iTunes saved the Music Industry?
Jim
How iTunes Saved the Music Industry
Viacom head Sumner Redstone speaks on content, copyright, and creativity
at LAW
(Will the WinBizarro's claim the site is Mac-Biased?)
--
Jim
Edwin
"Today's most popular iPod holds 1000 songs, and research tells us
that the average iPod is nearly full. This means that only 22 out of
1000 songs, or under 3% of the music on the average iPod, is purchased
from the iTunes store and protected with a DRM. The remaining 97% of
the music is unprotected and playable on any player that can play the
open formats. It's hard to believe that just 3% of the music on the
average iPod is enough to lock users into buying only iPods in the
future. And since 97% of the music on the average iPod was not
purchased from the iTunes store, iPod users are clearly not locked
into the iTunes store to acquire their music." -- Steve Jobs
http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/
One can not help but wonder how Apple managed to "save" the music
industry by being responsible for a scant 3% of sales.
So who's wrong, Steve Jobs denies users are locked into the Apple
music store because it's only responsible for 3% of music sales, or is
Sumner Redstone wrong, when he claims Apple sold enough music to
"save" the music industry?
spoo...@gmail.com
What a crappy shill this is from 7 months ago.
Lives de nile, smells like fish.
Edwin
I'll take it your remarks are about what Jim posted.
Sandman
Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> On Sep 19, 9:32 am, Jim <j...@NOwwa.net> wrote:
> > From BU Today:
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/34zq74
> >
> > How iTunes Saved the Music Industry
> >
> > Viacom head Sumner Redstone speaks on content, copyright, and creativity
> > at LAW
> >
> > (Will the WinBizarro's claim the site is Mac-Biased?)
>
> "Today's most popular iPod holds 1000 songs, and research tells us
> that the average iPod is nearly full. This means that only 22 out of
> 1000 songs, or under 3% of the music on the average iPod, is purchased
> from the iTunes store and protected with a DRM. The remaining 97% of
> the music is unprotected and playable on any player that can play the
> open formats. It's hard to believe that just 3% of the music on the
> average iPod is enough to lock users into buying only iPods in the
> future. And since 97% of the music on the average iPod was not
> purchased from the iTunes store, iPod users are clearly not locked
> into the iTunes store to acquire their music." -- Steve Jobs
>
> http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/
>
> One can not help but wonder how Apple managed to "save" the music
> industry by being responsible for a scant 3% of sales.
Maybe it's 3% of the total music collection, but it may be a lot more
in number of new acquired songs since one bought the iPod and got the
iTUnes Store account.
I've not bought a CD since the iTunes Store got to Sweden. In fact, I
hadn't bought a CD for years before that. The iTunes Store got me
interested in music again.
> So who's wrong, Steve Jobs denies users are locked into the Apple
> music store because it's only responsible for 3% of music sales, or is
> Sumner Redstone wrong, when he claims Apple sold enough music to
> "save" the music industry?
I think the iTunes Store is a new way to look at music for consumers.
Whether it has "saved" anyone is an exercise left for the reader.
--
Sandman[.net]
Edwin
> In article <1190217960.303620.230...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
Even though other on-line music stores predate it?
> Whether it has "saved" anyone is an exercise left for the reader.
You're showing your usual low comprehension of written English. The
article did not "leave it as an exercise for the reader," Sumner
Redstone claimed that Apple "saved" the music industry.
Can't you see your way clear to making at least one post in which you
don't act like a moron? Thanks in advance.
Sandman
Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > One can not help but wonder how Apple managed to "save" the music
> > > industry by being responsible for a scant 3% of sales.
> >
> > Maybe it's 3% of the total music collection, but it may be a lot more
> > in number of new acquired songs since one bought the iPod and got the
> > iTUnes Store account.
> >
> > I've not bought a CD since the iTunes Store got to Sweden. In fact, I
> > hadn't bought a CD for years before that. The iTunes Store got me
> > interested in music again.
> >
> > > So who's wrong, Steve Jobs denies users are locked into the Apple
> > > music store because it's only responsible for 3% of music sales, or is
> > > Sumner Redstone wrong, when he claims Apple sold enough music to
> > > "save" the music industry?
> >
> > I think the iTunes Store is a new way to look at music for consumers.
>
> Even though other on-line music stores predate it?
Yeah, since it's streamlined, easy to use, cheap and puts the music
you own on the most popular media device in the world. It's a solid
experience.
