last100 » Audio

Ubuntu One Music Store – The new iTunes?

David Gilson — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 14:12:16 +0000

Cannonical enters the music market

Cannonical are making some interesting moves with respect to making their desktop Linux distribution, Ubuntu, more friendly to mainstream users. They now have a Dropbox like service called Ubuntu One. Of which, the short term goal is to sync users’ files and application settings, via the cloud, across all of their Ubuntu computers.

Further to this, it seems that Cannonical clearly has aspirations to deliver DRM free music to desktop users. They have already given a vague outline of incorporating an ‘Ubuntu One Music Store’ into their default music player, RhythmBox. An alpha tester, “Popey”, of Ubuntu’s next desktop release, 10.04 “Lucid Lynx”, has already blogged that Cannonical are likely to use 7digital as the back-end for this service (link). He has also blogged that RhythmBox has been prepared to both: feature the music store, and look for MP3 tracks stored on users’ UbuntuOne drive (link). The latter means that when a user buys music from the Ubuntu One Music Store, the MP3 files will be available to the user on any of his/her Ubuntu computers.

The final tantalising piece of the Puzzle is that another Ubuntu 10.04 alpha tester has reported that it is now possible to view tracks and playlists stored on his non-jailbroken iPhone.

If all of this comes to fruition, it is significant, and a bold play by Cannonical. Even if the iPhone compatibility doesn’t work out, there are plenty of other mass-storage compliant music players out there, including mobile phones, that would sync with the U1 Music Store, just like Apple hardware does with iTunes.

It is also worth considering how Apple might react to the hardware compatibility. It really depends on what level of intellectual property needed to be encroached upon to make Ubuntu and the iPhone talk to each other. Although, we saw Apple employ counter measures against Palm last year, when their “Pre” smart phone was made to sync with iTunes. Finally, Apple is currently demonstrating more than ever that it is not at all gun shy when it comes to litigating (rather than innovating).

---
Related Articles at last100:

People keep asking… what do I make of Apple’s iPad?

Steve O'Hear — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 19:03:34 +0000

Now that the dust has settled and I’ve had time to gather my thoughts, here’s what I make of the iPad, Apple’s own take on the tablet computer.

It’s an Internet appliance not a computer

While the tablet computer is nothing new, the iPad is, arguably, a completely new product category, which appears to occupy the middle ground between a smartphone and a laptop. If, of course, such a middle ground exists.

Unlike the raft of Windows Tablet PCs, which Bill Gates once claimed would be the future of personal computing, replacing the desktop and laptop, the iPad doesn’t appear to replace anything. It’s certainly too big to replace a smartphone. And it’s not capable of undertaking many tasks for which a laptop or desktop computer – read: fully-fledged desktop OS/applications and mouse/hardware keyboard – is required. But in many situations – web browsing and consuming content – the iPad is arguably better.

It’s a closed and tightly controlled platform (as I predicted), with Apple acting as gatekeeper in terms of hardware, software, applications and content. Good or bad, as a result the iPad won’t be plagued with many of the usability issues users of a more open and complex platform face (Windows/Mac OS etc.). Unlike desktop OSes, the UI/platform is also designed from the ground up to support touch input.

It’s not a computer in the traditional sense but an Internet appliance. People won’t buy the iPad instead of another computer but because it’s not a computer.

Only Apple could have built it

On one level, the iPad represents very little new from Apple, which is actually the point. It’s no more than a supersized iPod touch or iPhone without the phone. Based on the same OS, multi-touch UI, closed and controlled and dead easy to use app and content store (iTunes), best of class web browser (minus Flash of course), best of class PMP etc.

It builds on so much before it, only Apple could produce the iPad.

Not its individual parts, of course, but the sum of those parts, which are much, much greater. Who else designs the hardware, operating system, software and has a thriving eCommerce platform all completely integrated? And don’t underestimate in-app purchases. Not Google, not Microsoft or any OEM… That’s why Apple’s competitors and the media industry are shitting bricks.

It’s no surprise how much Amazon has invested in its own digital content strategy but right now Apple looks to be better positioned to be the Amazon of digital.

And the iPad is a huge part of this.

