Rumored iTunes subscription would be a bargain
Repeat after me: it's just a rumor. Record company sources deny it. But if the anonymous tipster who e-mailed Mac Daily News is telling the truth, and Apple is indeed going to offer an all-you-can-download iTunes subscription service for for $129.99 a year (or $179.99 a year with Mobile Me), other subscription services will have a hard time surviving.
Let's review for a moment, shall we?
eMusic.
Cost? The cheapest plan $143.88 per year, but only for 30 downloads per month. No unlimited plan available.
Works with the
iPod? Yes, because the downloads are non-DRM-protected MP3s.
Chance of survival? Only with price cuts and a more generous subscription plan.
Zune Pass.
Cost? $179.88 per year.
Works with iPod? No.
Chance of survival? Yes, but only because Microsoft seems committed to losing money on the
Zune for as long as it takes to make a dent in Apple's market share, and will probably follow with a price cut.
Rhapsody to Go.
Cost? $179.88 per year.
Works with iPod? No.
Chance of survival? Slim. Subscription-music fans tend to like Rhapsody, but once there's an alternative that costs less and works with the most popular MP3 player in the world, I imagine a lot of those fans will reconsider.
Napster to Go.
Cost? $179.40 per year.
Works with iPod? No.
Chance of survival? Given all the other problems Napster's already facing, an iTunes subscription service could be the last straw.
Matt Rosoff is an analyst with Directions on Microsoft, where he covers Microsoft's consumer products and corporate news. He's written about the technology industry since 1995, and reviewed the first Rio MP3 player for CNET.com in 1998. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network. Disclosure. You can follow Matt on Twitter @mattrosoff. 






- by elektrobank August 22, 2008 6:55 AM PDT
- If the tracks were DRM free and included all the albums, not just selected ones, I'd sign on in a minute. Even at double that price I'd take it. I signed up for Rhapsody a while back, but it sucked, most of the bands I listen to weren't available as part of their subscriptions, and they couldn't play on my iPod. I used to spend hundreds of dollars a year on CDs before napster came along. For me, Napster wasn't about getting music for free, it was about being exposed to new artists and discovering new bands and genres I never knew existed. The artists deserve to get paid and I don't think anyone has a problem with forking over the money, I just think we're all so used to variety and ability to explore and sample tons of different music, that for most of us, a subscription service is the only way the record companies are going to start getting our money again, and they'll probably capture even more of our dollars this way than CD sales ever did.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (29 Comments)