> > Whether it has "saved" anyone is an exercise left for the reader.
>
> You're showing your usual low comprehension of written English. The
> article did not "leave it as an exercise for the reader," Sumner
> Redstone claimed that Apple "saved" the music industry.
So he has made the exercise and claimed a verdict. Good for him. I
just wanted to make a point out of the fact that I don't think Apple
"saved" anyone. Others may think so, though.
> Can't you see your way clear to making at least one post in which you
> don't act like a moron? Thanks in advance.
Ironic is just the foreword.
--
Sandman[.net]
Jim
Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
He meant YOU lost-edddie since it was YOUR POST he was replying to.
--
Jim
Edwin
> In article <1190234674.822744.311...@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
Neither one of you addressed anything that I posted. Why are you
afraid to?
Sandman
Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > > What a crappy shill this is from 7 months ago.
> > > > Lives de nile, smells like fish.
> >
> > > I'll take it your remarks are about what Jim posted.
> >
> > He meant YOU lost-edddie since it was YOUR POST he was replying to.
>
> Neither one of you addressed anything that I posted. Why are you
> afraid to?
Why are you afraid to address things I ask you to?
--
Sandman[.net]
Edwin
> In article <1190237147.609910.24...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
> Edwin <thorn...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > > One can not help but wonder how Apple managed to "save" the music
> > > > industry by being responsible for a scant 3% of sales.
>
> > > Maybe it's 3% of the total music collection, but it may be a lot more
> > > in number of new acquired songs since one bought the iPod and got the
> > > iTUnes Store account.
>
> > > I've not bought a CD since the iTunes Store got to Sweden. In fact, I
> > > hadn't bought a CD for years before that. The iTunes Store got me
> > > interested in music again.
>
> > > > So who's wrong, Steve Jobs denies users are locked into the Apple
> > > > music store because it's only responsible for 3% of music sales, or is
> > > > Sumner Redstone wrong, when he claims Apple sold enough music to
> > > > "save" the music industry?
>
> > > I think the iTunes Store is a new way to look at music for consumers.
>
> > Even though other on-line music stores predate it?
>
> Yeah, since it's streamlined, easy to use, cheap and puts the music
> you own on the most popular media device in the world. It's a solid
> experience.
>
> > > Whether it has "saved" anyone is an exercise left for the reader.
>
> > You're showing your usual low comprehension of written English. The
> > article did not "leave it as an exercise for the reader," Sumner
> > Redstone claimed that Apple "saved" the music industry.
>
> So he has made the exercise and claimed a verdict. Good for him.
The issue was whether or not he is correct, as what he and Steve Jobs
said are at odds with each other.
> I just wanted to make a point out of the fact that I don't think Apple
> "saved" anyone.
If that's what you wanted to do, you did a piss-poor job of it.
> Others may think so, though.
Well, duh!
> > Can't you see your way clear to making at least one post in which you
> > don't act like a moron? Thanks in advance.
>
> Ironic is just the foreword.
I'll take that as a "no."
Sandman
Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > > > So who's wrong, Steve Jobs denies users are locked into the Apple
> > > > > music store because it's only responsible for 3% of music sales, or is
> > > > > Sumner Redstone wrong, when he claims Apple sold enough music to
> > > > > "save" the music industry?
> >
> > > > I think the iTunes Store is a new way to look at music for consumers.
> >
> > > Even though other on-line music stores predate it?
> >
> > Yeah, since it's streamlined, easy to use, cheap and puts the music
> > you own on the most popular media device in the world. It's a solid
> > experience.
> >
> > > > Whether it has "saved" anyone is an exercise left for the reader.
> >
> > > You're showing your usual low comprehension of written English. The
> > > article did not "leave it as an exercise for the reader," Sumner
> > > Redstone claimed that Apple "saved" the music industry.
> >
> > So he has made the exercise and claimed a verdict. Good for him.
>
> The issue was whether or not he is correct, as what he and Steve Jobs
> said are at odds with each other.
I don't care whether he is correct. I said what I thought and prefixed
it with "I think..."
> > I just wanted to make a point out of the fact that I don't think Apple
> > "saved" anyone.
>
> If that's what you wanted to do, you did a piss-poor job of it.
Thanks!
> > Others may think so, though.
>
> Well, duh!
>
> > > Can't you see your way clear to making at least one post in which you
> > > don't act like a moron? Thanks in advance.
> >
> > Ironic is just the foreword.
>
> I'll take that as a "no."
