MSN Music Store to Open Next Week

[James Fee]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story?id=6450450&rnd=1093517841674&has-player=true' target='_blank'>http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story?id=6450450&rnd=1093517841674&has-player=true</a><br /><br /></div>"<i>Apple's iTunes music store is about to face some serious competition, as online giant Microsoft prepares to roll out its own music store on September 2nd. With the ability to funnel 350 million users a month to the store via its Hotmail, Messenger and MSN sites, Microsoft will likely become the number-two player in the market for legally downloaded music and ultimately could challenge Apple's reign at the top. The company has kept details of the Microsoft music store under wraps and declined to comment for this article. But according to sources close to Microsoft, the store will open to the public with somewhere between 600,000 and 700,000 tracks for sale at ninety-nine cents apiece. Within a couple of months, it will match Apple's 1 million offerings. Reports that Microsoft will use its financial clout to become the first site to offer the Beatles catalog (the band reportedly demands tens of millions of dollars for a long-term exclusive arrangement) could not be confirmed.</i>"<br /><br />Of course they shouldn't affect iTunes too much since most iTunes users are locked into the service due to lack of WMA support on the iPod, but all other music stores should be very worried. I guess it is goodbye to Napster, MusicMatch and Real. Still competition is good for all of us. I'm looking forward to Apple's response. <br /><br />The talk about integration into their search, webmail and instant messaging products should be interesting. Also getting exclusive content such as the Beatles and even The Rolling Stones would really set MSN music apart.

[Felix Torres]

This could be interesting.
I don't necessarily see them taking MusicMatch or Napster out, though.
Not unless they get very creative in their back-end software or bundling deals.

What I'm interested in seeing is what bitrate formats they provide the music in.
Ideally, you want it in lossless form for CD burning.
And, of course, the terms and conditions of the subscription service.

[James Fee]

This could be interesting.
I don't necessarily see them taking MusicMatch or Napster out, though.
Not unless they get very creative in their back-end software or bundling deals.
Is there any compelling reason to use anything other than the largest "WMA provider"? I just don't see what either of them offer me to not use MSN Music, even without me giving MSN Music a test drive.

What I'm interested in seeing is what bitrate formats they provide the music in.
Ideally, you want it in lossless form for CD burning.
Yea, I'd love to see at least 160 or better. Lossless could be nice, and I'd jump all over it, but will the RIAA allow anyone to use it?

And, of course, the terms and conditions of the subscription service.I'm sure it will require your passport account. ;)

[Mojo Jojo]

Another tidbit for you...

Apparently Microsoft came to Apple looking to make the MS music store compatible. They were turned down. (Source Rolling Stones)

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story?id=6450450&rnd=1093549308543&has-player=false

So does that mean MS wanted to sell Fairplay DRM tracks? Or MS wanted Apple to support WMA?

I think someone just blinked.

[Citezein]

I'm really looking forward to seeing what bitrate they offer. I have a bad feeling they will go with the mainstream 128kbps, but maybe we'll get lucky and it will be 192 or even higher. I'd love lossless -- and would even pay a bit more for it ($1.25) -- but I think that is highly unlikely.

I don't mind DRM'd music, but we need to have high quality, low prices, and standard formats for it to become more worthwhile than just buying a CD and ripping it.

I currently have bought about a dozen or so tracks from a combination of Napster and MusicMatch. Napster's format is only 128kbps, so I gave up on that when MusicMatch came out with 160kbps. Their software is annoying though and constantly asks me to upgrade. It's abnoxious, especially when I'm using it to purchase music from their service. You'd think that would be enough.

Real, despite its past problems is looking rather tempting right now. 192kbps AAC with built-in transcoding (I assume) so that songs can be played on WMA compatible devices. That's not bad (especially at 49 cents a track right now) but I am not thrilled with their software. iTunes has the nicest interface, but won't play WMA files. Windows Media Player ranks 2nd and is what I use daily, but won't play files purchased from Real. Let's hope this gets sorted out in the future. MSN may get my dollar, but let's see if they can deliver and if it's possible to "deactivate" a computer whenever I upgrade, unlike their e-book software, which is dooming e-books.

[Felix Torres]

Is there any compelling reason to use anything other than the largest "WMA provider"? I just don't see what either of them offer me to not use MSN Music, even without me giving MSN Music a test drive.

What I'm interested in seeing is what bitrate formats they provide the music in.
Ideally, you want it in lossless form for CD burning.
Yea, I'd love to see at least 160 or better. Lossless could be nice, and I'd jump all over it, but will the RIAA allow anyone to use it?

And, of course, the terms and conditions of the subscription service.I'm sure it will require your passport account. ;)

How about discoverability?
Recommendations?
Test drives?
Music sharing?
Unique content?
Subscriptions?

When I first heard MS was doing a music store, I wondered: why?
Everybody but Apple was already supporting WMA...
But since then its become clear to me that not only is there room for more than one business model in this business, none of the existing players has chosen to fully exploit the capabilities MS has built into WMA and its DRM.
Now, maybe its as you say and the RIAA doesn't allow high-bit-rate d/ls...
But even then there are options.
Anybody remember the old MP3.COM music locker concept?
How about if MSN MUSIC (or somebody else, for that matter) allowed you to buy music, but also stream it off *their* server afterwards.

