment is the new environmentalism.
Is this an Ad or an article?
I didn't say it wouldn't cost apple money, and as for the "why" because apple has an opportunity to turn the traditional music business upside down and help create a viable alternative to the current music industy. Bandwidth costs would essentially be only in the listing of songs and being appriased of transaction status for resold songs. The files would be transfered peer to peer, even from many peers to the purchaser. New itms songs would be handled of course as they have been. The biggest hurdle as I see it would be the legal ins and outs. Obviously there would be development costs, just as there were for the original itms, they're obviously planning to offset these costs with volume sales (no pun intended). Same principle as itms with a dash of napster. Also it's an opportunity for Apple to make money if people end up being comfortable purchasing music from other people. The key is that for the listing of said music apple gets a cut like ebays listing fee for brokering the deal as I explained earlier.
Or we can just go on stealing music pretending we're doing nothing wrong and not suggest any alternative.
Your grocery store analogy is flawed. I'm not selling my music to a business, I'm selling it to an individual at a reduced price because I no longer want or need it. I'm not saying it's a perfect solution, just one that could work.
Well, I dont think bidding would be involved at all in my vision of the system. You would arbitrarily set prices and behind the scenes at apple they could calculate the depreciation of a song pehaps weighted on popularity or some similar condition. There would be a bottom floor price that one could not dive under in order to satisfy Apple's costs on a transaction anything above that lowest price would go to me, perhaps ala google adsense checks being cut once I reach a certain dollar amount, or even credit towards music in itms.
The problem of smaller profits would be negated by the fact that it gets paid for once by the originial purchaser through itms, once sold again I would no longer have access to the song. Which means either we can cut out the record company cut or cut it down significantly and pass a micro-piece of the transaction to Apple. Yes I suppose technically they'd loose a little money considering the opportunity cost of another duplicated purchase through itms, but the system still holds true for user created music.
I think it could work, if given the proper time to sort out the details.
They would create an ebay like system directly in iTunes that would allow me to sell my music to other people. Both music I created and music I've purchased from itms. They provide the audience, I provide the bandwidth and content, Apple would get a cut which would go towards paying the artists and record label if one were involved. The rest goes to me, and lets say for each sale of an individual song the overhead of label costs would decrease for each time the song is sold. Obviously the centralized listing of sellers would have to be seperate from itms, but I think it could work. Think napster with a twist.
Every morning before school, Mr. Wizard would blow my mind with some crazy experiment. Remember his house and what not, well imagine if Mr. Wizard was just some guy who did experiments without a TV show or anything. I bet Mr. Wizard would get a visit from the fbi for all those chemicals he was buying. Or maybe the local law enforcement for all the kids coming and going from his house. I'm off on a tangent now... anyways, Mr. Wizard was an excellent show.
I think it would be interesting to be able to have 40 year chunks of your life doing different things. So really I could be a dock worker, a rockstar, an artichoke bronzer and a shrimp boat captain in a lifetime.
You're pretty much alone on that because the cube was the biggest commercial flop since the next cube. Lots of thought went into it but you can't sell something for $3000 with an almost non-existant upgrade path and a cloudy target market. If you put a G5 in it, it's going to cause the same confusion that the cube originally created. Who is this machine for? Consumers? Prosumers? It certainly won't be for the high end market of the current G5. It just doesn't fit well with Apple's current offerings. With portables selling like hotcakes in both pc and mac markets the most room for advancement in design and technology lies there me thinks.
I have to cringe when I see Ardours interface. I feel the same way about Logic.
How many more boats do record labels have to miss? Here you have a service people people use and like and they're likely quibbling about a few cents.
Yeah, but did you buy it at compusa?
The stones actually dont make any money until about the halfway point in the tour. They do still make money though. The stones travel in luxury and put on a massive (expensive) stage show. They could ride by van and skip the theatrics and probably take in twice as much but they probably feel they've earned it.
I think I counted at least 9 fans. It's a wonder that thing doesn't just float by itself.
The 12" powerbook price just dropped in price today too. Down 200 dollars.
It's a very small car.
MMORPGs could serve as a test bed for the study economic conditions. If players were given a strictly enforced set of rules the data it generated could actually be useful to someone. The only problem is a lot of time would have to be spent in different seperate games tweaking the environment so that it more closely approximated conditions that happen or can happen in the real world.
I'll contribute six frosted flakes and a car key from a car I no longer own that I found in the couch.
A place where they can't get their tanks should one of the colonists declare a democracy.
Maybe you missed that little documentary called star wars. Basically what happens is this kids father builds a planet destruction device out in space and the rest is well documented factual history.
You forgot rods to the hogshead.
I agree, it will even be a more compelling product once the 970 comes out and we see improved io with very large memory configurations.
I'm not a member of the check generation. What really really grinds my gears is when someone that's shall we say youthfully challenged decides to write a check for their depends or whatever it is they're buying which would undoubtedly be faster with the swipe of a debit card.
But you don't need altivec for a next gen chip that's so much faster than it's predecesor that no one would notice. There is a huge disparity in the performance of current G4's and whatever they're gonna call the 970 based machines.
In all likelyhood it is, we just figured out that apple already has the tools in place to acomplish something like PoE with hardware and software they've already created. It would also provide lots of bandwidth (which curent wireless standards can't utilize) for future standards or other devices which might utilize it/