It’s not an eBook reader, it’s about convergence

Steve Jobs once said of dedicated eReaders: “It doesn’t matter how good or bad the product is, the fact is that people don’t read anymore”? And: “The whole conception is flawed at the top because people don’t ready anymore.”

Of course, he often dismisses a product category before unveiling Apple’s own take which “fixes” all of those problems.

But on this occasion, I don’t think the iPad represents a U-turn on Jobs’ part.

The iPad is no eReader both technically – no eInk – and conceptually. Sure you can read long form books on this device, just as you can on a smartphone or laptop, and some users will, but it’s not as suited to such a task as a dedicated eBook reader… but it doesn’t need to be to compete with devices like Amazon’s Kindle.

Because for many it will be just good enough.

The iPad is purely about convergence. It combines existing solutions to many existing problems in a single product tied to and built on Apple’s existing technology, design and ecosystem – the very same tech or way of thinking that solved many of those problems in the first place.

The fact that it’s not dedicated to eBook reading is why it will win out over such single function devices. And when Jobs said that people don’t read anymore, I took it as saying that the market for a single purpose eBook device wasn’t large enough for Apple to go after. Not that people don’t read. On the other hand, the market for people who read all sorts of content – long, short – on the web is huge, and the market for people who also like to watch movies, do a little email, view photos from friends, social network etc., is even greater

Apple doesn’t go after niche markets anymore. Not under Jobs’ watch.

Just like the best camera is the one that you have with you (think Nokia and Sony Ericsson’s success with camera phones, which also, err, make calls and do other stuff), the iPad is either fantastic or just good enough for many tasks in a single converged device that it will displace single purpose devices, such as the Kindle, or less well converged ones, such as Netbooks, for many tasks.

I repeat.

The iPad is all about convergence.

It’s not really a mobile device

The iPad isn’t really a mobile device. Not in the sense that the iPhone or any decent smartphone is. It’s not, primarily, for the journey, it’s for when you’ve arrived (to borrow a line from Mad Men). In that sense, I don’t think it competes with a smartphone as much as it seems. If Apple had invented an iPhone that could, upon the press of a button, triple in size, there’d be no need for an iPad.

But the company hasn’t.

Now, depending on what you want to get done once you’ve arrived, the iPad may or may not compete well with a laptop, the device it most closely impinges on.

It reflects as much as defines consumer behaviour

Perhaps the best way to describe what the iPad does best is Couch Computing, even though it’s not a computer in the traditional sense and you don’t have to be sat on the couch.

While over time it will likely influence consumer habits – think in-app purchases of content for newspapers and magazines and apps that nobody has dreamed up yet – as it stands today I think the iPad reflects a change in consumer behaviour whereby people access the Internet while doing other things. Such as checking email, looking up something on Wikipedia, reading news, Facebooking, while watching TV. Or while chatting to friends in the same room or on the phone or listening to music and texting on their mobile.

Teenagers, for example, multi-task all the time, and one ‘task’ is being online. Good or bad, that’s just how it is these days. The iPad fits this model of consumer behaviour.

It’s perfect for ‘casual’ anything online, while you’re doing other things.

Or Couch Computing.

It will sell really well and developers will flock to it

I’ve no doubt the iPad will sell really well. People tend to forget how well the iPod touch has done and the iPad will build on this and surpass it.

Developers are going to love the iPad, both in terms of how it stimulates their imagination but also that they can make real money on the device. The majority of the iPhone’s 140,000 apps will already run on the iPad, albeit compromised, and it won’t be long before lots of the killer apps are rewritten for the iPad. New apps that are only possible or suddenly make sense on a bigger screen will, of course, also be written.

The same way as the iPhone created the perfect storm for paid-for apps, the iPad isn’t cheap and nor will its customers be.

---
Related Articles at last100:

The Guardian newspaper’s iPhone app offers off-line mode – mobile Internet’s killer feature?

Steve O'Hear — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 21:57:24 +0000

The Guardian has released a paid-for iPhone (and iPod touch) app that makes reading the UK newspaper on Apple’s device a truly smartphone experience.

