Jobs isn’t the only one who doesn’t like music subscriptions

I think it’s a lame idea too.

"People want to own their music," he said.

DRM is bad enoug, but renting the things I buy? How does that make sense?

"but I get unlimited music for $15 a month"

Great, good for you, and when you stop paying $15 a month, you get nothing, nada, zilch. So you enjoyed your unlimited music collection, largely things you’ll never listen to or be interested in, but you had access to it. Now you don’t

My music collection, not unlimited by any stretch, is mine. If I go broke and live in a van, my iPod will still have music on it. if Apple goes broke on iPhone refunds and goes away, my music is still here.

Can the same be said for Napster? Yahoo music?  No it can’t. Is Yahoo gonna go belly up? no, but they could decide that online music isn’t their thing, look at AIM if you need an example of a music subscription service that just "went away"

Is there a place for subscription music services? Maybe. I like the idea of being able to fully sample an album before I buy it, but it’s not the end of the world, I simply just buy what I know I like.

Oh yeah, Flex 3, open source. Interesting. :)

2 thoughts on “Jobs isn’t the only one who doesn’t like music subscriptions

  1. thad

    well, maybe napster now, but back in the day – different story. made it a lot easier to get MP3's of music you already owned (probably had bought on LP, cassette, *and*, cds) or had on mixtapes from friends. Bahh! buy direct from the artists people – skip the marketers and their leashes!

  2. thad Post author

    well, maybe napster now, but back in the day – different story. made it a lot easier to get MP3’s of music you already owned (probably had bought on LP, cassette, *and*, cds) or had on mixtapes from friends. Bahh! buy direct from the artists people – skip the marketers and their leashes!

Comments are closed.