Top

Apple only bought dying Lala for the engineers

May 2, 2010   by  

Ever since Apple launched its iTunes Store in 2003, various geek pundits have openly speculated that the company would soon abandon its attempt at selling music in favor of a music rental model. And even seven years later, after Apple has proven digital music sales to be a highly profitable business model, while music rental has proven to be a failed model time and time again, those same pundits have still opined that an iTunes music rental service was somehow just around the corner. So when failing music rental service Lala concluded back in December that it wasn’t going to be profitable and decided to approach Apple about a buyout, Apple agreed to the acquisition so the ever-expanding company could add to its engineering roster.

But that didn’t stop those same pundits from looking at the failure of yet another music rental service and interpreting it as Apple, the only widely successful company in the history of digital music, getting ready to shift away from a music sales model which has been proven to work in favor of a music rental model which has been proven time and again to be a failed idea. And now that Apple has shut down Lala’s music rental service this month, a move that any dispassionate observer would have seen coming since the day of the acquisition, those same geek tech pundits have now declared that the shutdown of Lala is even more evidence that Apple is about to abandon its own successful business model in favor of Lala’s failed one. How can these pundits be so insistent on misinterpreting the blatant facts of the matter?

Seemingly the only conclusion is that these geek tech pundits are still so desirous of the opportunity to rent music that they’re willing to overlook every detail to the contrary in order keep their hope alive that Apple, the only company who’s shown any ability to succeed in digital music, will give them their rental service. Which is why this week’s shutdown of Lala, which almost no one was using, was met with cries of pain by geek pundits who saw it for what it was, and hoots of denial from those geek pundits who were able to convince themselves that it was reasonable that Apple would shut down its newly acquired music rental service in favor of launching it again later.

Why are geeks are so insistent that music rental is the future, even as years of evidence have mounted to demonstrate that no one outside the geekdom has any interest? Perhaps it’s just part of the fundamentally differing mindset between geeks and the mainstream. Geeks want a theoretically infinite choice of external monitors for use with their personal computer; the mainstream is increasingly embracing an all in one computer like the iMac. Geeks consider the App Store to be “closed” despite the presence of hundreds of thousands of apps from tens of thousands of developers; the mainstream considers the App Store to be wide open; what geeks call “open” the mainstream would refer to as anarchy. So while it’s unclear whether geek tech pundits (and all tech pundits are geeks) truly believe that the mainstream would suddenly want to swallow a music rental service after a lifetime of soundly rejecting the concept, or whether the geeks merely want such a service for themselves, it seems increasingly clear that while Apple won’t be launching a music rental service anytime soon to replace the failed music rental service that it just put out of its dying misery, every additional step that Apple takes in burying Lala will result in yet another round of headlines from geek tech pundits about how the move somehow represents Apple moving one step closer to finally getting around to shutting down the overwhelmingly successful iTunes Store and replacing it with an iTunes Rental Depot. But then that’s what bubble geeks tend to do.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Comments

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest

Apple will NOT rent music. They will rent the cloud space for your iTunes library that you can then stream, for free, onto your devices. You already HAVE acquired the music. You will simply save it in the cloud instead of your local hard drive.

First of all, this article seems to have been written by a 9th-grader.Second, in defense of subscription-based music:I listen to *massive* amounts of music, and I have a very album-centric listening style (meaning a listen to full albums instead of radio/singles). This allows me to understand where a band's sound is, where it came from, and what they're all about. I can't afford to buy all the music I listen to.I also buy lots of music in CD form, but only the albums that I absolutely love (which turns out to be lots of albums). I'll never buy an album I haven't heard before. So I end up only buying amazing albums instead of mediocre ones that have 2 or 3 great singles on them.Furthermore, my taste in music changes as often as daily and as infrequently as weekly. I might be listening to some grungy sunshine pop one day and some kind of afrobeat the next. I can't afford to buy all that music, and internet radio stations don't give me the granular control I need to find the music that exactly fits what I'm looking for that exact moment.The end result is this: Since I started using Imeem, and then Lala, as my main music sources, music (and more specifically, new music) has become one of the most important parts of my life, where before I would only listen to whatever the radio played for me.(And to the music execs: I have bought more physical albums in this past year than I had bought in my entire life before that.)

You seem fixated on the term "geek tech pundits." Can you not find any synonyms at all?

How about nerd analysts?

"basement-dwelling techno-nerds"?"journalists on the consumer electronics beat"?"computer industry bloggers"?'iPhone-stealing jailbirds"?"First amendment warriors with an electronic twist"?

Concur, totally

Subscriptions, Maybe! Subscriptions, Maybe Not!The central issue isn't subscription, but the utter lack of relevant music. Apple is one of the few sellers who has done much with music in a digital format. Unfortunately, music has become such a spur of the moment kin of thing, that Apple outsells many digital music sellers who sell the same song in a superior format for less money. Music has become ringtone!I cannot think of a time were music is more needed, but less relevant. We have war (yes, we are still at war), a corrupt and incompetent government and a social fabric that is stretched to it's limit. WE NEED GOOD MUSIC!

