$1 per Zune Tune
2pnet.net News:- Following Wal-Mart’s advertising faux pas when it announced Microsoft Zune music player would hit the shelves at $284, Bill and the Boyz say it’ll go out at a loss-leading $250.
With the same amount of storage as the iPod, it’ll sell for $1 more when it goes on sale November 14, “at a price matching Apple Computer Inc.’s market-leading iPod and, as a result, [will] lose money this holiday season,” says Reuters.
Microsoft will try to hawk its DRM-loaded songs at the same rip-off amount as iTunes —– $1 per —— and will also be peddling a Zune Pass rental service, which’ll “let” ( like Microsoft is doing its marks a favour) punters listen to any of about 2 million songs for $15 a month, says the Associated Press, adding:
“Microsoft is hoping to differentiate itself from the iPod by including wireless technology to let people share some of their favorite songs, playlists or pictures with other Zune users who are close by.
“The other users can then listen to the songs three times over three days before deciding whether to purchase the tune themselves.”
Also See:
advertising faux pas – Wal-Mart leaks Zune price, September 26, 2006
Reuters – Microsoft sets $250 price for Zune, songs for 99 cts, September 27, 2006
Associated Press – Microsoft to charge $249.99 for Zune, September 28, 2006
p2pnet newsfeeds for your site.
rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss
Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
September 28th, 2006 at 5:25 pm
The general public is too ignorant/apathetic/stupid to realize when they “buy” something off iTunes, they are only renting it until their computer crashes, at which point all their music is lost. The same goes for this microsoft player. I can only listen to a track I got from a friend 3 times over 3 days? How dumb is that? Had they just burned me a CD, I could listen to it forever.
September 28th, 2006 at 7:22 pm
“…by including wireless technology to let people share some of their favorite songs, playlists or pictures with other Zune users who are close by.”
Oh yes, I can just imagine how many OTHER Zune users are gonna be close by.. what a neat feature!
September 28th, 2006 at 8:29 pm
Who wants one? Supposedly this was made to compete with the Apple iPod. With the restrictions and additional default insertion of DRM to everything, M$ has missed the boat on the completion by that limitation. The minor price difference between the two players is far overwhelmed by the limited functions that hobble the Zune. No one in their right mind is going to want this player when word gets out. This will be yet another failed attempt because of the cartel concerns.
I know for sure that I won’t be buying one. I also predict that at some point in the future M$ will have to deal with a lawsuit involving Creative Commons licensing and the default addition of DRMing everything that crosses it’s path. They can keep this player, I’ll keep my money as this one isn’t worth a penny much less the $250 they want to introduce the Zune at. You know of course that isn’t going to be the end price of this player because they can’t sell it at a loss forever.
Bowing to the cartels wishes have ruined any chance this one had to make it as a major player, M$ support or no.
*Second attempt at validation and back on the wagon of no posting till something is done that will allow us to distinguish between characters. It is just to frustrating to continue going through this at near every post.
September 29th, 2006 at 9:59 am
“Oh yes, I can just imagine how many OTHER Zune users are gonna be close by.. what a neat feature!”
A neat feature to become an “authorized” copyright infringer.
RIAA says sharing is infringement. Some artists and songwriters agree. The courts agree. I do not agree, but that is moot at present.
But the basic copyright of a song belongs to the creator. That is what the Copyright Act says. Sure, many songwriters have been suckered and gave away the rights to publishers who are the new controllers.
So if the song on a Zune is one of the many songs that are still controlled by the songwriter and the songwriter did not authorize copying for free and that songwriter agrees with RIAA that sharing is infringement, then in the view if that songwriter the sharing by Zune is infringement and the courts would have to agree.
Now, the fact that the free sharing may increase revenues for the songwriter is moot, as the courts are not there to reason, but to do as the masters request and the master is RIAA and RIAA says sharing is infringement.
After all, Microdoft cannot authorize free copies if the creator owner of the songs have not given authorization to Microsoft to allow such a thing. A major problem being that the free copies are allowed by Microsoft hardware, not he songwriter for the songs or legislation or a prior court decision.
As the publisher of hundreds of songs, Iam worried by the added complication (more lawsuits) this will bring to the already deeply hurt (by the RIAA lawsuits) music culture and business.
Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com