--
Sandman[.net]
Jim
Again, take your dispute up with the author, not the messenger.
Typically as you always do, you get things way, way wrong.
--
Jim
Jim
Sandman <m...@sandman.net> wrote:
lost-eddie is just plain afraid and running from things, overtaken by
his delusions which are the source of his perpetual lostness.
--
Jim
kdt
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote in message
news:1190217960.3...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
Poor Edwin wouldn't know a fact if it bit him in the ass...
What makes you think that all iTunes users own iPods? There are plenty of
people who buy songs off of iTunes and burn them to CDs. He never said that
iTunes only accounts for 3% of music sales -- only that 3% of music on IPods
is from iTunes. I don't believe that it is accurate to just divide the
number of iPods ever sold by the number of iTunes songs sold and just
magically come up with that number.
http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/23/apple-passes-amazon-to-become-the-3-us-music-retailer/
"Things must seem pretty rosy in Cupertino -- just a week before the
mega-hyped launch of you-know-what, market research group NPD's quarterly
survey shows Apple has passed Amazon to become the third biggest music
retailer in the US. This isn't the biggest of surprises, since Steve himself
predicted that the iTunes Store would overtake Amazon at the Showtime event
back in September, but the leap to #3 is a little unexpected, since Apple
also outpaced Target last quarter. iTunes is now rocking a 10% market share,
just behind Wal-Mart at 16% and Best Buy at 14%, and while we don't expect
to see it pass those two giants anytime soon, we'd bet that uptick in
DRM-free sales has got the iTMS crew at Apple licking their chops"
>
>
Alan Baker
You do that with such regularity who can wonder that others assume you
won't mind it when it is done to you?
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
Steve de Mena
The sum total of iTunes content in his speech:
"He said that iTunes has “resurrected the music industry” by creating a
legal, affordable, instantly gratifying purchasing system for fans."
Zzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Steve
Steve de Mena
Of course that is a reasonable assumption. Why would the percentage be
different with iTunes users who don't have iPods?
The music industry is bleeding hundreds of millions of dollars. No one
has "saved" them yet.
Steve
Invid Fan
> On Sep 19, 4:00 pm, Sandman <m...@sandman.net> wrote:
>
> > I think the iTunes Store is a new way to look at music for consumers.
>
> Even though other on-line music stores predate it?
>
Yes, if they didn't bother looking at online stores before iTunes.
--
Chris Mack "Refugee, total shit. That's how I've always seen us.
'Invid Fan' Not a help, you'll admit, to agreement between us."
-'Deal/No Deal', CHESS
KDT
> kdt wrote:
> > "Edwin" <thorn...@juno.com> wrote in message
There are few things wrong with that conclusion
1. He said that only 3% of the music on a typical iPod was from
iTunes, even if you take that statement at face value based on his
reasoning (which I don't). It does not imply that people only buy 3%
of their music from iTunes. Some of the music on their iPod came from
music they already have. Why wouldn't you believe that in the future,
people who have iPods wouldn't be buying more music from iTunes than
they did in the past?
2. Data from both NPD and SoundScan both put Apple's market share of
all music sold in the US at 10%
3. He came up with the 3% figure by dividing the total number of iPod
sold by the total number of songs sold which implies that every iPod
that has ever been sold is still in use and that no one has bought
more than one iPod since 2001. It also implies that every iTunes user
owns an iPod. I used iTunes to buy music and burn to a CD for two
years before I owned an iPod and CD burners still vastly outnumber
iPods.
>
> The music industry is bleeding hundreds of millions of dollars. No one
> has "saved" them yet.
>
The music industry is not "bleeding" money -- i.e. they are not losing
money. They are just not as profitable as they were.
> Steve
Steve de Mena
That all sounds reasonable. To me, it has seemed that the steep
decline in physical CD sales has not been offset nearly enough by legal
digital downloads. I wish more online music could be made available
DRM-free and at a higher bit rate (a la iTunes Plus).
Steve
Edwin
> In article <1190217960.303620.230...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
I'm asking you who's correct, Steve Jobs or Sumner Redstone? I have
no need to take up anything with the author to do that.
> Typically as you always do, you get things way, way wrong.
What have I got wrong about this?
Edwin
> In article <1190239748.026452.104...@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
> Edwin <thorn...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > > > > So who's wrong, Steve Jobs denies users are locked into the Apple
> > > > > > music store because it's only responsible for 3% of music sales, or is
> > > > > > Sumner Redstone wrong, when he claims Apple sold enough music to
> > > > > > "save" the music industry?