Along with features such as the ability to customize the newspaper’s ‘front page’, support for audio, finger-friendly navigation, including ’swiping’ through photo galleries, the feature that really stands out is off-line browsing.

As I write over at TechCrunch Europe, the functionality…

… works in a similar way to music streaming service Spotify’s own iPhone app. Sections of the newspaper can be ‘cached’ in advance to enable access when outside of a WiFi network or mobile signal. As with listening to music, this is particularly appropriate for reading a newspaper on-the-go, such as when commuting on London’s Underground or any other subway for that matter. The app also offers access to the various Guardian podcasts, which can be downloaded in advance or streamed.

Even though we are (slowly) moving towards a world where our data lives in the cloud and broadband access is ubiquitous, there are always going to be times when a reliable Internet connection simply isn’t possible. However, with mobile apps incorporating caching functionality, such as Spotify and now The Guardian’s offering, we’re seeing the lines being blurred between cloud-based and locally stored content. This hybrid approach, if the user experience is done right, has the potential to offer the best of both worlds.

Might an off-line mode be the mobile Internet’s killer feature?

---
Related Articles at last100:

3 and Spotify point to the future of music purchasing

Steve O'Hear — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:45:58 +0000

UK carrier 3 has teamed up with Spotify to offer a mobile tariff that includes a premium subscription, no ads and mobile usage, for the popular European (US launch pending) music streaming service. While the offer in itself is news worthy – it’s quite an attractive deal (more below) – perhaps more interesting is that the model may well point to the future of paid-for music.

Prior to 3’s offering, those wanting to utilize Spotify’s service on their handset were required to take out a premium subscription costing £10 per month in the UK. That’s quite high when competing against “free”, such as ad-supported offerings (including Spotify’s own, which prohibits mobile access) or illegal file downloads and the like.

However, by burying the premium subscription within a user’s monthly mobile tariff the service begins to enter the needed “feels like free” territory that self-proclaimed media futurist Gerd Leonhard has been talking about for years.

For £35 a month over 24 months, alongside an upfront fee of £99 for the handset (the very nice Android-driven HTC Hero – see my review) here’s what 3 are offering:

Unlimited Spotify Premium for 24 months (worth £240 at the non-bundled price of £10 per-month)
750 minutes to other mobiles
Unlimited texts
Unlimited 3 to 3 calls
Unlimited email, internet browsing and Facebook
Free Skype to Skype calls

Aside from paying an upfront cost for the HTC Hero, I think that’s a pretty good deal. My only real reservation is that I don’t like the move towards 24 month contracts, not because I particularly like to switch carriers but, being the early adopter I am, I like to upgrade my handset as soon as possible. On the other hand, for many users, a 24 month contract maybe a little easier to swallow while the music keeps playing. 3 have also hinted that the Hero is only the first handset to be offered with a bundled subscription to Spotify, and with a Symbian/S60 mobile app for the service just around the corner, I expect a range of Nokia phones on 3 to soon to be included.

As for the whole ‘feels like free’ mobile music space, 3 and Spotify’s offering will inevitably be compared to Nokia’s Comes With Music, which hasn’t exactly set the world on fire. However, CWM doesn’t offer a free version to hook users in and utilizes DRM in a much less user-friendly way. While Spotify does employs DRM, because it’s cloud-based (either streamed or cached rather than traditional downloads), the service can much more easily be used across multiple devices, Windows PC/Mac and on supported handsets.

---
Related Articles at last100:

7digital launches in the US, BlackBerry music download store provides the splash

Steve O'Hear — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 13:00:23 +0000

Like many British acts, UK-based music download service 7digital is hoping to conquer America. Today the company announced that its 6 million plus strong MP3 music store has opened its doors in the US, with tracked offered from Universal Music Group, Warner, EMI, Sony and an array independent labels.

To coincide and spearhead 7digital’s US launch, the company has also released the BlackBerry MP3 Music Store application for RIM’s latest range of smartphones (BlackBerry Bold, BlackBerry Curve 8900, BlackBerry Tour, BlackBerry Curve 8520 and BlackBerry Storm).

Tracks can be downloaded over over a cellular connection (GPRS, EDGE or 3G) in the lower 64kbs bit-rate MP3 format, for faster download and “instant” listening, and then when/if a Wi-Fi connection becomes available, the app automatically upgrades each track to a higher-quality 320kbps MP3.