Are you really this uninformed? Lala.com WASN'T a music rental service. You bought the music. You owned it forever (or at least unitl Lala.com went bust). It simply allowed you to access your "purchased" music from anywhere in the world. You bought the right to access it from their server (cloud computing-style) for 10 cents and could also buy a hard copy. No renting! Ever!Perhaps, before you write an article about a product, you should figure out what it is selling. This article makes you sound like an idiot.

us american like to "own" stuff, including other countries and people when its convenient. so having our music stored in cloud somewhere that wont ever work. then everyone would have bragging rites to the same amount of music in their library. and how could you compare "sizes" if they are all the same. Apple is a great company and a great alternative bill gates. but as jobs gets more of the market share he will become the big mean giant who wants to rule the world, and then somebody else will be the great alternative. its called the balance of power and its the saving grace that will allow this country of self serving consumers to one day fall into oblivion. history is fun it just keeps on happening and everyone acts surprised over and over again.

I used to use Lala.com as the perfect place to listen to an entire song, and depending on whether or not I liked the song, I would buy it. Most other places only give you a 30 second preview if anything and it is usually in the chorus.

You should really label this as a blog in big bold letters. This isn't even close to a news article and has nothing but opinion start to finish.

"Figuring out which MP3s you like and then downloading them is work."This may be the creepiest and laziest statement I've ever heard about music.

I take great issue with this one: > Geeks consider the App Store to be “closed” despite the presence of hundreds of thousands of apps from tens of thousands of developersThat's pretty bold statement considering the journalists whose apps are being rejected making the same claims. Remember this one? htttp://www.cjr.org/the_audit/its_time_for_the_press_to_push.phpor these? http://www.pcworld.com/article/159887/rejected_...Steve Jobs is an arrogant narcissist and as other platforms mature developers will migrate to them. Imagine if YOU spent weeks or months building an app, not knowing for sure if Apple would reject it because you can't tell in advance? Why bother.

The article is obviously biased. "he only widely successful company in the history of digital music"... where on earth do you live guys? Spotify, last.fm and others exist. Wake up, Apple killed another competing company. Live with that.

I would never buy music, especially when it had DRM, from Apple but maybe not because I think its a rip off. My reason for not doing that is because storing files on my computer is not what I want.I have not used the Lala service but Pandora is excellent and when you start to use it, you quickly realize a number of things:-Having MP3s on your hard drive is not better. They can stay safe in the cloud and as long as you always have internet access (WiFi will come built into cars pretty soon) everywhere you go, that is just as good.-Figuring out which MP3s you like and then downloading them is work. If Pandora can do this work for you better than you can by reading lots of music blogs and pissing around on MySpace, then let it.-Managing ID3 tags can categorization on an MP3 collection is another hassle and having millions of people doing the duplicate work is inefficient. Online services can make sure their music has perfect labels, album art, additional information. Doing this yourself, even with the automatic programs is a hassle.Once I used Pandora, I never downloaded another MP3 again and it wasn't because of cost or DRM.

I think a music rental service can still work, and if anyone, apple could could do it.I won't say that they will shut down their music buying service. Just a side service for renting music.It could have like a HUGE list of songs that it randomly plays trough for a set amount per minute. (price below break even point) Or you could select which songs uw at it to play, but I don't imagine a lot of ppl using that option. So it randomly plays music for you, like a radio set on shuffle, withouth ppl talking between songs/hearing the news etc.New artists who would like to break trough could then pay apple to give their song a higher chance to get played, so more ppl will hear it, and if they like it buy it from itunes. So the new artists get a new oppertunity to break trough upon. As much as I dislike Apple, I think they can make it work.After a while the rental service will mostly be for artists who want to break trough. Alrdy famous artists won't feature so prominently on that list, as they are already famous, and have their music bought/downloaded. So in the end only the new artists will put their songs up for rental in hopes to break trough. New artists are desparate for a chance to shine, so if succesfull, Apple could potentially charge quite alot for those artists to raise their chances to get their songs played on the rental service shufle mode. This is where Apple gets the profit, while it attracts ppl with extremely low prices per minute and the idea that music you hear on this rental shuffle won't be music you heard before (as its mostly from new artists) And thus offers some refreshing sound for anyone who is fed up with hearing the same hitsong over an over again.As a matter of fact....the more I think about it.....the more I think it could work...all it needs to work is a lot people that listen to the service and it will attract new artists on its own.

Well ......you can never sell a anything if you think about what anyone needs....its how make others convince them self they need it...do you think people need Ipad...but the sales are high and people are buying...

This is quite possibly the worse written article I have ever read! It was very difficult following what the author was trying to put across. I would liken the writing style to a 6th grader with a thesaurus. Fire this guy.

I will miss lala as an on-demand single song player. No one rents music... there is only "purchase" or "pirate".

Why would anyone want to rent music? People buy music to own it, not so their music collections can be potentially taken away by a corporate entity later on. Are people so intent on saving money they cannot afford to spend about a dollar per song? If that is the case, they should just get a radio.

Trackbacks

  1. [...] original post here: Apple only bought dying Lala for the engineers : Beatweek Magazine You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, [...]

  2. [...] Apple exclusive bought ending Lala for the engineers : Beatweek Magazine [...]

  3. [...] pundits have openly speculated that the company would soon abandon its attempt at selling … http://www.beatweek.com/news/5445-apple-only-bought-dying-lala-for-the-engineers/ Filed under links Comment (RSS)  |  Trackback [...]

  4. [...] over Apple’s Lala acquisition continuesMay 2, 2010    This morning we laid out the facts surrounding Apple’s acquisition of the failed music rental service known as Lala, and we [...]

Bottom