>
> > > > > I think the iTunes Store is a new way to look at music for consumers.
>
> > > > Even though other on-line music stores predate it?
>
> > > Yeah, since it's streamlined, easy to use, cheap and puts the music
> > > you own on the most popular media device in the world. It's a solid
> > > experience.
>
> > > > > Whether it has "saved" anyone is an exercise left for the reader.
>
> > > > You're showing your usual low comprehension of written English. The
> > > > article did not "leave it as an exercise for the reader," Sumner
> > > > Redstone claimed that Apple "saved" the music industry.
>
> > > So he has made the exercise and claimed a verdict. Good for him.
>
> > The issue was whether or not he is correct, as what he and Steve Jobs
> > said are at odds with each other.
>
> I don't care whether he is correct. I said what I thought and prefixed
> it with "I think..."
Next time try posting thoughts that actually have something do do with
the post you're replying to.
> > > I just wanted to make a point out of the fact that I don't think Apple
> > > "saved" anyone.
>
> > If that's what you wanted to do, you did a piss-poor job of it.
>
> Thanks!
You're welcome, Stinky.
> > > Others may think so, though.
>
> > Well, duh!
>
> > > > Can't you see your way clear to making at least one post in which you
> > > > don't act like a moron? Thanks in advance.
>
> > > Ironic is just the foreword.
>
> > I'll take that as a "no."
Note: No response.
Edwin
> In article <1190239449.778300.210...@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
You're lying again.
Sandman
Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > So who's wrong, Steve Jobs denies users are locked into the Apple
> > > > > > > music store because it's only responsible for 3% of music sales,
> > > > > > > or is
> > > > > > > Sumner Redstone wrong, when he claims Apple sold enough music to
> > > > > > > "save" the music industry?
> >
> > > > > > I think the iTunes Store is a new way to look at music for
> > > > > > consumers.
> >
> > > > > Even though other on-line music stores predate it?
> >
> > > > Yeah, since it's streamlined, easy to use, cheap and puts the music
> > > > you own on the most popular media device in the world. It's a solid
> > > > experience.
> >
> > > > > > Whether it has "saved" anyone is an exercise left for the reader.
> >
> > > > > You're showing your usual low comprehension of written English.
> > > > > The
> > > > > article did not "leave it as an exercise for the reader," Sumner
> > > > > Redstone claimed that Apple "saved" the music industry.
> >
> > > > So he has made the exercise and claimed a verdict. Good for him.
> >
> > > The issue was whether or not he is correct, as what he and Steve Jobs
> > > said are at odds with each other.
> >
> > I don't care whether he is correct. I said what I thought and prefixed
> > it with "I think..."
>
> Next time try posting thoughts that actually have something do do with
> the post you're replying to.
My thoughts were in direct relation to the iTunes store and how users
purchase music, which is very much relevant to the topic at hand.
<snip mindless insults>
--
Sandman[.net]
Edwin
"Jim" <j...@NOwwa.net> wrote in message
news:jim-564491.1...@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
Here's another chance for you and Sandman to answer what you're running away
from:
Edwin
"Sandman" <m...@sandman.net> wrote in message
news:mr-8F796C.06...@News.Individual.NET...
No they weren't.
> <snip mindless insults>
Thanks for snipping your mindless insults.
Now make a real answer to this:
"Today's most popular iPod holds 1000 songs, and research tells us
that the average iPod is nearly full. This means that only 22 out of
1000 songs, or under 3% of the music on the average iPod, is purchased
from the iTunes store and protected with a DRM. The remaining 97% of
the music is unprotected and playable on any player that can play the
open formats. It's hard to believe that just 3% of the music on the
average iPod is enough to lock users into buying only iPods in the
future. And since 97% of the music on the average iPod was not
purchased from the iTunes store, iPod users are clearly not locked
into the iTunes store to acquire their music." -- Steve Jobs
http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/
One can not help but wonder how Apple managed to "save" the music
industry by being responsible for a scant 3% of sales.
So who's wrong, Steve Jobs denies users are locked into the Apple
Edwin
"Invid Fan" <in...@localnet.com> wrote in message
news:200920071702076309%in...@localnet.com...
> In article <1190237147....@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
> Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sep 19, 4:00 pm, Sandman <m...@sandman.net> wrote:
>>
>> > I think the iTunes Store is a new way to look at music for consumers.
