ie8 fix
madison

The Ed Bott Report

Ed Bott
Home / News & Blogs / The Ed Bott Report

Readers speak out on the future of digital music: "a convoluted mess"

By | January 5, 2011, 3:55pm PST

Summary: Last month I asked readers to share their thoughts on the future of digital music, offering a pair of shiny new Zune HD devices for the best comments. The contest entries make for good reading. Here are the winners.

Last month I asked readers to share their thoughts on the future of digital music, offering a pair of shiny new Zune HD devices for the best comments.

The contest entries make for good reading. A few submitted mini-essays on the subject, some of which were thoughtful and interesting. Unfortunately, the authors missed the part in the contest rules requiring all entries to be 100 words or less. After tossing out those that were too long, two comments wound up at the top of the ballot.

First prize (a 32GB Zune HD with Zune HD AV Dock) goes to Patrick McGrath for this comment:

The digital music industry will remain a convoluted mess for the foreseeable future, with one dominant player, Apple, and everyone else clawing for the scraps. Apple made digital music players and the consumption of digital music easy for the general consumer. To these people, iTunes and iPods ARE digital music the same way AOL was and FaceBook is the Internet. They don’t know and don’t care about other digital music providers or options. If subscriptions take off, Apple will offer one. Consumers will act like Apple just invented it, and embrace it because they won’t have to think about it.

Bonus points to Patrick, who was one of several entrants that carefully crafted their comments to be exactly 100 words. Well played!

Second prize (a 32GB Zune HD with a one-month Zune Pass) goes to Jeff Park, who wrote:

Apple is the 10 ton gorilla in the room. They’ve managed to make the iPod a necessary social accessory that happens to play music. I had a teenager complain to me about how expensive iPods are, but when I pointed out there are cheaper alternatives, I got a deer-in-the-headlights look. Until Apple’s stranglehold on the market can be broken, the digital music market will be defined by what Steve Jobs thinks it should be.

Other products and services will appeal to niche markets and Apple-haters but their influence will be severely limited.

I agree with both readers that Apple has an effective monopoly on the digital music market today. Even Amazon, which is a force of nature in online commerce, hasn’t been able to make a dent against iTunes, despite serious price-cutting.

The big societal change that is only now beginning to play out is how the shift to digital media affects how we find and enjoy music. The concept of ownership changes dramatically with digital copies, which play by a different, considerably more restrictive set of rules than tangible products like CDs.

There’s going to be another seismic event when (not if) Apple finally decides to share its vision of what a cloud-based music service looks like. Subscription-based services have failed to attractany kind of meaningful consumer support to this point. Does Steve Jobs have a vision that has eluded the rest of the music industry? Can Apple muscle its way into the hearts and minds of hundreds of millions of iPod users?

I have no idea what Jobs has up his sleeve. And until he finally decides to play his hand, I have to agree with Patrick that it’s all “a convoluted mess.”

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

More from “The Ed Bott Report”

Topics

Microsoft Zune, Apple Inc., Digital Music, Digital Media, Personal Technology, Consumer Electronics, Ed Bott

Ed Bott is an award-winning technology writer with more than two decades' experience writing for mainstream media outlets and online publications.

Disclosure

Ed Bott

Ed Bott is a freelance technical journalist and book author. All work that Ed does is on a contractual basis.

Since 1994, Ed has written more than 25 books about Microsoft Windows and Office. Along with various co-authors, Ed is completely responsible for the content of the books he writes. As a key part of his contractual relationship with publishers, he gives them permission to print and distribute the content he writes and to pay him a royalty based on the actual sales of those books. Ed's books written prior to fall 2011 have been distributed by Que Publishing (a division of Pearson Education) and by Microsoft Press. As of November 2011, Ed is a partner in the independent publishing company Fair Trade Digital Exchange, which exclusively publishes his books.

