Finishing Up on Music Ownership and Distribution
After some of the most recent postings and online 'zines have focused their attention on the state of music, I'm now inclined to finish my ramblings on the subject.
Well, it seems we have a couple of choices that I've outlined earlier, but want to go over yet again. The all-you-can-eat subscription service, a la Napster, and the pay-to-play services like iTunes. This Register article (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/02/14/music_a_la_carte_vs_subs/) makes us believe that subscription services just won't work. There's one reason why they won't work, and Steve Jobs has already hit upon it: you don't own the music you're paying for. When you stop paying, you stop playing. Simple as that. Who wants that?
So, we have the pay-to-play services. I like iTunes. I especially like it because once I get the song, it's mine. I can transfer it 5 times, which ain't perfect, but it's enough. I still think the industry is missing the bigger picture. I want to let the industry know what music I already own (license) and then have them give me access to it however I want it. I don't want another physical format for the music. I want a virtual vault where the "pointers" to my music are kept and I can get to it, organize it, and play it any way I please. This is a failing of a lot of business. It's either/or. Maybe the solution is more of a combo unit.
Like I said before, I don't want a dozen copies of the same song on some hard drive or flash unit I'm responsible for. I want my receiver to have the music streamed to me on demand, like VOD. This is why I think the satellite systems have the leg up. I just saw that the Sirius radio CEO asked Steve Jobs about adding satellite reception to the iPod and Jobs said no. That's either the stupidest decision in the world or Jobs is hiding something. There's that either/or thing again. I'm not sure. I'm not making the rules, either, just harboring guesses.
While the industry continues to bang its head against a wall looking for another physical format to force us all to rebuild our libraries, the technology will move in the opposite direction. It's a classic case of the Innovator's Dilemma. The music industry pushes up market with new, initially more expensive physical formats for distribution of the same product. In the background, technology companies find ways to license the music and distribute it without the overhead of packaging. There is no doubt that technology will win out.
What if iTunes could stream my "owned" music to my iPod, my car stereo, my home stereo without forcing me to download it to the hard drive? Isn't this just a few steps away from today? Isn't this what some of the new Apple gear lets us do by pushing iTunes music wirelessly to AirTunes? Imagine if AirTunes could simply be a piece of every stereo receiver in the home? If our car's stereos could do the same?
For the audiophiles out there who are cringing about this because you've spent 10s of thousands of dollars on equipment, hold your horses. None of this would happen overnight. I think it will be 5-7 years until it even starts. And the sound quality, while good to those of us with damaged or constrained hearing, would be perfectly acceptable, the original streaming would not be done at some lossless rate. The bandwidth would be untenable. But it would get there.
How about those of you who want the cover art? The lyrics? You'll still be able to get those. You'll just have to download them somewhere yourself. Like Lyrics.com or some other place that has that stuff. iTunes already lets you create album cover artwork, so does every other piece of music software. So download it and get it yourself. This is work for us, yes, but theoretically it's less work for the industry and hence, less cost passed to us.
Who's going to control all of this stuff? At this point, I don't care. I just want my music streamed to me via a wonderfully diverse grid computing network with multiple nodes pushing the music out. There's no reason why individuals cannot be paid to use computing cycles as distributors. If you've got a spare Mac mini, you've got a perfect node on the grid. There's power in them there machines enough to be the perfect grid nodes, pushing out music to those of us requesting it.
Well, I'm done rambling on this. Next.
Well, it seems we have a couple of choices that I've outlined earlier, but want to go over yet again. The all-you-can-eat subscription service, a la Napster, and the pay-to-play services like iTunes. This Register article (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/02/14/music_a_la_carte_vs_subs/) makes us believe that subscription services just won't work. There's one reason why they won't work, and Steve Jobs has already hit upon it: you don't own the music you're paying for. When you stop paying, you stop playing. Simple as that. Who wants that?
So, we have the pay-to-play services. I like iTunes. I especially like it because once I get the song, it's mine. I can transfer it 5 times, which ain't perfect, but it's enough. I still think the industry is missing the bigger picture. I want to let the industry know what music I already own (license) and then have them give me access to it however I want it. I don't want another physical format for the music. I want a virtual vault where the "pointers" to my music are kept and I can get to it, organize it, and play it any way I please. This is a failing of a lot of business. It's either/or. Maybe the solution is more of a combo unit.
Like I said before, I don't want a dozen copies of the same song on some hard drive or flash unit I'm responsible for. I want my receiver to have the music streamed to me on demand, like VOD. This is why I think the satellite systems have the leg up. I just saw that the Sirius radio CEO asked Steve Jobs about adding satellite reception to the iPod and Jobs said no. That's either the stupidest decision in the world or Jobs is hiding something. There's that either/or thing again. I'm not sure. I'm not making the rules, either, just harboring guesses.
While the industry continues to bang its head against a wall looking for another physical format to force us all to rebuild our libraries, the technology will move in the opposite direction. It's a classic case of the Innovator's Dilemma. The music industry pushes up market with new, initially more expensive physical formats for distribution of the same product. In the background, technology companies find ways to license the music and distribute it without the overhead of packaging. There is no doubt that technology will win out.
What if iTunes could stream my "owned" music to my iPod, my car stereo, my home stereo without forcing me to download it to the hard drive? Isn't this just a few steps away from today? Isn't this what some of the new Apple gear lets us do by pushing iTunes music wirelessly to AirTunes? Imagine if AirTunes could simply be a piece of every stereo receiver in the home? If our car's stereos could do the same?
For the audiophiles out there who are cringing about this because you've spent 10s of thousands of dollars on equipment, hold your horses. None of this would happen overnight. I think it will be 5-7 years until it even starts. And the sound quality, while good to those of us with damaged or constrained hearing, would be perfectly acceptable, the original streaming would not be done at some lossless rate. The bandwidth would be untenable. But it would get there.
How about those of you who want the cover art? The lyrics? You'll still be able to get those. You'll just have to download them somewhere yourself. Like Lyrics.com or some other place that has that stuff. iTunes already lets you create album cover artwork, so does every other piece of music software. So download it and get it yourself. This is work for us, yes, but theoretically it's less work for the industry and hence, less cost passed to us.
Who's going to control all of this stuff? At this point, I don't care. I just want my music streamed to me via a wonderfully diverse grid computing network with multiple nodes pushing the music out. There's no reason why individuals cannot be paid to use computing cycles as distributors. If you've got a spare Mac mini, you've got a perfect node on the grid. There's power in them there machines enough to be the perfect grid nodes, pushing out music to those of us requesting it.
Well, I'm done rambling on this. Next.
posted by Toronto McKee at 8:48 AM
1 comments