>>
>> Even though other on-line music stores predate it?
>>
>
> Yes, if they didn't bother looking at online stores before iTunes.
that the average iPod is nearly full. This means that only 22 out of
1000 songs, or under 3% of the music on the average iPod, is purchased
from the iTunes store and protected with a DRM. The remaining 97% of
the music is unprotected and playable on any player that can play the
open formats. It's hard to believe that just 3% of the music on the
average iPod is enough to lock users into buying only iPods in the
future. And since 97% of the music on the average iPod was not
purchased from the iTunes store, iPod users are clearly not locked
into the iTunes store to acquire their music." -- Steve Jobs
http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/
One can not help but wonder how Apple managed to "save" the music
industry by being responsible for a scant 3% of sales.
So who's wrong, Steve Jobs denies users are locked into the Apple
Sandman
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> >> Next time try posting thoughts that actually have something do do with
> >> the post you're replying to.
> >
> > My thoughts were in direct relation to the iTunes store and how users
> > purchase music, which is very much relevant to the topic at hand.
>
> No they weren't.
Yes, they were.
> > <snip mindless insults>
>
> Thanks for snipping your mindless insults.
What mindless insults of mine where snipped, Edwin?
> Now make a real answer to this:
>
> "Today's most popular iPod holds 1000 songs, and research tells us
> that the average iPod is nearly full. This means that only 22 out of
> 1000 songs, or under 3% of the music on the average iPod, is purchased
> from the iTunes store and protected with a DRM. The remaining 97% of
> the music is unprotected and playable on any player that can play the
> open formats. It's hard to believe that just 3% of the music on the
> average iPod is enough to lock users into buying only iPods in the
> future. And since 97% of the music on the average iPod was not
> purchased from the iTunes store, iPod users are clearly not locked
> into the iTunes store to acquire their music." -- Steve Jobs
>
> http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/
>
> One can not help but wonder how Apple managed to "save" the music
> industry by being responsible for a scant 3% of sales.
Sure. I've never claimed that Apple "saved" the music industry.
> So who's wrong, Steve Jobs denies users are locked into the Apple
> music store because it's only responsible for 3% of music sales, or is
> Sumner Redstone wrong, when he claims Apple sold enough music to
> "save" the music industry?
Maybe he doesn't mean "save" as in sales, but "save" as in how people
does and will purchase music?
--
Sandman[.net]
Edwin
"kdt" <scarf...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9DkIi.48994$wN3....@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
You have mistaken me for "KDT."
> What makes you think that all iTunes users own iPods?
Ask Steve Jobs about the flaws you see in his argument.
> There are plenty of people who buy songs off of iTunes and burn them to
> CDs. He never said that iTunes only accounts for 3% of music sales --
> only that 3% of music on IPods is from iTunes.
Now you get to prove how many people use iTunes but not an iPod.
> I don't believe that it is accurate to just divide the number of iPods
> ever sold by the number of iTunes songs sold and just magically come up
> with that number.
So you say that Steve Jobs was wrong when he used that argument to claim
Apple doesn't dominant music sales.
> http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/23/apple-passes-amazon-to-become-the-3-us-music-retailer/
>
> "Things must seem pretty rosy in Cupertino -- just a week before the
> mega-hyped launch of you-know-what, market research group NPD's quarterly
> survey shows Apple has passed Amazon to become the third biggest music
> retailer in the US. This isn't the biggest of surprises, since Steve
> himself predicted that the iTunes Store would overtake Amazon at the
> Showtime event back in September, but the leap to #3 is a little
> unexpected, since Apple also outpaced Target last quarter. iTunes is now
> rocking a 10% market share, just behind Wal-Mart at 16% and Best Buy at
> 14%, and while we don't expect to see it pass those two giants anytime
> soon, we'd bet that uptick in DRM-free sales has got the iTMS crew at
> Apple licking their chops"
So you disagree that Apple "saved" the music industry.
Sandman
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> >> > > > > What a crappy shill this is from 7 months ago.
> >> > > > > Lives de nile, smells like fish.
> >> > >
> >> > > > I'll take it your remarks are about what Jim posted.
> >> > >
> >> > > He meant YOU lost-edddie since it was YOUR POST he was replying to.
> >> >
> >> > Neither one of you addressed anything that I posted. Why are you
> >> > afraid to?
> >>
> >> Why are you afraid to address things I ask you to?