The BlackBerry app is also able to access a 7digital user’s “digital locker” so that any previously purchased tracks can be re-downloaded when needed.

7digital has long been a proponent of DRM-free music, with CEO Ben Drury campaigning for and rightfully predicting the demise of copy protection in the download-to-own digital music space, while the US launch provides consumers across the pond with yet another DRM-free music option, with Apple’s iTunes, Amazon MP3, Napster, Best Buy, and others already operating in a very crowded market.

---
Related Articles at last100:

Spotify hits the iPhone and Android app stores

Steve O'Hear — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 11:57:32 +0000

The stars were already aligned: a preemptive PR strike, a premium business model, and regulators questioning anti-competitive practices with relation to the iPhone’s app store — making it less and less surprising that Apple should give Spotify the green light.

As of today, the iPhone version of the music streaming service is available for download from Apple’s official App Store — UK, Sweden, Spain, France, Norway and Finland only (with the U.S. debut planned for sometime next year) — while a mobile client for the Google-led Android has also launched. The app is free for either platform but you’ll need to be a Spotify premium subscriber — £10 per month in the UK — to access the service.

The key feature that sets Spotify apart from other music streaming services is the ability to play any track or album on-demand rather than at random within a particular genre or ‘artists similar to’. While the mobile version also one-ups its competitors by offering an off-line mode that caches play lists for when your phone is out of coverage or wireless is switched off. This means users can access the service while on the subway or a plane, for example, or utilize the feature to conserve battery life.

As I predicted, however, the iPhone version of Spotify has one major floor. Music can not be played in the background if a user switches applications. Not the fault of Spotify but a limitation imposed by Apple with relation to multitasking on the iPhone. Unsurprisingly, the Android version doesn’t suffer the same fate.

The is the first phase of Spotify’s ambitious mobile plans, with a version for Symbiam S60 (Nokia etc.) next, and a rumored tie-in with Hutchison Whampoa-owned carrier 3 and INQ Mobile, makers of the so-called Facebook and Twitter phones. The Really Mobile Project recently reported that Hutchison Whampoa “head honcho” Li Ka-shing has invested in Spotify and that INQ CEO Frank Meehan now sits on Spotify’s board.

Video demos of Spotify on iPhone and Andriod after the jump…

---
Related Articles at last100:

Nokia’s all-you-can eat music service now “comes with” its own flagship touch screen phone – Nokia X6

Steve O'Hear — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 19:02:57 +0000

Although I’d put poor marketing, carrier resistance, and possibly DRM, ahead of the lack of a flagship device to explain why Comes With Music, Nokia’s all-you-can-eat music service, hasn’t been the hit the handset maker had hoped for, the company’s newly announced X6 music phone is encouraging.

The device, unveiled at Nokia World today, is to be a Comes With Music exclusive offering, and sports a 3.2-inch touch screen display (16:9 ratio at 360 x 640 pixels), 32 GB of built-in storage, a 5 megapixel camera with Carl Zeiss optics and dual LED flash, A-GPS and WiFi, amongst its impressive stats. And in a first for Nokia, that touch screen is capacitive (not resistive), meaning that its should be a lot more responsive to the touch of a finger. Regular readers will know I’m not a fan of old skool stylus optimized resistive screens.

A quick recap of how Comes With Music works: you purchase a qualifying Nokia handset and then get access to the entire library of the Nokia Music Store for 12 – 18 months and get to keep any downloaded tracks once the subscription ends. For that privilege, the Nokia X6 has an estimated retail price of EUR 450, although the handset maker is stressing that ‘in many, many markets’, thanks to carrier subsidy, the device should be closer to “free”.

---
Related Articles at last100:

Spotify on iPhone approved by Apple

Steve O'Hear — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 20:59:59 +0000

With Apple stuck between the FCC, Eurpean Union regulators and a hard place, I’m not that surprised to see the approval of music streaming service Spotify’s iPhone app. Apple today confirmed to paidContent that Spotify (currently Europe-only) has been given the green light and will be available in the App Store “very soon”.