On occasion, Ed accepts consulting assignments. In recent years, he has worked as an expert witness in cases where his experience and knowledge of Microsoft and Microsoft Windows have been useful. In each such case, his compensation is on an hourly basis, and he is hired as a witness, not an advocate.

Ed does not own stock or have any other financial interest in Microsoft or any other software company. He owns 500 shares of stock in EMC Corporation, which was purchased before the company's acquisition of VMware. In addition, he owns 350 shares of stock in Intel Corporation, purchased more than two years ago. All stocks are held in retirement accounts for long-term growth.

Ed does not accept gifts from companies he covers. All hardware products he writes about are purchased with his own funds or are review units covered under formal loan agreements and are returned after the review is complete.

Biography

Ed Bott

Ed Bott is an award-winning technology writer with more than two decades' experience writing for mainstream media outlets and online publications. He's served as editor of the U.S. edition of PC Computing and managing editor of PC World; both publications had monthly paid circulation in excess of 1 million during his tenure. He is the author of more than 25 books on Microsoft Windows and Office, including the recently released Windows 7 Inside Out.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
Ask a Question Start a Discussion
20
Comments
Add Your Opinion

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Readers speak out on the future of digital music:
raweb 7th Jan 2011
@MG537 But you said you buy CDs, so what uncompressed sources do you use in your living room? Or did you not realize that CDs are compressed? There are audiophile options that are well worth the effort.
View in thread
0 Votes
+ -
Yes, Apple does have a monopoly and must be regulated
NonZealot Updated - 5th Jan 2011
Apple has an effective monopoly on the digital music market today

It is criminal that Apple was allowed to leverage their iTMS monopoly to break into the smartphone market. DoJ and EC, time to start fining Apple billions of dollars and also time to force Apple to give you an option of music store when you unbox your iOS device and also time to force Apple to give Android and WP7 first class access to iTMS.
0 Votes
+ -
a clueless liar
banned from zdnet 6th Jan 2011
@NonZealot
when i unbox my iOS device and plug it in, i have to use itunes to set it up and synchronize my data (if i want to synchronize anything). i don't have to use the itunes store however. i can use any store (like the amazon mp3 store for instance) and the music i download there works perfectly fine in itunes or on my idevice. i could even forgo itunes entirely to synchronize my media.

something you would know, if you would own a macbook pro and an iphone as you claim. but of course you don't, as you are - as everyone here knows - a liar and a clueless troll.
0 Votes
+ -
Same thing with Windows and Internet Explorer
ye 6th Jan 2011
@banned from zdnet: i don't have to use the itunes store however. i can use any store (like the amazon mp3 store for instance) and the music i download there works perfectly fine in itunes or on my idevice.

You were always free to use something else. But that didn't stop the ABMers from faulting Microsoft. How is this any different?

something you would know, if you would own a macbook pro and an iphone as you claim. but of course you don't, as you are - as everyone here knows - a liar and a clueless troll.

I believe he said he owns an MBP and runs Windows exclusively on it. Thus making it nothing more than another Windows system. The capabilities you refer to are software based.
0 Votes
+ -
Faulty reasoning
LTV10 Updated - 7th Jan 2011
You were always free to use something else. But that didn't stop the ABMers from faulting Microsoft. How is this any different

@banned at zdnet didn't even bring Micro$oft up in his response. Why are you doing this now? Unless you're NZ's sock puppet. No?

I believe he said he owns an MBP and runs Windows exclusively on it. Thus making it nothing more than another Windows system. The capabilities you refer to are software based.

One of the more irrational, idiotic statements he's made here. Only a moron would go out an buy a MBP, wipe it clean of OSX and put win7 on it. And only clueless idiots would believe such a tale.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Readers speak out on the future of digital music:
ShamooToo 6th Jan 2011
@NonZealot

A company's products and brand do not constitute a monopoly in and of itself, no matter how popular it becomes. That's like saying Sony had a monopoly on the Trinitron back in the 80s or Microsoft did with Windows back in the 90s - just because they're proprietary products and services that are doing well. For today's music, you can choose the Zune as an alternative integrated solution (with as much music store choice) or Amazon etc. and any other player/phone. Where's the monopoly? How is Apple disabling free choice or putting up obstructive roadblocks? Serious question. Asking for details...