> >
> > lost-eddie is just plain afraid and running from things, overtaken by
> > his delusions which are the source of his perpetual lostness.
>
> Here's another chance for you and Sandman to answer what you're running away
> from:
What about the thins you keep running away from? Do you want a list?
--
Sandman[.net]
Edwin
> In article <2rydnWOtPeUdyGrbnZ2dnUVZ_u6rn...@comcast.com>,
>
> "Edwin" <thorn...@juno.com> wrote:
> > >> Next time try posting thoughts that actually have something do do with
> > >> the post you're replying to.
>
> > > My thoughts were in direct relation to the iTunes store and how users
> > > purchase music, which is very much relevant to the topic at hand.
>
> > No they weren't.
>
> Yes, they were.
No, they weren't.
> > > <snip mindless insults>
>
> > Thanks for snipping your mindless insults.
>
> What mindless insults of mine where snipped, Edwin?
Whichever ones you claimed to snip above.
>
> > Now make a real answer to this:
>
> > "Today's most popular iPod holds 1000 songs, and research tells us
> > that the average iPod is nearly full. This means that only 22 out of
> > 1000 songs, or under 3% of the music on the average iPod, is purchased
> > from the iTunes store and protected with a DRM. The remaining 97% of
> > the music is unprotected and playable on any player that can play the
> > open formats. It's hard to believe that just 3% of the music on the
> > average iPod is enough to lock users into buying only iPods in the
> > future. And since 97% of the music on the average iPod was not
> > purchased from the iTunes store, iPod users are clearly not locked
> > into the iTunes store to acquire their music." -- Steve Jobs
>
> >http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/
>
> > One can not help but wonder how Apple managed to "save" the music
> > industry by being responsible for a scant 3% of sales.
>
> Sure. I've never claimed that Apple "saved" the music industry.
IOW, you think Sumner Redstone is wrong in his claims. Why didn't
you just say so from the start?
And why be so wimpy with your "I never claimed?" Just come right
out and say "Jim's article got it wrong. Apple in no way "saved" the
music industry."
> > So who's wrong, Steve Jobs denies users are locked into the Apple
> > music store because it's only responsible for 3% of music sales, or is
> > Sumner Redstone wrong, when he claims Apple sold enough music to
> > "save" the music industry?
>
> Maybe he doesn't mean "save" as in sales, but "save" as in how people
> does and will purchase music?
In means "save" in terms of purchases, not "save" in terms of
sales? Just what do you use for brains? I ask for information
only.
Sandman
Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > > My thoughts were in direct relation to the iTunes store and how users
> > > > purchase music, which is very much relevant to the topic at hand.
> >
> > > No they weren't.
> >
> > Yes, they were.
>
> No, they weren't.
Yes, they were.
> > > > <snip mindless insults>
> >
> > > Thanks for snipping your mindless insults.
> >
> > What mindless insults of mine where snipped, Edwin?
>
> Whichever ones you claimed to snip above.
I didn't claim to snip any insults of mine above.
> > > Now make a real answer to this:
> >
> > > "Today's most popular iPod holds 1000 songs, and research tells us
> > > that the average iPod is nearly full. This means that only 22 out of
> > > 1000 songs, or under 3% of the music on the average iPod, is purchased
> > > from the iTunes store and protected with a DRM. The remaining 97% of
> > > the music is unprotected and playable on any player that can play the
> > > open formats. It's hard to believe that just 3% of the music on the
> > > average iPod is enough to lock users into buying only iPods in the
> > > future. And since 97% of the music on the average iPod was not
> > > purchased from the iTunes store, iPod users are clearly not locked
> > > into the iTunes store to acquire their music." -- Steve Jobs
> >
> > >http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/
> >
> > > One can not help but wonder how Apple managed to "save" the music
> > > industry by being responsible for a scant 3% of sales.
> >
> > Sure. I've never claimed that Apple "saved" the music industry.
>
> IOW, you think Sumner Redstone is wrong in his claims. Why didn't
> you just say so from the start?
Because I didn't even read his claims.
> And why be so wimpy with your "I never claimed?" Just come right
> out and say "Jim's article got it wrong. Apple in no way "saved" the
> music industry."
I don't know either way, so I won't make an explicit claim either way
since I can't support it. Like you do, make explicit claims without
being able to support it.
> > > So who's wrong, Steve Jobs denies users are locked into the Apple
> > > music store because it's only responsible for 3% of music sales, or is
> > > Sumner Redstone wrong, when he claims Apple sold enough music to
> > > "save" the music industry?
