“Wednesday’s Apple announcements included some significant market advances, particularly the iPod Touch and the iTunes Wi-Fi Store. The new lineup of devices should keep the company clearly in the digital-media drivers’ seat through the end of 2007, at least, and the pricing strategy is rock-solid,” Matt Rosoff blogs for CNET.
Rosoff writes, “Even so, a few things that Apple didn’t announce might leave some room for other innovators.”
Rosoff’s list of what Apple didn’t announce:
• Subscription store
• Wireless sync
• User interaction
• The Beatles
Full article here.
“What Apple CEO Steve Jobs didn’t announce this week”
MY @#$%^-ing FLYING CAR ! ! ! (and not a Moller, either)
(Steve owes me, dammit!)
flying cars… no flying cars. or sexdroids
I’m sorry, but I’m tired about hearing about the Beatles catalog being that make-or-break a factor. If you’re really that big a Beatles fan, you already own their box sets which you’ve ripped to iTunes long ago and added your own album art for coverflow. I cannot see this addition adding that substantial a revenue bump to the ITMS. It’s been 30+ years since they’ve released material. Get over it.
Here we go again, Subscription…. who wants it, it hasn’t worked yet, will it ever!?
Okay, I’ll bite. What does he mean by “User interaction?”
Do you think Rosoff is going out on a limb by predicting that Apple will be in the “digital-media drivers’ seat through the end of 2007” ?
Who cares about the Beatles? Why is this a big deal. Elvis is more significant than the Beatles, in my opinion. Who really cares if iTunes ever has the Beatles?
” . . . might leave some room for other innovators.”
If they existed. Who knows?
Maybe one day. Honest competition is always good (which automatically excludes MS).
I’ll probably get my flying car first.
what/who is/were the beatles?
what is an elvis?
what are you guys talking about?
Rosoff’s list of what Apple didn’t announce:
• Subscription store
No one wants this
• Wireless sync
No one wants this
• User interaction
No one wants this (spotting a trend?)
• The Beatles
No one… OK I’d like this, but blaming Apple, inc. for this is just retarded.
It’s a typo. He meant Prescription Service. Matt keeps forgetting to take his meds. I wonder if Matt’s eyes get glossy?
Does any body knows where can I report a crappy apple seller? I have a huge problem with a store in Menterrey mexico called “Mac Gic”, they sell a old, used computer, and also a defective macbook to a friend, and they did not wanted to give us the warranty for that. Is there a phone number or email to report this problem?
“what is an elvis?”
It’s the general area where urine is removed from the body.
You see, you just removed the p.
It’s also a name reserved if by some chance the Messiah is born in a trailer park.
Steve Job did talk about Beatles, here:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/2007-09-05-jobs-qanda_N.htm
“Subscription store”
Raise your hand if you want a subscription music service…anybody…anybody? No?
I didn’t think so…
Viktor:
http://www.apple.com/contact/
Or write or call:
Apple
1 Infinite Loop
Cupertino, CA 95014
408.996.1010
Did someone say sexdroids?
Hell, I just became a “sexygenarian” and I don’t give a sh*t about the fscking Beatles. I didn’t like them then, and I surely don’t give a crap about them now.
That Yoko Ono sure is a hottie, though. (Wretching sound . . . .)
Subscription store. They didn’t announce a subscription store because they probably never will. Most other subscription models have already failed. Wireless sync. It’s got to be close now that wi-fi is built in and bluetooth is suspected. Perhaps at the next media event. User interaction. Yeah, the Zune really proves that people want and need that. Beam a song and play it three times in three days. That’s so much fun, huh. The Beatles. I agree with Ogre: it’s not that big of a deal. I’d rather see Apple get more movies and HD content on iTunes. I’ve had my White Album on the iMac for years at loss-less. It’s a non-issue.
• Subscription store – Um, NO.
• Wireless sync – Um, meh.
• User interaction – Um, huh?
• The Beatles – Um, OK.
Subscriptions are for Rachel Ray magazines.
Wait for MacWorld in January
A little psychic kleptomaniac bird showed me that iPhones with 16GB of memory and GPS are coming. GPS to the iPod Touch coming by this time next year.
*rolls up confidential data*
i’m very anxious for the Beatles to get added….. so they will shut up about it, I am so tired of hearing about this NON important news.
Subscription will come next year after the nationwide network is setup. It will be included in .Mac, and will allow you to stream the music to your iPod to listen to. Setup an online playlist and stream it to your iPod. You won’t be able to download or own any of it, but you have access to every song at anytime. .Mac will almost double, but will be worth every penny.
MacMorsel
Rosoff’s list of what Apple didn’t announce:
• Subscription store
–A proven failure
• Wireless sync
–Maybe he has one point, but does anyone really care?
• User interaction
–“Hey look at my neat new iPod Touch”, theres your interaction
• The Beatles
–Does it matter to users if it is on the iTunes store? It may matter to Apple, as they aren’t making money off sales of the songs. As consumers we can but the CDs.
Chester
You were saying in another thread that Apple was going out of the cell phone market. Now your predicting a new iPhone…sounds like you are talking out of both orifices. Go troll somewhere else.
It’s interesting the Beatles bashing. If you really listened, i mean discriminating listening, you might change your appreciation. I’d predict that they will sell a lot on iTunes.
Why no subscription service? Let me count the reasons . . . .
1. Users don’t want it.
2. For all this talk about Wi-Fi, the reality is that there are a relatively few number of free hot spots where you could access the service.
3. Users don’t want it.
4. The “impulse buying” he talks about wouldn’t affect revenues at all. It doesn’t matter if you listen to 10 or 10,000 songs in a month if it still costs you $10.
5. Users don’t want it.
6. Apple’s affiliation with Starbuck’s is MUCH more advantageous. The “impulse buying” is actual purchases, at $.99 or $1.29, Wi-Fi is already in most Starbuck’s, and Apple, Starbuck’s and the musician/music label all benefit. The end user has a very easy method to get new music they like.
7. Users don’t want it.
Perhaps he meant a subscription movie rental service?
Now that would work!
“user interaction”:
WiFi on the iPod touch could allow remote browsing/control/streaming of my own iTunes library already on my Mac to a stereo.
Also, the basic ability to edit, delete files, change playlists etc directly on the iPod without a PC is long overdue.
Funky Chicken: “Raise your hand if you want a subscription music service…anybody…anybody? No?”
No, but who else here wants to do the Funky Chicken?
Subscription movie service, more movie studios added to iTunes.
Apple always leaves a little something for next time.
Hopefully we’ll be able to download movies and TV shows from iTunes directly onto the iPod by next year’s event.
User interaction?
You fart and the track changes? That would be kinda cool.
A. Who gives a frickin’ damn about the The Beatles!?
B. Subscriptions peril to the abilities of iTunes and iPod – and people know it. This stuff is just too juicy to ignore, and its worth giving up a subscription deal to get what one gets with iPods and iTunes.
C. Wireless Sync. Need to connect and charge the iPod anyways, so sync that way while charging. Not a huge deal, and no one on the planet will make a purchasing decision on this idea – none. Apple is likely to included it mid-year with a SW update on iTunes and for iPods anyways.
D. What the fresh is user interaction? Please people!
iOrgasmatron
lbuschjr: I think you left out “Users don’t want it”.
One – perhaps the only – good use for a subscription service would be for classical music lovers, who have the choice of a multitude of recordings of the same composition. A 30-second preview is insufficient to base a purchase on, so subscibing and having the option of hearing several versions in full before purchasing makes some sense. But what percentage of iTunes sales are in classical music? I’m betting it’s pretty small.
“You fart and the track changes? That would be kinda cool.”
A Bluetooth Toot Tone would be great!
TT: There’s a lower cost model, the iJaculate if you’re just a little buy curious.
read my lips:
NO
SUBSCRIPTIONS!!!
…i LOVE this website and all its posters!
“TT: There’s a lower cost model, the iJaculate if you’re just a little buy curious.”
Yes, I have one……it was a hand-me-down!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”LOL” style=”border:0;” />
I want wireless sync…OTA for email is great, but iCal is a must for biz users. They already do it with .Mac…seems like it’s just a s/w update is necessary.
This article missed the two most compelling non-announcements… a 16GB iPhone with a price tag of $499.00 and a iTable for starting at who knows what!
The clock is ticking!
There the next big announcements that Apple has up it’s bag of tricks…
And I for one would buy both in a heart beat…
Wireless sync? Why? You still have to plug into charge, and synching is nearly instant.
I was hoping for a replicant, perhaps an actoroid.