The point of monopoly could have been argued against Microsoft in the 90s to present as you had to pay for Windows whether or not you used it on any PC. No such thing with the Apple dominance. Ironic to your point, the only alternative to PCs was Apple. You simply cannot buy an OEM PC without paying into a Windows license, even if you don't intend to use Windows. Fact. Please look it up. Unless you build a "Frankensystem" and put Linux on it, which most serious PC users really should do, you are still putting money in Microsoft's pockets. You are not putting any money in Apple's when you buy an Android phone or Zune and use another music service. Also a fact.

Apple does well because they understand ecosystems and end-to-end integration where the product is worth more than the sum of its parts. It burned Macheads when people mindlessly followed the PC route in droves for fear of being left with the betamax of the 90s. Nice or not, it was almost fair. It sucked, but where there was freewill (choice to not buy a Mac) it was fair as most Macs sucked until the late 90s. Guess what changed? Not just Steve Jobs, but the philosophy he ushered in. He just embodies it. Ironic to see those that played with fire getting burned by the same path of least resistance. Barring the point about the 'Windows' default purchases on OEM PCs (regardless of desire or use of Windows), it's almost entirely the same. The sword swings both ways.

What is criminal is that Microsoft stole intellectual property from Apple in the late 80s and rose to unprecedented heights out of sheer ignorance. But nobody noticed until long after the crime and by then it was too late. Microsoft staying afloat by offering a better product and service though, was not criminal. It sucked for a lot of people, but that aspect was within rights and almost ethical. And as the market shows, there is no room for monopolies (or perceived monopolies) to exist in perpetuity. ...even when the law of the land turns its head. Innovation and great philosophy will win in the long run and raise the waterline for all of us.

We should be thankful to Apple and to a significant degree to Microsoft for greatly improving our lives. And when their offerings do not matter, seek services elsewhere or capitalize on the need for a better solution. Such is life. Restricting the right to thrive is death. Removing the right to steal is essential. Please know the difference.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Readers speak out on the future of digital music:
aep528 6th Jan 2011
@Angrypug

Are you referring to the intellectual property that Apple stole from Xerox that was then copied by Microsoft?

Keep in mind, the story goes that Apple stole the ideas from within Xerox PARC and MS just copied a released product. Big difference in my mind, if true.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Readers speak out on the future of digital music:
ShamooToo Updated - 6th Jan 2011
@ aep528

No. I am referring to the code used originally in Windows - we all know the Pirates of Silicon Valley story. Xerox->Apple->Microsoft where licensing agreements were convoluted/misinterpreted etc. I refer to the actual specific code that MS had access to and stole - not the GUI. In fact, if one wanted to split hairs, the idea of GUI was created by a scientist in the 40s at a highly conceptual level, 25+ years before Xerox PARC. Please research it.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Readers speak out on the future of digital music:
DannyO_0x98 5th Jan 2011
Twenty years back Wal-Mart dictated cover art to the industry. Forty-some years back, a single could climb no higher than twenty-something on the charts if the RKO stations didn't program it. Selling music was always a tough business. I suspect focusing on Apple, its modern-day transistor radio, and its music store misses large complexities in the music business. The record companies always have had to pay attention to gatekeepers of sort. (If you want figure out why not Zune, look to Hollywood's fear of ditching Apple to get Microsoft.) As I argued earlier, today's digital store depends on a license to sell in a way the retail store of yore did not. A rights-holder may pull their tracks from iTMS any time they choose to not renew a contract. AC/DC and its recording company haven't gotten seven bucks of my money because they are opting out. That is amazing: some smart people think that they make more money if they stay out the top retail store. I don't doubt their wisdom; this, though, bespeaks of something awry today.

