Books

Books
Books written by Ray Sullivan
Showing posts with label Apple iTunes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Apple iTunes. Show all posts

Sunday, 26 July 2015

How to break a record

Struggling with the latest incarnation of iTunes has become a bit of a habit here. I don't use Apple but my wife does, and has loaded our CD collection onto her iPod over time. It didn't come as a surprise the other day that she struggled to load three CDs she'd received for her birthday as the goalposts seem to move every few months, but this time the challenge seemed to have her beaten.

A chance remark pointed us to the real culprit, though. For once it wasn't Apple attempting to be over-clever with their software updates, it was just Apple attempting to comply with the law. Before my international readers start panicking, this currently is a British problem only, but I guess the moral is international in nature, so may come to bite non-British readers too.

Until fairly recently, in the UK at least, it wasn't legal to make copies of recorded music without the copyright holder's permission. This was enshrined in laws created decades before MP3s and digital recordings were invented and to be honest nobody took them seriously. Of course there were some people who took the proverbial Michael out of the situation and copied music wholesale, sometimes for gain, sometimes just because they could. Some have been prosecuted, most probably haven't. The music industry has been very active in pursuing these people over the years, and as the owner of copyright material (books) I have some empathy with them.

However many people just made copies for their own use, to pop in the car for example, initially on a cassette tape, later by burning a full or MP3 copy to CD. Of course many also made occasional copies to give to their friends and this really freaked out the music industry, which for decades had cashed in big time on music sales. There were a few ways the music industry could have attacked this problem.

One way could have been to make their products more affordable and attractive - in the mid nineties a CD typically cost £15 to buy. When burning CDs became an affordable option many people made counterfeit copies, most of which had the artist and album name scribbled on with a Sharpie. I'm guessing that in a perfect world nobody would choose such an offering over a professionally produced CD, but £15 versus £0.50 makes the decision easier. Now if the industry had reduced the average cost to £7 or less then many folk would have chosen to buy the prime product every time. Would it have eradicated copies? No way, we would still like to make our 'disposable' copy for the car, some people would never accept a price that was low enough (and probably wouldn't have bought the original anyway), and just because the technology existed it would be used.

But the price differential made the deal a no-brainer in many people's eyes. Arguably the record industry pricing structure encouraged piracy. The alternate approach, the one pursued by the industry, was to sue. They had, and retain, a legal right to protect their property. It didn't work, piracy became rife and was followed by music streaming services and the likes of iTunes. I suspect that more reasonably priced products would have delayed the iTunes era but wouldn't have prevented it.

Today artists use recordings to promote tours, which is where they make their money as opposed to the seventies where touring was a loss making process to promote record sales. I don't think the new music business model is universally popular with musicians but they seem to have accepted that the earth turns, sun rises, world changes. Of course the recording industry doesn't get much out of this new world order, so they are far from happy.

Last year the UK government overhauled its copyright legislation to account for the massive changes we've witnessed and part of that legislation actually enshrined the right to copy music you had bought purely for your own consumption. All other copying rightfully remained illegal, but the copying of music paid for and owned was enshrined in law for the first time ever.

However the music industry, in concert with the Musician's Union, have challenged the government's legislation in the courts and recently the UK High Court agreed with them that the government hadn't considered their rights sufficiently. Consequently copying music for your own use from media you have paid for is now not only illegal, it is explicitly illegal as opposed to being implicitly illegal. That is why Apple won't let us copy our own music to the iPod.

Will this help the music industry? Unlikely, apart from the point that most CD collections are already in iTunes somewhere the law only stops ethical organisations like Apple from explicitly assisting in breaking the law, whereas most of us still retain suitable software to rip CDs to MP3 for use on less constrictive environments than Apple's (at minimal risk of prosecution). Out and out pirates will be unbothered by the change in the law as their activities were already outside of it. What the industry has done is provide another compelling reason to not buy CDs, which although now much better priced than they used to be, are still more lucrative than the download royalties.  Of course we may all start downloading and streaming like crazy, but then again some might decide it's a change too far and just stop buying music.

We can just get our fix from our extensive CD libraries and by going to gigs. Musicians hopefully will continue to find ways to compensate them for their artistry. The guys and gals who add value to music through artwork, design and packaging are going to find work even harder to make a living and the fat cats who add little value will now slim down. For the record I'm hopeful I'm right about the musicians, sad about the value adding people and couldn't give a stuff about the fat cats, who I suspect initiated this latest episode.

With luck the case will go to the Supreme Court and get reversed or the government will redraft the legislation to suit the courts' requirements. Or maybe the music industry will just get some common sense. I for one won't make the same mistakes made by the record companies with my books. Sure, when you buy one or more of my books only a percentage of your hard earned cash makes its way to me and in some cases, for example Amazon, the majority goes to people who had no input whatsoever in the crafting of the books. Notwithstanding I endeavour to keep the costs down and at the time of writing this post all of my books can be obtained for the cost of one CD, at least as long as CDs continue to exist.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------                                                         
Visit my Book Website here



    


        Follow me on Twitter  - @RayASullivan

Thursday, 17 July 2014

Apple out of touch

Like many households we've become locked into the Apple ecosystem.  Not me personally, I'm a bit of a rogue running an Android phone, an Android 7" tablet and a Windows 8 Surface RT tablet, so I'm spreading the love across two operating systems myself.  My wife is the Apple user, with both the iPad and the iPhone.

It was the iPad first, if my memory serves me correctly, followed by the iPhone.  Earlier adopters will have bought the iPad second, but it's all the same as far as locking-in is concerned. Part of me struggles with the locking in part - I'm toying with the idea of moving over to a Windows 8 phone when my contract comes up for renewal later this year. Because I'm not tied completely to either Android or Microsoft I can swap around as much as my contract allows me.

