“Microsoft Corp. said Time Warner Inc.’s America Online unit, Walt Disney Co., Roxio Inc.’s Napster and others have agreed to use a new version of Microsoft’s media software that could give the company an advantage in a budding music rivalry with Apple Computer Inc. The new version of its Windows Media software contains an improvement that could allow consumers who rent, rather than buy, digital music and movies to put those files on portable devices — an important capability that media rental and subscription services now lack. Subscribers to such services would be able to fill up a portable player with songs, keeping them for as long as they remain members,” Dow Jones reports.
“Users will periodically need to reconnect their devices to their computers and the Internet — every 30 days, say — to renew rights to keep listening to songs on their players. While pricing plans haven’t been set, online music executives have talked about offering the ability to rent unlimited amounts of music for $ 20 or more a month,” Dow Jones reports.
Full article here.
you mean… they had a choice???
I can see this failing by yet unseen measures. There is a reason why stores sell CDs and don’t rent them.
The word “Rent” – how does this sound good to anyone?
Usually the phrase goes something like the following:
“Rent to Own”
Rent with Microsoft, Own with Apple.
Rent…. Like a book from library.
So, are record labels planning to pay the artists everytime someone “rent” a song or are they planning to pay when the “library” buys a copy to “rent.” Sounds to me like a new way to screw the artists.
I don’t get it @ all, how will record companies gain anything from this or how will artisit make money?? How does 1000 songs on ur Ipod for $20 sound?? I mean it sounds fucking great to me, I hope record companies see what this means to there bizness!! they will never make any money and Microsoft will take over the world!! lol jk.
I’ve always wondered how people with such high powered jobs can be so stupid. The music industry leaders seem to be getting dumber by the day, and now the tech ‘leaders’ (the ones involved here are more like followers) are doing the same.
Have you heard of XM radio? Its getting pretty successful. And you have to pay for it. So basically you are “renting” that music. The difference here is you get to rent the music you want.
I think Apple has failed already. Within two years, iTunes will be gone and the music we bought will be unplayable. Maybe not quite that doomsday, but I think Apple has yet again failed to see the big picture. Locking your customers in to your formats and not licensing them out to others will kill you every time. It happens time and time again. Yet Apple couldn’t see this yet again.
simple1: are you an idiot? it’s not 1000 songs for $20! it’s 1000 songs for $20 a month, meaning if in a few years you want to listen to your music you will have spent hundreds. this is the worst idea i have ever heard. so fucking stupid.
I hate to tell Micro$oftopoly and it “partners”, but if you can download it you can hijack it. No software protection scheme is going to be foolproof and “rented” music cannot be properly imported into videos (iMovie and the like) and slideshows because it will not play if the subscription expires or is played on an “unauthorized” device. Again, Micro$oftopoly comes to the game with a second-rate product and will try to use the power of monopoly to overwhelm everybody else.
All those crooked PC hacker-wannabes will be using the Windows equivelants of WireTap and Audio Hijack Pro to record the audio and then re-encode it.
Say you are a PC weenie with a huge, phat pipe to the internet. Download GIGS of music in a month or two… then re-encode it to whatever format you want. Then unsubscribe.
Yep, sounds like a way to screw the artists, the record companies, etc. Or maybe they just don’t care… maybe all they really want is $20 for that month.
As great as it is to own your music forever, the one drawback to paying for each individual song that you want is that within a year or two you get tired of listening to the same songs and so have to continually be buying new songs. This can become very expensive, especially if you don’t end up listening to half the music you bought a year ago. The one advantage of subscription services is that you can continue to hear new, fresh music without committing yourself to buying each song you want to hear. Something that appears in every Walkman on the market, and that is starting to appear in some mp3 players, is the ability to listen to radio stations. I think the next step in music and mp3 players is the ability to listen to satellite radio on the player itself. There are obviously many people that prefer buying the satellite radio equipment and paying the monthly fee over having an iPod, just because they would prefer to constantly listen to new music instead of being limited to what they own. I think if Apple were able to make their iPod’s satellite radio ready, in other words, able to receive satellite radio stations if the owner chooses to subscribe, this will make the iPod a complete music system with absolutely nothing lacking. It would make the iPod by far superior and more useful in regards to music than any other mp3 player on the market.
XM Radio like renting music? I don’t think so. XM’s biggest selling point is commercial free stuff that can be heard from just about anywhere, anytime. However, you stil can’t choose the song you want to hear at that exact moment, can you Jeff? No one is foolish enough to “rent” music. Or perhaps Microsoft can find a way to charge people for renting AM/FM music? There are plenty of MS-suckers born every minute.
Apple closed door policy will make itunes end up with 5 percent of the market one day. History repeats itself.
this is pretty interesting !!!!!!
well if iTunes and ipods end up with 5% of the market it will still be the best 5%, don’t worry about it…
you can’t do one thing tech without having 9 million copy cats right behind you, so everyone trying to catch up and make money is no surprise. I think Apple is on the right track by relying so much on innovation and great software. I seriously doubt they are relaxing just because they have had some big successes.
Hmm, $20 a month for all the music a person can choke down. On the surface that may sound good, but how much music must one download and listen to before the service is worth it? How many people REALLY have that much disposable time to download, edit, and listen – especially if they are limited to a dialup service? What if you don’t listen to that much music? If you don’t, then the cost per song goes way up! What happens to your library should you fail to make a payment? It’s really not your library you know…you’re only renting it. Knowing the M$ business ethic, your library will disappear in a flash. What happens if good ol’ M$ screws up and accidently loses your account? Do you want M$ to have a direct feed into your personal finances?
Up until now, recorded music was always purchased. Once purchased, it is yours to keep as long as you wish. I never knew a person to suffer because he didn’t have a huge library immediately. Just like any good collection – it takes time.
One more question to ponder…What happens when they decide to jack the monthly rental up some outlandish amount? Notice I didn’t say “IF they wanted to increase the monthly rental”. Now you’re stuck. If you want to keep “your” library, you will have to cough up the extra dough and keep doing it. This would never happen to your existing music if you owned it outright.
This whole thing smells to me like something a drug lord does to his victims. Once the victim is hooked, they set the hook and won’t ever let go.
This whole thing smells to me like something a drug lord does to his victims. Once the victim is hooked, they set the hook and won’t ever let go.- Mac Daddy
This sounds like Gates & Windows. Lock everybody in to their format. Lets face it Microsoft will own the world ( at least the western part of it). Who will stop them, everything they do will be good enough & make the users pay forever. Proof of point is that the majority of people think that computers are Microsoft & there is nothing else & whatever Microsoft does is a first in innovation. Lots of people are happy to pay subscription services like cable tv etc. They say its only $20 a month thats less than $1 a day, no-one thinks what it costs over a year or two. Microsoft will win.
Dear customer, due to the expansion set of features your monthly fee has been raised to $30.
Uhmm no wait, let’s make it $40 otherwise our businees does not turn into profit.
PS
Apple closed format? Have you counted the number of formats I can have MY music with once I have bought it? Not to take into account that full CDs have been turned into… well, full CDs
What is these silly comments about “locked in one format” “one day you will not be able to play it because iTMS would have closed”. Silly.
And when Microsoft controls 90% of the music downloads up come the costs. Microsoft makes a killing again. You will have 2 choices, pay up or lose your music.
$20 a month, $240 a year! That’s roughly 240 songs you could have bought on iTMS to own forever! I don’t hear 240 new songs each year that I need to have in my music library… iTMS is much better! It doesn’t actually lock you into something, because there is no monthly fee you’ll have to pay in order to not let your music go away…
$20 a month seems like a bargain in the first 2 months, but certainly not in the long run…
Just a tip to all the “youngsters” – I have noticed that once people get married and have (noisey) children the adults listen to very little music.
Quiet is now what one wants/enjoys.
So listen now and own your tunes for later fond rememberances that the music brings.
And warming to the contribution of Kool: –
240 songs is around 24 albums, which is more music than I purchased during 2002 or 2003.
Most of the music I listen to I have owned for years.
Here are the key bits of my catalog with albums purchased since 1977 and repurchased on CD format since 1992: Bryan Ferry, Roxy Music, Robert Fripp, King Crimson, Brian Eno, Robert Palmer, David Bowie, with albums dating back to 1972.
Under this ‘rental’ model, I would have paid 312 months at $20/�13, or �4000 to maintain this collection. Or I could have done what I actually did which was build a collection of around 250 albums in total for the same money.
But next month – instead of paying Microsoft a single penny – I will pay nothing, but still have my music collection to use anywhere I see fit, at a quality I consider acceptable, with the artwork and everything.
I look forward to the first quarter’s sales figures with an almost giddy sense of anticipation.
I for one will not ‘rent’ music or movies and certainly won’t be giving microsoft $20 a month!
I like owning my media and therefor do as I wish with it and when I want to.
This is just another case of micrsoft screwing it’s customers for more money!!
And guess what – this rental system will be only compatible with windows media player – I wonder how they are going to do this in light of the EU decision for microsoft to strip windows media player from it’s OS.
Apple should now launch a movie store where you dowload movies/music and anything else digital pay per movie with ownership.
Just look at the dvd/video rental market in stores – it’s a dead industry and I can’t see anyone subcribing to this crap in the UK.
Good idea
Renting music might work – and then again it might not, no one really knows yet. At least these companies are trying. When I was younger, music played a much bigger role in my life than it does now. I expect things haven’t changed much and people with a passion for music (if they are like I was) will have one or two artists per month/quarter who they sincerely believe are the BEST thing since sliced bread. What I’m saying is, BUYING a particular artist’s new recording was (and, I guess, still is) a very large part of the statement I made about my tastes and my commitment to a particular outlook on life. Owning a selected collection of music was one of the ways I defined myself to the world around me. Even favourite music I might have initially taped from a friend, I would eventually buy because the act of ownership provided me with an important – and, in the world of music…necessary – affinity with the artist and his/her outlook on life. If other people are like me, it would be absurd for them to say “this artist’s music feels like it is life-changing… but only life-changing enough for me to pay someone to BORROW it and then give it back”. It would be like renting food.
I still have a lot of my old favourites – and I’m glad I have them around. I don’t play them much, but collectively – they act a bit like a diary, I dip in and it reminds me of previous times.