I remind everyone of the skew and bubble that occurred in the 80s and 90s due to the Boomers. The stars of that era are still the top box office draws.

Music has always been a business of 19 failures being paid off by the one hit. Still, the Boomer and CD bubble fooled entertainment companies into thinking record labels were a value and the industry consolidated, artist rosters were reduced, and the few basket holders put their eggs in fewer baskets, which is problematic, because how do you know which is the correct 5% as you make your cuts?

Similar consolidation happened in radio, and the exposure of regional break-out music, which helped the record industry find new acts or even profitable one-hit wonders from the 1950s through the late-1970s, ended. Being another seat at the big corporate owner's table next to television networks and film studios discouraged risk, and taking risk is the key common factor among the Record Men who built the major labels in the vinyl LP era.

In short, no matter what, the major labels were in trouble circa 2000, regardless of infringements and, shortly, the iTMS insistence on $0.99 singles. I also think the RIAA and the songwriters did the NAB (radio broadcasters) a favor by supporting expensive statutory fees on internet broadcasters, and the NAB sold them out by playing less new music. I think semi-amateur internet broadcasting, run by fans, could have brought exposure to regional and niche talent and helped the labels find the 5% they needed. Now the record companies want money from the radio stations for playing the records: I think the economics are obvious. Less new music will be programmed if that goes through, but it's clear, the record companies really think their bread and butter is catalog and they spend devote their creativity to figuring out new licensing streams from it.

Edison cylinder to 78 to hand-cranked Victrola to Electric Phonograph to 45 to LP to Transistor Radio to 8-Track to Cassette to CD to MP3 to iPod. I see a chain of increasing convenience for the music listener. In the meantime the old ways are disappearing and the music industry, again, is not feeling sanguine about current disruptions.

Long-term prospects, in my opinion, require big risks and throwing heart and soul into getting new music into the ears and lives of new fans.

Apple and streams? Only if these guys running the record labels agree and I don't see them doing that, right now, unless they get pay per play, or advertising rights, and restrictions on users as to ownership and which device may be used. Maybe Amazon or Netflix might agree to that and Apple follows. Maybe Apple first. Maybe Paul Allen will say he patented it.

If I had Zune-lust, perhaps I would have consulted my Magic 8-Ball(TM) [Does it have a film deal yet?]. Hang on. Checking. "Reply hazy, try again." Now that's economy in writing.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Readers speak out on the future of digital music:
james347 5th Jan 2011
A mess only if you don't know what you are doing.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Readers speak out on the future of digital music:
ShamooToo 6th Jan 2011
@james347

Amen brother James!

The problem is not that Apple is what it is, but that there aren't more of them in existence. Anyone could have got there first (meaning mass market adoption), but no one did. Apple's demonstrated it time and again by not always being first, but almost always being best. If I were a significant part of one of these competing companies and took my career seriously, I'd have some humility about it. I'd respectfully look at the situation without smoke & mirrors, piss & vinegar and either improve the situation or move on and join or form another company where I could.

That's the point more people should examine on a personal level too. Understand what makes a champion and you may be one too. The alternative of taking the position is all around us every day. Do the right thing without trying to take away from others (or regardless of others) and you'll succeed. Moan and complain, looking for trampled bodies' schemes and you'll get what you create. World's what we make it. happy
0 Votes
+ -
Bilking the end user, again
dzdrazil 6th Jan 2011
It's strange how Apple charges near-retail prices for cd downloads- in fact, the same day the Beatles came to iTunes, you could order the physical cd from Amazon for cheaper; not only could you then rip the cd into iTunes and have a physical backup, but the same is true for many of the downloadable albums on Amazon as well- some albums as much as 20% cheaper. On top of that, you're free to do what you want, not be stuck with iTunes crap formats.
I don't think I'll ever understand why people spring for so-called convenience of Apple products when there is (almost) always a superior alternative... Digital Music will have no clear path forward as long as consumers allow themselves to be offered the lowest common denominator of experiences as the only option.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Readers speak out on the future of digital music:
ShamooToo 6th Jan 2011
@dzdrazil

