It’s funny how sometimes the planets all align to make something I want quite irresistable.
First, the player of my dreams is within grasp.
Then, engadget posts a really great interview with the Napster CEO Chris Gorog, basically introducing me to and selling me on Napster to Go.
I’d never heard of Napster to Go before – for those in the same boat, here’s the concept:
-You pay $15/mo to access unlimited DRM music from the Napster database.
-As long as you keep paying your monthly fee, the music keeps playing on up to 3 computers and 3 mp3 players. The licenses expire whenever you cancel your subscription.
-If you want to burn any of the music, it’s $0.99/track or $9.95/album, ensuring you keep it forever.
At first I thought that it’s a bit of a ripoff, not owning the music I’d be paying $15/mo to access.
Then I thought about the couple hundred CDs sitting in my living room collecting dust. I haven’t actually listened to any of them in a loooooooong time. In fact, I rarely buy CDs anymore unless it’s something I really want, not because I don’t want to spend the money, but because I don’t want another thing sitting around collecting dust. If I really wanted to keep any of the music, $10 is absolutely reasonable to purchase an album.
I think Gorog is absolutely right in thinking that Napster to Go will absolutely change the way we think about music “ownership.” Once I’ve picked up the player, I’ll sign up for the 2 week trial, and let you know how it goes.
hmm. I rarely buy cd’s, and when I do, it’s only to support artists that I particularly like. Then, they get dumped in my parents basement with the rest of my 200+ cd collection.
However, I still listen to them all, because I have a 15gb mp3 collection. I buy the CD, rip it to mp3, and toss it in a box. (Or, as is frequently the case, buy the cd and toss it in a box without even opening it, as I’ve usually already downloaded the album… heh.)
I don’t think napster to go would work for me. I don’t always buy a CD every month, they currently seem to have a somewhat limited selection (signed artists only), and while the concept of subscribing to music seems interesting… I think I’m too old fashioned. I want to own my music, not rent it.
Besides, it’s a dotcom — what happens if/when it goes belly up in a year? You end up with squat. 🙁
And, as mentioned previously, I intensely dislike the idea of mp3’s with copy protection. I’m going to go with the old fashioned thing again.
I don’t mind copy protection. I agree that the artists need to be paid for their music somehow. So I’m ok with paying for access to music. I think this is a great example of thinking outside of the box for on-demand access to music. I’ve paid for access to cable FM, people subscribe to XFM – there isn’t really any difference here. And in any case, it seems like a happy medium to a really polarized issue with the existing solutions so far (either pay for every song, or do something illegal) going nowhere fast.
Very interesting. I love to visit Virgin, but Im not buying anymore. A big part of it is that there are now 15,000 worthwhile music stations on the net.
The $15 (CDN?) a month is good, if they have enough stuff. Do they have everything, or just some stuff. If you are limited in away, then… Hmmm
Like you, I have no CDs laying around anymore… nor books, nor anything else that can easily be found on the net. The downside is that I now have three Screens in my living room when I am home.
That bothers me quite a bit actually.