Or what if the d/l included an option to buy a physical CD for the difference in price between the d/l and the CD?

Or what if somebody provide surround-sound d/ls and/or streaming?
Or integration with a media center PC?

Its not just about catalog size and price.
But competitors can't just simply sit back, thinking that just selling generic 128Kbps files is a license to print money; that is DOT.COM-think.
And we all saw where that led to.
Possibilities exist.

Will anybody choose to pursue them?
Well, that's why we're watching, no? ;-)

Place your bets ladies and gents...

[Felix Torres]

Another tidbit for you...

Apparently Microsoft came to Apple looking to make the MS music store compatible. They were turned down. (Source Rolling Stones)

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story?id=6450450&rnd=1093549308543&has-player=false

So does that mean MS wanted to sell Fairplay DRM tracks? Or MS wanted Apple to support WMA?

I think someone just blinked.

Maybe.
Or maybe MS was procurring some antitrust insurance.
:twisted:

If I had to bet, I'd bet MS asked for both, in the full knowledge they'd be turned down.

After all, if MS offered to sell AAC songs and Apple refused, they wouldn't have a case to sue on later.
Similarly, if MS offered to help enable the WMA-playback capabilities that Apple disables in their decoder chip and was turned down, they can't be accused of maintaining a walled garden of their own...

I don't see any blinking on either side; just a good general covering their flank before marching into battle.

[James Fee]

When I first heard MS was doing a music store, I wondered: why?
Because there needs a reason for MSN to exist. If by having their music library integrated into Hotmail, MSN Search, MSN Messenger (maybe even MSNBC) and Windows Media Player allows them push these services, I think it makes sense for them. Obviously having Walmart and others sell WMA files isn't enough to drive people to MSN properties. All those ads can now be viewed by people who want to download their files.

[Felix Torres]

When I first heard MS was doing a music store, I wondered: why?
Because there needs a reason for MSN to exist. If by having their music library integrated into Hotmail, MSN Search, MSN Messenger (maybe even MSNBC) and Windows Media Player allows them push these services, I think it makes sense for them. Obviously having Walmart and others sell WMA files isn't enough to drive people to MSN properties. All those ads can now be viewed by people who want to download their files.

Hmm, so you see it as an eyeballs play, not a pure music play...
Possible, possible...

But wouldn't the best approach then be to sell music at cost (say $0.89) as Walmart does?

I'm thinking the ad revenue is the frosting on the music store cake; that they simply see too much money being left on the table by those that aren't fully exploiting the possibilities of the technology.
And that because there are so many possibilities, there will be room for many players and the market won't go zero-sum for a while.

[James Fee]

But wouldn't the best approach then be to sell music at cost (say $0.89) as Walmart does?
True, but I don't think they want to anger the companies licensing WMA DRM. Undercutting them because they can afford to is what gets the DoJ's attention.
I'm thinking the ad revenue is the frosting on the music store cake; that they simply see too much money being left on the table by those that aren't fully exploiting the possibilities of the technology.
And that because there are so many possibilities, there will be room for many players and the market won't go zero-sum for a while.
Probably right... If Napster or Musicmatch had really taken it to Apple, there would be less incentive to run with MSN Music. BUT since iTunes really hasn't noticed either of them they really have to step in for the sake of Windows and WMP. I'm not saying that Windows was in danger, but all the "integrated" features are not being used by iTunes users and their iPods.

[Felix Torres]

If Napster or Musicmatch had really taken it to Apple, there would be less incentive to run with MSN Music.

True, but I suspect neither will be all *that* pleased with MSN.
And I *know* Real will be ticked.
But they've already sued so the only thing they can do is amend the suit. ;-)

In a way its sad that the market hasn't taken better notice of Musicmatch or, conversely, they haven't marketed it better.
It is a pretty good system with some real nice features(front-end software issues aside); the Media Center version in particular is a very good idea.
And their back-end is well thought out.

But as you said, in a year they have made no traction against Apple and it is not in MS interests to be excluded from any market. They don't need to dominate, but they do have to be a player.

At least this is a fight they go in with hundreds of allies; namely every last manufacturer of digital music players who can't get Apple to license them Fairplay. So they *really* have to screw this up big-time *not* to be a player. 8)

[James Fee]

At least this is a fight they go in with hundreds of allies; namely every last manufacturer of digital music players who can't get Apple to license them Fairplay. So they *really* have to screw this up big-time *not* to be a player. 8)
Very true. If I have a WMA compatible player, this is great news. Finally they might have a music store that can start selling the players. It will be interesting to see what kinds of marketing deal are made with companies. Will there be a "prefered" player?

[Felix Torres]

If I have a WMA compatible player, this is great news. Finally they might have a music store that can start selling the players. It will be interesting to see what kinds of marketing deal are made with companies. Will there be a "prefered" player?

Probably not, since the idea of the MS approach is to enable diversity with compatibility, but if they were to choose a flagship, it would likely be a PMC, no?