You're absolutely right, if it's a situation an end user will not tolerate. Exercise your right and be sure you're honest with yourself even when you're using one of your favorite technology or lifestyle services (trendy or 'alternative'). The reason you can't "see it" though, doesn't not mean that it doesn't exist as valid for some or isn't more dynamic than what you perceive? Value is often arbitrary. People buy bottled water too, even when their tap water is a better money value or health option. I think they're foolish, waste resources and are mindless trend joiners but won't break my neck to dissuade or "correct" them - until I see them throwing their f^@$!*g empty bottles in my yard or in our public park. ...then it's open season! >-)

If no real victim, then no real crime.
0 Votes
+ -
crap format
banned from zdnet Updated - 6th Jan 2011
@dzdrazil
you understand that the industry standard aac-format that apple uses is the successor to the age-old mp3-format that amazon uses, developed by the same consortium? so that there is no "itunes crap format" only a standard compliant, much more modern, efficient aac-codec?

well, never mind, why would you care. keep your baseless, uninformed, clueless preconceptions. at zdnet you are welcome.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Readers speak out on the future of digital music:
Vesicant 6th Jan 2011
@banned from zdnet What do "industry standard" and "standards compliant" have to do with crapness? Compression formats like MP3 and AAC aren't good for music -- that's why dzdrazil is right.
0 Votes
+ -
agreed
banned from zdnet 7th Jan 2011
@Vesicant
both are compressed formats thus not ideal for audiophiles. but the clueless idiot probably thinks that aac is an apple format and worse then mp3 (while it is clearly superior), or closed, or proprietary or whatever FUD buzzword he heard or read somewhere.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Readers speak out on the future of digital music:
MG537 6th Jan 2011
@dzdrazil
While amazon has good prices on books and e-books and I use their services, I am not buying any reduced price CD's from them. I've had two negative experiences with their re-sellers and their product never arrived. To Amazon's credit they reimbursed me the full amount. However the hassle of waiting for over two months for the actual product to arrive did it for me. I now buy my CD's from actual brick and mortar stores.
I also believe that iTunes AAC format is low quality, just like Amazon's MP3 formats (that's why I still buy CD's). I have audiophile equipment in my house and would never dream of playing compressed formats in my living room. However I do have two iTunes libraries one residing on my desktop in AAC format for syncing to my iPhone and one residing on a NAS in my basement in Apple Lossless format, to stream to my audio system. I use iTunes in the latter case just as a library management and music tagging system. In that sense, iTunes does a wonderful job for me.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Readers speak out on the future of digital music:
raweb 7th Jan 2011
@MG537 But you said you buy CDs, so what uncompressed sources do you use in your living room? Or did you not realize that CDs are compressed? There are audiophile options that are well worth the effort.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Readers speak out on the future of digital music:
Vesicant 6th Jan 2011
Exactly when did digital music come to mean MP3 and nothing but MP3? I'm pretty sure (sarcasm) that my 25 year old CDs are digital.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Readers speak out on the future of digital music:
raweb Updated - 7th Jan 2011
@Vesicant Yes, indeed they are. But the semantics of an industry are important to follow. "digital" implies file-based these days. Best get used to it. Although, yes, MP3s are just one format.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Readers speak out on the future of digital music:
raweb Updated - 7th Jan 2011
Anyone who approaches their digital music solution as an all-or-nothing "ecosystem" isn't going to be happy more than the first few minutes of their new solution's life. Use the products that address your needs/desires/likes. Look for alternatives and adapt when appropriate. iTunes does certain things really really well. iPods & iPhones are what they are. Some people want them to be can openers, so they're disappointed. So be it. What's with all this chest-thumping?

Who's a great new band in your town? That's what I'd like to hear.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

Blog Roll

Blog Archive

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix