Log in

View Full Version : Digital Music King May Lose Crown


James Fee
08-22-2005, 11:30 PM
<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/ptech/08/22/music.apple.reut/index.html' target='_blank'>http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/ptech/08/22/music.apple.reut/index.html</a><br /><br /></div><i>"It's inevitable that over time their market share declines," Piper Jaffray senior research analyst Gene Munster says. "It's safe to say that nobody can sustain an 80 percent market share in a consumer electronics business for more than two or three years. It's pretty much impossible." Privately, record company executives say they can't wait. Not because they want to see Apple stumble, but because a less dominant Apple means a more robust market for digital music. The company by itself cannot bring digital music to account for 25 percent of all music sales, as labels hope it will by 2009."</i><br /><br />Huh? Apple must fail so the market can be more robust? What a load of garbage. Where do these "writers" come from? Sure, Apple won't budge on music subscriptions which the RIAA seems to really want, but consumers are the driving force and if they wanted subscriptions, Apple would provide it to them. To think that Apple is holding back anything is a complete misrepresentation of the facts on the ground. To blame consumers and Apple for the failings of Microsoft and their WMA allies shows the author doesn't know much about the market he is writing about.<br /><br />Will Apple's share decrease? Probably, I can't imagine how even Microsoft could command 80% of this market. Will they fail? Probably not unless consumers vote with their wallets and Apple is too oblivious to catch on. For now Apple is driving the market and there isn't anything the RIAA, Piper Jaffray "analysts", or whoever wrote this horrible article can do about it.

Phronetix
08-23-2005, 12:51 AM
Perhaps the issue should be: Why can't anybody else create a music store experience as good as the ITMS? I think the Napster subscription idea was a good one, but it didn't catch on due to user interface and music selection issues, at least according to my peers who don't iPod their music.

I think this is what needs to happen: another music service needs to cater to iPod owners and provide aac, apple lossless codec, or at the very least mp3 format in a package/store that is iPod and Mac OS friendly, and their name can't be 'Real'. I suppose that would be admitting defeat too early for the other players who get a piece of that 20%. I think there may be a lot of waiting for the right time, and it may not come.

Then again, perhaps if Redmond launched a ballistic missile on Cupertino. Might be their only short term solution. :twisted: :wink:

klinux
08-23-2005, 01:18 AM
What a poorly written article (by a nameless Reuters/Billboard author).

Case in point, it illustrates Samsung "taking on market leaders and succeeding" by using two examples. First, Samsung is 8 positions higher than Sony on Interbrand's global brand list. That's it? That's the best example of success the author can find? What about actual revenue and profits, units shipped, or market share? The second example it provided was that Samsung is now number three in the mobile phone market place. It has 13% of the marketplace and way behind Nokia and Motorola after three years of trying. I would hardly call that taking on market leaders and succeeding.

The article then postulates that Sony is perhaps best in position to beat Apple. While that may be true but Sony only finally admitted its error earlier this year with going with ATRAC instead of MP3. It will take them at least a year or two to recover from it. Of the non-iTunes music service, so far I am most impressed with Yahoo's $60 a year service that while lesser known than ITMS, sets a very high bar for MSN. For one thing, its music engine is much better (supports FLAC, OGG, AAC, WMA, and MP3 out-of-box) than Microsoft Media Player but still not quite as good as iTunes in terms of interface.

Now, I would like to see Apple license Fairplay. It should provide an iTunes for Linux. There are a number of things I think Apple should do but placate to the demands of lame music industry executives? Please don't!

jeffd
08-23-2005, 01:42 AM
I can sort of see the logic behind it, apple makes MOST of their money on music sales.. not ipods. If the market grew big enough that the ipod became a smaller percentage, that would mean more people with digital players.. buying music online.

The biggest hurdle by far though.. is the fact that IMS is the largest store out there, and afaik apples players are still the only ones capable of playing the encrypted music. They need to liscence that crap.

James Fee
08-23-2005, 04:44 AM
I can sort of see the logic behind it, apple makes MOST of their money on music sales.. not ipods. If the market grew big enough that the ipod became a smaller percentage, that would mean more people with digital players.. buying music online.You sure about that? From what I've read is that the either break even or lose money on each sale.
The biggest hurdle by far though.. is the fact that IMS is the largest store out there, and afaik apples players are still the only ones capable of playing the encrypted music. They need to liscence that crap.I totally agree with that, but because Apple loses money on each music sale, they don't want to subsidies another player.

klinux
08-23-2005, 04:46 AM
apple makes MOST of their money on music sales.. not ipods..

Not again.

Apple does not make more profit from ITMS than iPod. I would love for someone to show me otherwise. See my debate with Jeremy here http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8674&amp;start=10

Vincent Ferrari
08-25-2005, 02:01 AM
WMA would succeed if Windows Media, which has been present on every Pocket PC since forever, was not a manufacturer-supplied application, and could be upgraded. I never use WMP on my PPC. If I could get it to play nice with Yahoo or Napster, I certainly would.

Damn fools they are. A huge installed base and they keep screwing them over.