Has it occurred to anyone else that perhaps one reason that the iPhone doesn’t interact better (or at all) with a Mac with Bluetooth is because Macs will need Leopard to communicate properly with iPhones? (Dunno about Windows, maybe they’re just gonna be SOL.) I’m probably wrong, but since it’s generally believed that the iPhone OS is a variant of Leopard (or however it’s properly stated), then maybe the iPhone can only interact with Leopard’s Address Book and other features.
I’m basically thinking about cool features like on-screen Caller ID for your iPhone while working on a nearby Mac, using your Mac to answer your iPhone or make calls, using your iPhone to remotely control iTunes, stuff like that. Just dreaming.
the name is Mike Rosoff
the beatles had a wide variety of music. if you say you dont like the beatles you have never really listened to them.
“You still have to plug into charge . . .”
Yeah but, wireless charging may be coming soon too.
@MacMorsel
ooohh, sorry, you’re way off on part of this one. .Mac may be involved but the price will not go up in any significant way. Steve knows human nature, lower the price and sales go up. This has been done recently with .Mac and is working. Including a streaming music service subscription as part of a free ” upgrade ” is much more likely and Apple-esque.
I have all of the Beatles music alredy loaded on my iTunes – oh let’s see – I want to buy it again because…?
Give it a rest!
I would like to see more jazz, classical and Yawni! music befoe I wnt to see more Pelvis or Beetless …
What Apple didn’t announce – ask Phil “nothing we can talk about at this juncture” Shiller!
Patience – apple has a plan and you are all invited…
MDN = all
I’m totally raising my hand for a subscription service. Two hands, in fact. The ability to listen to anything I wanted from the iTunes Music Store at any time, in front of my computer or at someone else’s place via my iPhone or iPod touch? I’d pay around $15 a month for that. I bet I’d listen to hundreds more songs — and then I’d still buy permanent, high-quality DRM-free copies of whichever songs I liked best.
This is such a no-brainer. They’d make a lot of people happy with this.
Subscriptions suck! You pay to much to listen to them a month and if you stop paying you lose all your music. It doesn’t work and that has been proven by all the iTunes competitors out there who have gone under. It costs twice as much too. First you pay to listen then you pay again to burn a CD then you pay again to sync the song to a player. What a fricken waste! Sync wirelessly, why?
Beatles, whatever. Interaction? Huh??
iTunes is great the way it is and that’s why it is number 1.
See, I like what MacMorsel says, that’s the only kind of subscription service that makes any sense, because you never really even pretend to own the music, you just stream it. It’s kinda like satellite radio except you pick exactly what streams to you. And if you decide you like a song enough to have it on your compy, then you can buy it. That makes sense. Other subscription services don’t.
What he did not announce is the VoIP he is planning in future versions of the iPOD touch, just add a speaker and the sky is the limit and all the carriers become obsolete.
I hate nearly all Beatles’ songs… most of them are so childish…
“Love, love me do. You know I love you. So ple-e-e-ease, love me too. Oh yeah, love me too.”
Or how about:
“She’s on a ticket to Ryde. She’s on a ticket to Ry-y-yde. She’s on a ticket to Ryde, and she don’t care.”
Another literary masterpiece:
“All you need is love.
All you need is love.
All you need is love, love.
Love is all you need.”
OR:
“She loves you, yeah, yeah, yeah.
She loves you, yeah, yeah, yeah.
And with a love like that,
You know you should be glad.”
Funny, Shadowmac.
But I’m sure you know it is “Ticket To Ride”, about a German prostitute that had a permit to work, her ‘ticket to ride’….
MW:children
subscription service: it is stupid to put this in a list of what “innovators” would do. There are already subscription services. They are doing poorly. An interesting concept kept afloat by the content providers because it is a higher profit model and a guaranteed revenue stream. I’m sure they would love it if that was the only way music was sold. Some people love this kind of service, but it currently does not seem to be a large enough percentage of music buyers to be of consequence right now.
the Beattles: ugh. This is so “old model” thinking. The iTunes Store is not made or broken by the big names. Sure, it would be great for Beattles fans. But adding their catalog would just be one-time blip in sales.
user interaction: OMG!!!!! Myspace is huge!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Social networking!!!!!! While I do admit that this could be an interesting feature, it has more to do with easy file transfer (no more burning CDs for friends) than some sort of “interaction” akin to social networking. After all, if I’m in a room with someone, I typicaly do social networking by <<gasp>> talking with them.
Wireles sync: when this is faster than USB 2, sure. Until then, no thanks.