While many had speculated that the app might be rejected by Cupertino on the grounds of ‘duplicating’ (read: competing with) the iPhone’s built in functionality — iTunes — I was confident that, especially in the current climate, Spotify would be approved.

I predict that Apple will in the end give Spotify the green light based on several factors. Avoiding monopoly accusations being one. Spotify’s pricing model being another (the iPhone app will only be available to premium subscribers so it’s far from a free-for-all). And then there’s Apple’s kludgy multitasking solution. The latter of which means that Spotify on iPhone will be unable to run in the background. Switch to a different app and the music stops.

One thing we don’t yet know, however, is if Apple has in anyway restricted any of the features of the Spotify iPhone app, in particular the ability to cache playlists for off-line playback. This feature alone means that Spotify competes more heavily with iTunes than other streaming music apps that already exist for the iPhone.

Overall though it looks like great news for Spotify and bodes well for the future of Rhapsody’s iPhone app, which is currently pending Apple’s approval.

---
Related Articles at last100:

Real’s Rhapsody enters App Store submission hell, could bode well for Spotify?

Steve O'Hear — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 11:58:27 +0000

Adopting a similar PR strategy to Spotify, U.S.-only music subscription service Rhapsody ($14.99-a-month) has published details of its iPhone app, mid submission process to Apple’s App Store. While submitting an app alone far from guarantees that it will ever see the light of day through Cupertino’s official channel, by showing off the app now, including a video demo (below), it does ensure that any dirty linen on Apple’s part is aired in public. It also helps to build consumer demand from existing Rhapsody subscribers who also own an iPhone in preparation for a backlash should the app be rejected.

And rejection is certainly a possibility.

While other music streaming services have been green lighted by Apple, like European-based Spotify, it’s the on-demand nature of the service that potentially competes too heavily with the iPhone maker’s own iTunes. Unlike traditional Internet radio-type offerings, subscribers can pick a specific song or album from a catalog of eight million tracks for near-instant playback.

In other words, it’s like having the largest iTunes library in the world or kinda.

That is, it would be, if Rhapsody’s iPhone app enabled you to cache playlists for offline playback when you’re outside 3G or WiFi coverage, a feature that Spotify offers, even if like Rhapsody, the app has also yet to be approved by Apple. Rhapsody says it plans to offer caching in a version 2.0 of its iPhone app, presumably taking a one step at a time with regards to App Store submission hell.

Should Rhapsody’s iPhone app be rejected, it could actually help Spotify’s case, especially in the context of the current FCC investigation into the whole App Store submission process. Spotify is a relatively new startup, albeit one backed by the major record labels, and is currently a Europe-only offering, while Real’s Rhapsody has been around for a lot longer and is an American company. Real also hasn’t been shy of upsetting Apple’s legal team in the past either.

Rhapsody on iPhone from Jamie on Vimeo.

---
Related Articles at last100:

VidZone, Sony PS3’s on-demand music video service, is a hit with… record labels

Steve O'Hear — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 12:30:58 +0000

I was so underwhelmed with VidZone, the PlayStation 3’s on-demand music video service, that I couldn’t bring myself to review it. The UI is clunky and videos stream in a 4:3 aspect ratio, even for recent releases, so that they don’t fill up the whole screen on my High Def telly.

However, it seems that I’m in the minority, if the company behind VidZone is to be believed. The service is a hit with the major record labels, meaning that it’s presumably resonating with consumers too, its co-founders tell GamesIndustry.biz.

After starting off by having to persuade the major labels to license their music videos to the service, VidZone says that the music industry is now knocking at their door.

“In terms of the music we’re receiving for the service we’re getting offered a number of world premiers of music videos ahead of MTV, MSN or Yahoo,” says Louisa Jackson, director of marketing for VidZone.

“We had to approach the major record labels to begin with but now it’s a case of labels coming back to us and saying ‘okay, how can you lead the music video strategy for the new music release of our artists?’. Which is really exciting because we’ve gone from watching a music video on TV to watching online, to a console where you’re watching both online and in a broadcast environment simultaneously.”