Apple users, though, struggle with this lack of loyalty, and with good reason. Apple were first to the post with a joined up ecosystem, linking devices together so that photos taken on the iPad appeared almost instantly on the iPhone and vice versa. Same with their calendar, music and, of course, apps. Now I've blogged about this a few times previously, but the ecosystem appears to be more dysfunctional than ever. Photos are very sticky, once in almost impossible to remove, so the photo library grows and grows, to the point that my wife has deleted virtually all her musice from her iPhone to accommodate the photos. Moving music seems harder than we remember it, too. Initially my wife used to use her iPhone like a juke box, changing songs to suit her mood and season. As her phone is only 16gb versus the iPad 32gb she always had to take care not to bust her storage, but in the last year or so that has become almost impossible. As her phone contract is up later this year she has mooted changing to a non-Apple product, but then the crisis regarding the ecosystem always crops up.

But now it seems that Apple have come up with a potential solution, albeit unintentionally. They've just revamped their iPod Touch MP3 players, dropping the price a tad while upping the spec. They've also added some colour to the devices, so that may please some potential buyers. The biggest improvement, apart from price, is the inclusion of a 5mb camera. So users could pick up a larger capacity iPod - they go up to 64gb - so all of your photos, music and diary events could be stored on the one device, it could become the go-to camera to carry around, it can share with the iPad and the iCloud.

And users would be free to go with whatever phone, based on whatever OS they wanted. Which is good news for Android and Windows 8 phones, because that is probably where Apple customers will go as soon as their phone contract is up.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------                                                         
Visit my Book Website here


 
    
    Visit Project: Evil Website here                                        Visit DLF Website here

        Follow me on Twitter  - @RayASullivan

        Join me on Facebook -  use raysullivan.novels@yahoo.com to find me

Sunday, 16 June 2013

iTunes Races Ahead

There's a lot of competition for your music spends these days.  Apple started it with iTunes, but there's plenty of others wanting a slice of the action.  Google are hustling their Google Play, Amazon want to sell us music and Microsoft, through its Xbox Music is making a pitch, though it's far from pitch perfect.  It's a tough market to break into.

For example I've been playing around with Xbox Music for the last month, seeing as it comes pre-loaded on the Microsoft RT as an app.  It seems pretty comprehensive in its range of music, although that is difficult to gauge without being able to compare lists.  You only know what you know, and I've only looked for what I've wanted to find.  I guess evaluating music streaming services puts Donald Rumsfeld's statement 'there are things we know we don't know, and things we don't know that we don't know' into sharp relief, and seems more relevant somehow.

There are gaps, though.  There are some artists I have a lot of material of in my collection, and some of the albums I'd like to see on Xbox music seem to be missing.  But right now I'm having a ball looking up artists and albums from my youth that I've only got on vinyl - as I write this I'm listening to a group called 'The Undisputed Truth' that got hi-jacked by one of the most under-rated talents ever to come out of Motown, Norman Whitfield.  Norman was a writer and producer, who produced some of Motown's most adventurous music, most notably with The Temptations, but it was through groups like the Undisputed Truth that he found he was able to extend his creative talents.  Thanks to Xbox music I'm catching up on their discography.

It's far from perfect, though.  Sometimes it only plays one or two tracks even though I've told it to play the album.  That gets a little frustrating.  In addition there does appear to be track skipping, as if the streamed recording is from a dodgy CD.  Of course, because I'm only using the free version I have to put up with the occasional advert, which is usually ten or so seconds plugging an obscure new artist.  Additionally they stop streaming every so often, just to remind me that there is a paid service I could use. I have to accept, grudgingly, that is the price cheapskates like myself have to consider sometimes.

But the leader of the streaming pack has to be iTunes.  They've just announced that they are currently adding about half a million new iTunes accounts a day and that they are on track to have added over 100 million new accounts this year by year end.  It's the volume of accounts that give Apple the revenue they seem to love.  It seems that each iTunes account, and there are over 500 million of them now, generate about $3.20 a month for each account, on average.  Clearly some households buy more music than mine does.  It's probably Bruce Willis skewing the figures.  It seems that he's not suing Apple, by the way.  It's not in dispute that he's unhappy that his extensive iTunes collection reverts to Apple when he dies, but he's not taking the legal route to sort it out with them.  Having seen how he sorts out organisations that piss him off in the Die Hard series I'm really keen to see the next step in this long running dispute.

Anyway, some analysts think the revenue per account is cause for concern because it's about half the revenue each account generated back in 2009.  Back then there was a paltry 100 million accounts - hell, I wouldn't get out of bed for numbers like that, let alone write a daily blog.  Get your counting fingers out and you'll soon realise that 500 million times $3.20 is a not unreasonable $1,600,000,000 a month, whereas $6.40 times 100 million is about 2.5 times less.  I had to double check the numbers because it seems a mind boggling amount even for Apple, but of course they only skim a profit off that and pay the owners of the music the bulk. However if those numbers do represent the state of the download music industry then it's clearly healthier than it cracks on to be.

It's difficult to imagine Google, Amazon or Microsoft, and all three are major players in the industry, making any serious inroads into iTunes anytime soon.  None of those have built up an infrastructure that challenges iTunes' ecosystem.  Microsoft might be on the right track - giving the music away initially to rope you in.  Their paid for service, at less than £90 a year which seems to allow you to download albums to listen to off-line too, isn't too expensive either.  As long as they can stop the tracks skipping and improve the range of albums available, then I might consider paying for a subscription.

In the meantime, I think Apple can breathe easy.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                          Visit my Book Website here



        Visit Project: Evil Website here                                        Visit DLF Website here

        Follow me on Twitter  - @RayASullivan

        Join me on Facebook -  use raysullivan.novels@yahoo.com to find me