Google Music Store Inches Closer? 282
smallguy78 writes "Forbes is once again reporting on Google plans to launch its own competitor to iTunes, a Google music store. From the article: 'The music industry is broadly unhappy with the fixed pricing and lack of subscription options at the market-leading iTunes Music Store and likely to support alternative services.'" We have touched on this subject previously. This most recent report would seem to indicate the launch will happen sooner rather than later.
Google's first serious misstep? (Score:5, Insightful)
From the Fine Article:
One of two things has to give here: either the music industry's unhappiness is sustained because Google has enough principle to do on-line music equitably (which, by definition will be unhappiness for the music industry); or Google capitulates and in the process violates their "Do No Evil" credo.
This could be a misstep for Google if they appear to be in the pockets of an increasingly strident and miserable music industry. Please let them do the right thing.
Of course, for the gazillionth time, the only right way to do this is unencumbered media. Hey, I can hope.
Re:Google's first serious misstep? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Google's first serious misstep? (Score:5, Insightful)
This IMO is the only short-term hope against the majors.
Basically, we need a Good Guy (TM) with deep pockets to raise a middle finger to the majors.
However, I fear this is not going to happen anytime soon.
--
XviD review [palmdrive.net]
Re:Google's first serious misstep? (Score:3, Interesting)
With artists like Sarah McLachlan, Delerium, BT, Avril Lavigne, Bare Naked Ladies, and MC Lars, they're not exactly a small label. (But no, they're not Sony-BMG either)
And they are doing their absolute best to give the RIAA the middle finger--not only by founding this not-for-profit (and picking up families' RIAA legal costs and any possible fines), but by selling decent quality NON-DRM'ed music at their own
This is not google's core competency (Score:2)
Offering original content is not part of their business model.
Re:Google's first serious misstep? (Score:3, Interesting)
No, they will both have less. This is what the RIAA wants, at least two significant players that they can play off of each other. Apple won't agree to higher prices? Then the RIAA can take their ball and go home, because they no longer need Apple, they can sell everything through Google. Google won't raise prices higher than Apple? I guess Apple will get all of the business. This is the same thing they've done with copyr
Re:Google's first serious misstep? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, no. If Apple were the "good guy," they might use DRM, but they would make it available to other device manufacturers. The only reason for the iPod lock-in is to benefit Apple.
Not that I think there's anything inherently wrong with this - that's business, after all. But don't put Apple out there as some altruistic "good guy."
Re:Google's first serious misstep? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't believe Apple is altruistic, just as I don't believe Google is altruistic, and I never said so. What I did say is that Apple is the best consumer representative we're going to get for digital music under the current system, because Apple makes their money primarily from hardware sales, with the lion's share of song profits going to the RIAA. Apple could conceivably stop selling songs online. They'd take a hit, but people could go back to buying CDs and pirating music just as the did before iTMS. The hit to the RIAA would be greater.
As I said, the lock-in does benefit Apple. But what is the upside to Apple opening up FairPlay, even to device manufacturers? Now they have to support a bunch of different MP3 players and they have to make up in song sales what they lose in hardware sales. And then they are dependent on the RIAA and they lose their bargaining power. Their sole advantage is that the RIAA needs them a lot more than they need the RIAA. Take that away and Apple is beholden to the RIAA, just like every other music company, and we lose the only advocate we have.
I don't think so (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Google's first serious misstep? (Score:4, Interesting)
if you have a gmail account, they're probably doing evil with your consumer preferences right now.
re: a music store. Oooooooooooh, a shiny new music store. How innovative, Google. They're like eight years too late with that.
It's a misstep for google to be opening a music store.
As of yet, they don't have a million subscribers for gmail. if they do, they've passed that threshold so recently that there is little info on it. they haven't passed a million subscribers to gtalk either. they haven't shown any uptake for any of their products other than google, which means the general audience is either unaware of their consumer efforts and/or uninterested.
I've used Microsoft Live
looking at the world through google glasses is to obscure the reality. YouTube is eating Google Video's lunch. they only hold the search engine market - and deeper pocket will continue to assial them from all sides.
In your parlance, they'll need to do boatloads of evil just to SURVIVE.
Google = fairy tales for adults. They're just some guys who turned a graduate project into some cash folks. Relax.
Re:Google's first serious misstep? (Score:4, Insightful)
re: a music store. Oooooooooooh, a shiny new music store. How innovative, Google. They're like eight years too late with that.
It's a misstep for google to be opening a music store.
Ooooh, a search engine! How innovative, Google. I mean, given Yahoo!, Altavista and what not, a *search* engine?
Gmail? Another email?! How innovative, Google! They're like, what, 30 years late? Or 40 years late? But from what I see, most people who've used Gmail hardly ever tend to use anything else.
Ever strike you that the million users that *mail has might be - just *might be* - because they don't have spammers signing up for thousands fake addresses?
Sheesh.
Remember that first mover advantage is very limited and very short lived. First movers may sometimes make it big, but the ones that come later also have the ability to not do your mistakes and improve upon what you've already built upon.
And they know that there exists a market that they can tap into, which is more than what the first mover had.
If you take anything that Google's done (Search, Maps, News, Email, IM), they've taken what others have done it and tried perfecting it. A much better idea than finding new niche markets.
Re:Google's first serious misstep? (Score:2)
In its onset, Google was groundbreaking because evaluating the "importance" of sites based almost entirely on hyperlinks WAS innovative when AltaVista, then search-engine king, was flooded with META tag and content spammers - unfortunately doorway pages and link farms was breaking Google severely for a while (they still are to some extent) until they started placing a bit more weight on relave
Re:Google's first serious misstep? (Score:2)
Really, there's no other way to explain such a dogmatic (read: faith-based) defense that people put up on behalf of a faceless corporation.
Re:Google's first serious misstep? (Score:2)
Yet, there is search engine worship.
Re:Google's first serious misstep? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Google's first serious misstep? (Score:2)
like a corporation in a lot of markets in which it makes little money? An overvalued corporation that makes the critical mass of its money off advertising?!?!?!?! (lol) in a market where others will steadily squeeze them out by virtue of huge cash stores and a lack of reliance on the search engine revenue stream? Because their answer to Live is GooglePack???? Because google talk can't attract the audience advertisers wou
Re:Google's first serious misstep? (Score:3, Interesting)
It's sad that the Creationists still can't conceive that evolutionary Christians are the majority of believers worldwide, and even in the United States. They lack the critical thinking skills to delineate "God did it and I don't question him!" from "God did it, and this is *how*!"
Re:Google's first serious misstep? (Score:2)
Re:Google's first serious misstep? (Score:2, Insightful)
Google has good intentions, but I think it's mistaken in believing it can keep launching service after service after service and be the leader in each. I'm really wishing Google would pull back and focus on a few key business plans, instead of half completing 1000 of them. Google's lack of focus is going to cost them pretty soon when smaller companies start focusing on the business plans that Google is getting l
Re:Google's first serious misstep? (Score:2)
Dynamic Pricing Based on Plays (Score:5, Interesting)
Over time, the cost of this track would become less and less and all of the "filler" tracks would slide fairly rapidly.
Jim http://www.runfatboy.net/ [runfatboy.net] -- Exercise for the rest of us.
Re:Dynamic Pricing Based on Plays (Score:2)
I think people generally expect to "own" music and video, which seems to eliminate most of Googles strengths.
Only if Google isn't careful... (Score:2)
I don't want to see this happening, but it seems consistent along the line of what the music industry has been moving towards.
Mod Parent Up (Score:3, Insightful)
Imagine the physical CD media of a popular record. Marginal cost is now not zero, probably instead closer to $1. How should we price it - expensive, to acquire the price insensitive "gotta-have-it" types, or cheap, to attract the "it-could-be-cool" casual buyers?
As you surmise, the answer in both c
I have a good idea? (Score:5, Funny)
O RLY? (Score:2)
[Insert Picture of The Owl Here]
Oh, great. (Score:2)
Inches closer... (Score:2, Funny)
This headline reminds me of the "Far Side" strip where two cavemen are standing outside of their cave with a glacier wall just inches away, and one of the cavemen is saying, "Say, Thag, wall of ice closer today?"
I can see a version of this strip where the cavemen are Steve Jobs/Apple and the glacier is Google...
Re:Inches closer... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
what format? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:what format? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:what format? (Score:2)
Re:what format? (Score:2)
Re:what format? (Score:2)
Re:what format? (Score:2, Insightful)
For the simple reason that you can buy a bunch of different players that'll play the format. Next question?
Re:what format? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:what format? (Score:2, Informative)
They don't have much, if any, of current major pop music. However, they're still a worthwhile option for music downloads.
Re:what format? (Score:2)
I mean, in all honesty, iTunes sucks. It's absolutely unusable and has a nasty habit of messing things up ever so often (sometimes I wonder what the hue and cry about Apple software is, but I digress).
If Google could come up with a better software (and I'm sure that if anyone can, it would be them), something that's not just for downloading music, but also to sync up with MP3 players, it would be a good selling point for Google.
Remember - iTunes started off with iPod
Re:what format? (Score:2)
You're having difficulty with the iTunes interface? Granted, if you're trying to copy music from shared computers or convert everything to WMA or something you're going to have trouble, but it's rare that I find people who can't figure out how to load music on their Ipod, purchase music from the store, or find and play any song in their collection with iTunes.
That's not to say there isn't room for improvement. I'd love to be able to syncronize the libraries of various versio
Re:what format? (Score:2)
However, I was talking about ripping CDs and attempting to categorize music. The thing is, I want my music player to be my music library, and iTunes is a lousy library.
I've the habit of putting music from various artists in folders, and iTunes does not even have the option of sorting it by the path. And of course, sorting by file names does not work very well, either. Heck, I cannot even move files around in t
Uhhh... a PLAYLIST?!? (Score:2)
Re:Uhhh... a PLAYLIST?!? (Score:2)
So now, let's see -- for the hundreds of CDs that I have, I would have to make a playlist for all the artists. That's time spent making over a hundred playlists from data that I *already* have organized in a folder format.
Now, try dragging and dropping a few hundred tracks called Track XYZ and watch iTunes sort it. Oh yeah, brilliant. The damn thing does not even fetch data from a CDDB to get name
Re:what format? (Score:2)
I'm not sure that I follow you - when you say "putting music from various artists in folders" are you talking about the file system (e.g. /Myfolder/Music/Beatnuts/watch_out_now.mp3)? iTunes does that, provided the files are properly tagged, and you can select the location of the library. Or are you talking
Re:what format? (Score:2)
I'm not sure that I follow you - when you say "putting music from various artists in folders" are you talking about the file system (e.g.
Re:what format? (Score:2)
So, this means that I ought to have the exact music that I have on my desktop at my work machine, else iTunes simply has trouble grokking the fact that people might have music in more than one place.
I can't just add music from my desktop at home, take it to work, and add some more songs.
Of course, I could keep going on about why iTunes sucks, but this is just for starters.
Re:what format? (Score:2)
Emacs!
Re:what format? (Score:2)
Re:what format? (Score:2)
Do we really know that the record labels are still hung up on DRM? The most potent DRM schemes don't seem to be going over well with consumers, and the DRM-lite found in iTunes isn't doing much, if anything, to stop piracy. When Steve Jobs first went to the music industry about the iTunes store they had been sold on Microsoft's DRM snake oil and he managed to talk them down to a saner solution, sp
DRM free, but not completely open. (Score:2)
DRM free, outside chance. Watermarked [slashdot.org], almost certainly. The only way to know if the DRM has been cracked is by watermarking iTunes or gTunes files and seeing if they're appearing online or if the online versions are still just the normal CD rips.
On what device? (Score:2, Insightful)
How many people are going to want to have two devices, one to play their hundreds of dollars in itunes music (that only plays on ipod) and another to play songs purchased from Google.
Anyway if they end up using an Open DRM format
why google will fail it (Score:5, Insightful)
hence why customers are broadly happy with iTunes - it's FAIR!
Re:why google will fail it (Score:2)
Re:why google will fail it (Score:2)
I don't think it is that fair, it is incredible that the record companies get as big a share of the cake as they do, now that they are not handling the distribution any more.
With the great savings that come from electronic distribution I was hoping for substantial reductions in price for consumers, increased royalties for the artists, and diminished significance/compensation for the record companies. So far this hasn't happened.
Tor
Re:why google will fail it (Score:2, Insightful)
On-line indie stores? (Score:2, Insightful)
I've just finished reading Simon Reynolds' very interesting history of the British post-punk scene "Rip It Up And Start Again". There are sections in there discussing the indie labels like Rough Trade, Mute, Stiff and others which were set up and funded by enthusiasts. This was a world where music could only be distributed physically on casette or vinyl which presented huge barriers to entry. Yet these people not only overcame them they ushered in arguably
Re:why google will fail it (Score:2, Informative)
Buy DRM-less independent music if you want to be treated fairly.
eMusic [emusic.com] Subcription-based, very cheap, a lot of great artists and indie labels (New Pornos, Spoon, Blackalicious
Prediction (Score:3, Funny)
Server Centric? (Score:2, Insightful)
Still if it does come out, I expect Google to fit it in with its 'organise the world's information' line.
Perhaps just using their search algorithm to find the music you want to buy is enough.. perhaps...
Product Name (Score:5, Funny)
I guess you meant Gtunes *Beta*
The Missing Link Found? (Score:5, Funny)
Step 1. Anything
Step 2. Google
Step 3. Profit!
And then... (Score:2)
Step 4. Evil!!!
Only once piece of the picture... (Score:3, Interesting)
Can users easily manage their music libraries?
What kind of file formats will be available?
Overall, the article makes it sound like Google is very focused on the music industry. I understand this to a point, but Google's users won't be too happy if the music industry seems like it is in too much control. Users are willing to pay, but they expect a certain level of freedom and choice. The user experience is at least as crucial as buy in from the music industry. Or, in other words, Google needs to consider both supply and demand.
OMFG (Score:4, Funny)
The music industry is broadly unhappy (Score:4, Insightful)
Content is only king...if people can see/hear it. (Score:2)
Re:Content is only king...if people can see/hear i (Score:2)
Re:The music industry is broadly unhappy (Score:2, Funny)
Name? (Score:3, Funny)
Or how about something that just as describing as "Ekiga", which is real easy to remember.
Sarcasm intended.
Oblig. Futurama response (Score:2)
Leela: We haven't thought of a name yet.
Bender: They're tasty, right? Let's call 'em "Tasticles".
Hermes: *gasp*
Amy: Ew!
Farnsworth: No!
Leela: We can't call them that.
Bender: Why not?
Leela: It sounds too much like those frozen Rocky Mountain oysters on a stick. You know, "Testsicles"?
Re:Name? (Score:2)
Who wants the service - industry or consumer? (Score:5, Insightful)
"The music industry is broadly unhappy with the fixed pricing and lack of subscription options at the market-leading iTunes Music Store and likely to support alternative services."
I thought to myself, "If the music industry is broadly unhappy, then Apple is probably doing something right."
What we should be hearing is how Google is stepping up to offer alternative services that address a gap that consumers are experiencing. Instead that quote would indicate that Google is stepping up to offer alternatives to the music industry. Frankly, I don't hear too many people (myself included) in the mainstream complaining about the options. I'm all for capitalism and competition and welcome Google to the game. However, I'm going to remain skeptical about this until I fully understand where Google is going with this.
--
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty." - Churchill
Re:Who wants the service - industry or consumer? (Score:2)
and
I don't hear too many people (myself included) in the mainstream complaining about the options
See, this is the problem. There is a skew in the Annoyance Factor. In a truly capitalistic society, we must strike a balance. The annoyance must be equal on both sides for everyone to be happy (or... unhappy). This "sweet spot," if you willl, is called The Grumpy Point. Once the grumpy levels out, equilibrium c
Unending greed? (Score:3, Insightful)
What part are they unhappy about? Making tons of money not enough, they want more? The only thing that could lead the music industry to be "unhappy" with iTunes is that they want to charge more per download, whether it be through higher price-fixing or subscriptions that seem like a good deal, but aren't. That's all they care about. Unfortunately, the MPAA doesn't get to dictate how the market works, too bad for them. Unless Google starts off with an online music store a good bit cheaper than iTunes and somehow manages to completely kill off the iTunes store before jacking up the prices, the music industry isn't going anywhere, and neither will any new efforts from Google or anyone else.
Utter lack of sympathy for the music industry (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh, really?
Well, I'm broadly unhappy with the music industry's desire to charge like wounded bulls for mediocre content and infest their media with single-platform proprietary DRM. I just *wonder* what sort of 'subscription models' the music industry is hanging out for. Guess what? I'm usually pretty supportive of google's enterprises, but if if I can't listen to the music on my iPod *and* my daughter's el cheapo MP3 player *and* my PowerBook *and* my work linux box *and* burn it to a CD so I can show it to my non-MP3-player-owning friends and relatives -- I'm not interested.
Oh, and I like Celtic folk, Afro-Celtic world music, blues, prog, electronica, choral and a bunch of other minority genres. I spent about A$70 on music last month, almost all from little indy labels. The Big Names of the music industry can take their overproduced teen manufactured product and stick it where the sun don't shine.
Re:Utter lack of sympathy for the music industry (Score:2)
Holy crap, I think you've either made a complete copy of my iTunes library, or you're me from a parallel universe. And I thought my tastes were weird...
--
(By the way, editors, Slashdot is really messed up right now. I had to hit "cancel" halfway through loading the reply page, because all Slashdot links seem to redirect to a Xerox advertisement after a second.)
I hope that Google does this, and does so with... (Score:4, Interesting)
If MS or the RIAA could find a company that works as well as ITMS or that works better than ITMS, they would have done so. Clearly, they are in need of a partner company that has both the technology know-how and the backbone to make it work. Google definitely fits in that category. I hope that if such a bargain is struck, that the *AA finds themselves holding on for dear life to the tail of a very BIG tiger....
More possibilities for adsense? (Score:3, Insightful)
Amazing (Score:5, Funny)
DRM is Unnecessary (Score:3, Insightful)
Would iTunes or any other legitimate music/movie service be *less* successful without DRM? I don't think so. Which begs the question: what's the **AA's business case for DRM?
Re:DRM is Unnecessary (Score:2)
You don't think that DRM makes music/move download services successful and that somehow "begs" a business case for DRM? Wierd. The business case for DRM is so freaking obvious... if you control how the music is distributed not just at the point of purchase but beyond you ensure that after market copying is severly limited and in turn
Re:DRM is Unnecessary (Score:2)
My question therefore remains: how does DRM solve the problem it was intended to address when non-DRM versions of almost everything exist (and will continue to exist) in p2p and usenet?
[1] The MPAA did in fact panic with the introduc
Re:DRM is Unnecessary (Score:2)
Re:DRM is Unnecessary (Score:2)
You're right that non-DRM copies of content exist today. But if I'm a media exec I see that as an anomaly that I want to resolve, not capitulate to. Non-DRM copies exist for two reasons. They are copied from unprotected sources (CDs), or the DRM is circumvented because it is not strong enough. If I'm a media exec, I want to eliminate all distribution channels that aren't DRM thereby eliminating source #1 for unprotected content. I also want to tackle point #2 through ext
Re:DRM is Unnecessary (Score:2)
That's all well and good in theory, but
Re:DRM is Unnecessary (Score:2)
Re:DRM is Unnecessary (Score:4, Informative)
Re:DRM is Unnecessary (Score:2)
how to keep the RIAA happy... (Score:3, Funny)
All Apple has to do to keep the industry happy is rearrange that to "price fixing".
Free market suppply and demand (Score:2)
Say you have two songs available A and B. A is in high demand and B is an oldie which sells low volume.
on Itunes, A and B are sold for the same price: 99c
On Gogles Music Store (GMS), A is priced at $1.19 and B at $.79.
If I am a consumer, I will always buy f
What we need... (Score:2)
Alternative? (Score:2)
Good luck with that. How many millions of people have iPods? If I could get the yahoo music service onto my iPod, I'd pay for that subscription, just as a way of exploring and heading >30 seconds of songs. I frankly don't buy much music from itunes or anywhere, because I can't hear it first. I'm not going into a store, and I don'
DRM Free Music? (Score:2, Informative)
Comment removed (Score:3, Funny)
Yes But (Score:4, Interesting)
This is sort of a delicious irony because I remember in the 90's the big question about any computer system was "Will it run MS Office?"
From another article: (Score:2, Funny)
I should hope not! (Score:2)
I actually like iTunes. (Score:3, Insightful)
The music industry is broadly unhappy with the fixed pricing and lack of subscription options at the market-leading iTunes Music Store and likely to support alternative services.
Call me crazy, but I actually like iTunes. I like that all the songs are $1. I like their selection, the interface, how easy it is to get what I want on my iPod, etc. I don't want to pay more for music. I stopped buying CD's a long time ago and it is the $1 price point that got me to purchase music again. If it goes up I'll do what I did with CD's years ago and stop buying music again. The last thing I want is a subscription service. Honestly, who here wants a subscription service for music? Raise your hands.
Now ask me how much of my time I waste worrying about the music industry only making a crap-load of money rather than a whole shit-load. Their whining about "mean old apple and fixed pricing" is enough to make a person sick.
Re:Hmmmm (Score:3, Insightful)
and why should they? 2 years from now, no one is going to care about what OS you are running, anyway. We will have true Windows emmulation on OS X shortly, and WINE seems to do great things for windows apps under linux... pretty soon your choice of OS isn't going to matter in terms of what software you can run.
Re:It doesn't fit (Score:2)
Imagine a GMusic player where you can listen to the track you want to listen to... for free. This would be a desktop-PC only system (e.g. no downloads to a portable player, so Google could say that GMusic isn't competing with iTunes... they always claims their services don't compete with established players) but why complain when it is free?
Think of it as similar to a streaming online radiostation, except that YOU determine the playlist. The stream wou