VidZone’s catalog has reached 13,000 music videos, according to the company, and that future upgrades planned include better search and proper support for wide screen TVs. On that note, perhaps I’ll give VidZone a second chance.

---
Related Articles at last100:

Creative announces Android-based PMP platform, goes head to head with Apple’s iPod touch

Steve O'Hear — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 17:36:49 +0000

This is pretty interesting on the surface but misses a trick.

Creative, who has its roots in MP3 players and other portable media devices, have announced an Android-based media player platform. I say platform because the company may never release a consumer-facing device itself, but instead is touting its own reference design, software development kit and media processor to OEMs and developers.

Hardware-wise, the device known as the Zii EGG (to be re-branded by those that bring it to market), has impressive media-centric specs that include:

High Definition 1080p Output
3.5” 320×480 (16 million colors) LCD
Capacitive 10-Point Multi-Gesture Touchscreen Display
SD card slot
3D Hardware Graphics Acceleration for OpenGL ES
32GB Internal Memory
256MB Mobile DDR RAM
X-Fi Audio Processing
Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g
GPS Receiver
Bluetooth 2.1 + EDR
3-axis Accelerometer
HD and VGA Dual Cameras

In all areas the Zii EGG matches or beats Apple’s iPod touch, the product it’s clearly designed to compete with. What’s interesting is that Creative have decided to do this with the help of OEMs rather than going it alone. The wounds inflicted on Creative during the MP3 player wars must still be sore. High-def output is a key selling point of the Zii EGG and iPod touch beater (for now) as is expandable storage, GPS and front and rear facing cameras (a feature thought to be in the next-gen iPod touch too).

Where Creative is missing a trick, aside from the decision to not go it alone, is that software will likely be the key differentiator on any Android-based PMP or Internet tablet or whatever. And so again it seems odd to leave this part of the user experience to third-parties (based on the video below). It’s almost as if Google is providing the generic OS/UI and Creative the generic hardware design (albeit one that is impressive).

Perhaps that’s the best way to look at it: Creative taking the heavy lifting out of building hardware, just as Google has done with building the OS. Either way, as a strategy on Creative’s part, it leaves me scratching my head.

(via CNet)

---
Related Articles at last100:

Spotify launches preemptive PR strike following iPhone App Store submission

Steve O'Hear — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 16:06:51 +0000

Spotify has submitted its iPhone app to Apple’s App Store and the company wants everybody to know it. An official blog post has gone up, demos of the app to select press have been given, and a YouTube video (see below) is doing the rounds.

Now the wait begins, however: Will Apple approve the music streaming service for distribution on its platform, a service that, when you dig a little deeper, appears to compete more directly with the company’s own iTunes Music Store than similar offerings, such as Last.fm and Pandora, both of which have already been given the go-ahead by Cupertino.

The difference, and here’s the key, is that Spotify ditches the Internet ‘radio’ model in which users can’t select specific tracks but can only choose by genre or ’similar artists to’, and instead provides a full on-demand experience. A juke-box in the sky if you will, whereby any specific track or album can be selected for near-instant playback. In other words, the experience is much more akin to iTunes and a user’s own music library, only the catalog is much, much bigger.

This similarity is compelled by a specific feature of the mobile version of Spotify. The ability to cache playlists for off-line playback, thereby addressing the major shortcoming of any mobile streaming music service. By downloading a selection of music first, users can continue to access Spotify on their iPhones outside of WiFi or 3G coverage and at the same time conserve battery life. Again, much closer to the way iTunes works.

On this basis it’s conceivable, though far from definite, that Apple will ban Spotify because it offers functionality too similar to the iPhone’s built-in iTunes app. Another way of saying its competes too heavily.

In Spotify’s favor – and hence the round of PR today, I suspect – this would raise the eyebrows of the EU at least on anti-competitive grounds. However, it probably won’t come to that.

I predict that Apple will in the end give Spotify the green light based on several factors. Avoiding monopoly accusations being one. Spotify’s pricing model being another (the iPhone app will only be available to premium subscribers so it’s far from a free-for-all). And then there’s Apple’s kludgy multitasking solution. The latter of which means that Spotify on iPhone will be unable to run in the background. Switch to a different app and the music stops.

---
Related Articles at last100: