What does DRM-free mean for iPod sales?
January 8, 2009 by Martin Hoscik · 3 Comments
With this week’s news that Apple are to convert their entire iTunes catalogue to non-DRM status, allowing tracks to be played on other brands of media players, I find myself wondering what this means for the future of iPod sales.
I know it’s heresy in the eyes of many, but I’ve always suspected sales of iPods owed less to the success of iPods as an experience (expensive, poor battery life) and more to do with the fact that as the first major legal download service iTunes was a runaway success and people them realised they needed the tied hardware to play their purchases on.
I’m a great Apple fan, I’m writing this on my dependable old iBook G4, but it seems to me the company doesn’t really have a lot of experience of dealing with competition – if you want an iPhone in most major markets you go to the mobile network Apple selected for you, if you wanted to play iTunes purchases you bought an iPod and if you want to run Max OS you buy a Mac from Apple.
The DRM-free development means people will suddenly be able to play their iTunes purchases on a Walkman or Creative Zen – many of which are cheaper and at least as well specced than Apple’s devices.
Plus of course many more people will be able to give up carrying around a separate and use the media player features in their mobile of smartphone.
None of this is knock Apple or diminish from the innovation they’ve brought to the world of music downloads but in a world where people have less money to spend Apple might have to rethink some aspects of their range, starting with the specs of their entry-level model.
Without the benefit of content exclusivity how attractive will a £30, 1GB iPod shuffle look if shopping around can get you a higher specced machine for an extra £15 or £20 quid?
Of course, this relies on other media player makers advertising their products and ending the sales-killing practice of not bundling Mac-synching software. I wonder how many people realise the Walkman brand which revolutionised their listening habits in the 80’s is still around in this age of digital music?
I think you’re right comments about Apple never having to deal with competition.
That said I think there are a number of reasons why Apple and the iPod brand will survive:
+ to a lot of people an mp3 player IS an iPod…
+The brand and status of the product is suitably fashionable to make it the defacto mp3 player… an iPod is a fashion item, people will spend that bit more to have one. Zen Creative Labs just doesn’t sound hip
+ They still stand head and shoulders above the competition in terms of UI and build quality… iPods feels “designed” most other gadgets and mp3 players feel like they have been “manufactured.
I also think your wrong to think that people buy iPod’s for iTunes… true maybe some tech savvy people realise you can’t have iTunes without an iPod but I get the feeling people want an iPod first and foremost.
That said no doubt this will make a differance and their will be people who will hunt out a bargain… personally I would suggest they are getting an inferior product.
I’ve got a slightly different take on this. As, being a Luddite, I haven’t used iTunes, or any music download service for that matter!
Given the number of CDs I’ve got (let alone vinyl) I’ve got enough music as it is to handle.
My first MP3 player was a Tesco Technika brand. Only £10, and let me dip my toe in the water.
Next was a 1Gb Walkman NW-E013F.
Now I have a 4Gb iPod Nano, courtesy of my girlfriend.
Whilst I still use the Walkman (mainly for it’s built-in radio), all the more recent digitisations have gone on the iPod.
It may have inferior specs per pound, but the whole package is stylish. Plus I can tell people what MP3 player I’ve got without having to read the label on the back of it for the model number.
I’m glad that Apple have decided to can DRM, as that has been one of the issues putting me off downloading music.
With a CD, I can bung it into virtually any device and play it, subject to conversion. With DRM, I’m stuck with one website or manufacturer. Which is barmy.
I can’t help thinking that Apple’s change of heart is more to do with fending off pending anti-competitive legal proceedings than genuine concern for users.
But it’s a start.
And let’s be honest – whilst a number of record companies and manufacturers were sticking their heads in the sand, Apple were probably the one company that made the download market viable.
“And let’s be honest – whilst a number of record companies and manufacturers were sticking their heads in the sand, Apple were probably the one company that made the download market viable.”
Yes Apple were lucky (or clever enough) to get in their first, hats off to them. Though I’ve read over the years that the record companies have wanted to go back on the original deal they had with apple and have wanted to push up the price of downloads