The Good, the Bad, the Stupid of

2003: To absolutely no one’s surprise, a music downloading company is taking a run at the iTunes Music Store. When you’re top dog (or the only dog), people come knocking. Needless to say, yesterday’s announcement by to bring music downloading to the Windows masses sparked an interesting round of articles.

Mac Scope

There’s good, bad, and stupid in the foray into the music downloading business. ( is owned by

The Bad beats Apple to the Windows downloading punch. While Apple is surely moving as fast as possible to port iTunes to Windows, they clearly weren’t fast enough. Personally, I’m not entirely convinced that the first mover will always win out in the end. Apple anyone? rides Apple’s coattails. While imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, compete emulation isn’t exactly a good thing. Buy is coming as close a possible to the Apple ads as they can and muddying the waters. On the upside, the confusion could work in Apple’s favor when they roll out their own Windows music service.

The Good

Competition is a good thing. has emerged to at least move Apple’s feet closer to the fire. I’m fairly certain that won’t be Apple’s main problem. There are other services that probably have more potential than attracts new users to paid music downloads. This is a good thing because will be the company that pours out the money to get the new Windows users. Each new Windows user is a potential Apple Music Store customer once iTunes for Windows is ready. When Apple rolls out the iTunes Music Store for Windows, these folks will likely follow the better user experience.

The Stupid

Bravado is a requirement when you’re taking on the big boys, and Scott Blum seems to have that in spades. Hidden away in the chest-thumping rhetoric are these stupid things about

It’s not compatible with the iPod. It seems a bit amusing that Scott accuses Jobs of being on the wrong platform when he is rolling out a service that doesn’t work with 50% of the portable music players on the market. That would be the iPod.

Varying restrictions on downloaded songs. I’m not certain how selling a similar commodity with different restrictions is going to help the consumer. Place your bets, people. How many users will be fed up with figuring out what tunes they can copy and play where by the end of the first year?

Cost is the only thing that matters. From the sound of things, cost seems to be where Scott wants everyone focusing their attention. However, what Scott doesn’t realize is that the user experience counts for a great deal. Price is nice, but if I have to figure out which songs have which copying restrictions and work with which players, well, I’ll willingly pay an extra 20¢ a song. (And not all songs are 79¢.)

Once users find out that things aren’t as easy as they seem, they’ll look elsewhere. Like the Apple Music Store.

keywords: #itunesstore #buymusic

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.