> >
> > Maybe he doesn't mean "save" as in sales, but "save" as in how people
> > does and will purchase music?
>
> In means "save" in terms of purchases, not "save" in terms of
> sales? Just what do you use for brains? I ask for information
> only.
What do you use? How could you not understand what I wrote? It was
perfectly clear.
I see you "ran" from thew thread where you tried to make fun of my
English and ended up being wrong yourself. Good choice. :)
--
Sandman[.net]
Edwin
> In article <1190645577.988374.120...@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
>
> Edwin <thorn...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > > > My thoughts were in direct relation to the iTunes store and how users
> > > > > purchase music, which is very much relevant to the topic at hand.
>
> > > > No they weren't.
>
> > > Yes, they were.
>
> > No, they weren't.
>
> Yes, they were.
No, they weren't.
> > > > > <snip mindless insults>
>
> > > > Thanks for snipping your mindless insults.
>
> > > What mindless insults of mine where snipped, Edwin?
>
> > Whichever ones you claimed to snip above.
>
> I didn't claim to snip any insults of mine above.
Sure you did.
>
>
> > > > Now make a real answer to this:
>
> > > > "Today's most popular iPod holds 1000 songs, and research tells us
> > > > that the average iPod is nearly full. This means that only 22 out of
> > > > 1000 songs, or under 3% of the music on the average iPod, is purchased
> > > > from the iTunes store and protected with a DRM. The remaining 97% of
> > > > the music is unprotected and playable on any player that can play the
> > > > open formats. It's hard to believe that just 3% of the music on the
> > > > average iPod is enough to lock users into buying only iPods in the
> > > > future. And since 97% of the music on the average iPod was not
> > > > purchased from the iTunes store, iPod users are clearly not locked
> > > > into the iTunes store to acquire their music." -- Steve Jobs
>
> > > >http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/
>
> > > > One can not help but wonder how Apple managed to "save" the music
> > > > industry by being responsible for a scant 3% of sales.
>
> > > Sure. I've never claimed that Apple "saved" the music industry.
>
> > IOW, you think Sumner Redstone is wrong in his claims. Why didn't
> > you just say so from the start?
>
> Because I didn't even read his claims.
Then WTF are you doing in this thread?
> > And why be so wimpy with your "I never claimed?" Just come right
> > out and say "Jim's article got it wrong. Apple in no way "saved" the
> > music industry."
>
> I don't know either way,
Yet here you are arguing anyway.
> so I won't make an explicit claim either way
> since I can't support it.
You'll just make loopy clatter, as usual.
> Like you do, make explicit claims without
> being able to support it.
You're lying again.
And I presented to contradictory articles and asked which one was
correct. So why are you telling me I'm not supporting explicit
claims, Loopy?
> > > > So who's wrong, Steve Jobs denies users are locked into the Apple
> > > > music store because it's only responsible for 3% of music sales, or is
> > > > Sumner Redstone wrong, when he claims Apple sold enough music to
> > > > "save" the music industry?
>
> > > Maybe he doesn't mean "save" as in sales, but "save" as in how people
> > > does and will purchase music?
>
> > In means "save" in terms of purchases, not "save" in terms of
> > sales? Just what do you use for brains? I ask for information
> > only.
>
> What do you use?
A human brain. You ought to get one for yourself.
> How could you not understand what I wrote? It was
> perfectly clear.
I don't doubt it was clear to yourself. It wasn't clear to anybody
outside your cranium.
> I see you "ran" from thew
The spell checker built into Mac OS X must be a complete POS.
> thread where you tried to make fun of my
> English and ended up being wrong yourself.
No such thread exists.
> Good choice. :)
Heh. Goofy Swede...
Snit
1190655689.5...@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com on 9/24/07 10:41 AM:
>>>>> No they weren't.
>>
>>>> Yes, they were.
>>
>>> No, they weren't.
>>
>> Yes, they were.
>
> No, they weren't.
CSMA at its finest!
--
Picture of a tuna soda: http://snipurl.com/f351
Feel free to ask for the recipe.
Edwin
> In article <OKadnbYXI_SDyGrbnZ2dnUVZ_judn...@comcast.com>,
Irony is lost on you.
Sandman
Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
Ah, you were being ironic when you said that I was running from
something when it is in fact you who is running. Gotcha.
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
Edwin <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
>>> And why be so wimpy with your "I never claimed?" Just come
>>> right out and say "Jim's article got it wrong. Apple in no way
>>> "saved" the music industry."
>>
>> I don't know either way, so I won't make an explicit claim either
>> way since I can't support it. Like you do, make explicit claims
>> without being able to support it.
>
> You're lying again.
>
> And I presented to contradictory articles and asked which one was
> correct.
The very fact you had to ask that questions means you realise yourself
that the article wasn't supporting anything. It was just another
thought. Only, it was negative towards Apple, which counts as hard
facts to you.
--
Sandman[.net]
kdt
>
> Here's another chance for you and Sandman to answer what you're running
> away from:
>
> "Today's most popular iPod holds 1000 songs, and research tells us
> that the average iPod is nearly full. This means that only 22 out of
> 1000 songs, or under 3% of the music on the average iPod, is purchased
> from the iTunes store and protected with a DRM. The remaining 97% of
> the music is unprotected and playable on any player that can play the
> open formats. It's hard to believe that just 3% of the music on the
> average iPod is enough to lock users into buying only iPods in the
> future. And since 97% of the music on the average iPod was not
> purchased from the iTunes store, iPod users are clearly not locked
> into the iTunes store to acquire their music." -- Steve Jobs
>
> http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/
>
> One can not help but wonder how Apple managed to "save" the music
> industry by being responsible for a scant 3% of sales.
Your lack of reading comprehension never fails to amaze me.
1. The statistics that SJ quoted did not say that iTunes only makes up 3% of
sales of music-- only that 3% of music on the typical iPod comes from
iTunes. Did you ever think that lots of people had music before they bought
an iPod? NPD and Soundscan both put iTunes at 10% of all music sales and
#3 behind Walmart and Best Buy in the US.
2. The statistic is highly inaccurate. It assumes that every iTunes user is
an iPod user. There are peole who are buying from iTunes for the onvenience
and burning CDs. There are millions of more CD burners out there than
iPods.
3. It also assumes that every iPod that was ever sold is still in use and
that no household would own multiple iPods. Itunes lets you sync to an
unlimted number of iPods.
>
> So who's wrong, Steve Jobs denies users are locked into the Apple
> music store because it's only responsible for 3% of music sales, or is
> Sumner Redstone wrong, when he claims Apple sold enough music to
> "save" the music industry?
You are wrong actually.
kdt
>> What makes you think that all iTunes users own iPods?
>
> Ask Steve Jobs about the flaws you see in his argument.
His argument is flawed. Clearly not every iPod that ever existed is still
in use and clearly some households have multiple iPods.
>
>> There are plenty of people who buy songs off of iTunes and burn them to
>> CDs. He never said that iTunes only accounts for 3% of music sales --
>> only that 3% of music on IPods is from iTunes.
>
> Now you get to prove how many people use iTunes but not an iPod.
No, if there are any iTunes users not using iPods than the methodology is
bogus.
>
>> I don't believe that it is accurate to just divide the number of iPods
>> ever sold by the number of iTunes songs sold and just magically come up
>> with that number.
>
> So you say that Steve Jobs was wrong when he used that argument to claim
> Apple doesn't dominant music sales.
Yes SJ's methodology wrong. No he never claimed that he dominated music
sells and nor did I.
>
>> http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/23/apple-passes-amazon-to-become-the-3-us-music-retailer/
>>
>> "Things must seem pretty rosy in Cupertino -- just a week before the
>> mega-hyped launch of you-know-what, market research group NPD's quarterly
>> survey shows Apple has passed Amazon to become the third biggest music
>> retailer in the US. This isn't the biggest of surprises, since Steve
>> himself predicted that the iTunes Store would overtake Amazon at the
>> Showtime event back in September, but the leap to #3 is a little
>> unexpected, since Apple also outpaced Target last quarter. iTunes is now
>> rocking a 10% market share, just behind Wal-Mart at 16% and Best Buy at
>> 14%, and while we don't expect to see it pass those two giants anytime
>> soon, we'd bet that uptick in DRM-free sales has got the iTMS crew at
>> Apple licking their chops"
>
> So you disagree that Apple "saved" the music industry.
It might surprise you that some people are capable of analyzing the data and
coming up with an independent thought. The fact is that digital sales are
climbing while physical sales are declining. It's also a fact that Apple
went from nowhere to #3 in four years in market share. Apple has not
"saved" the music industry but is there only bright spot.