The anti-Napster or Napster's future?...
April 2, 2001 9:28 AM Subscribe
posted by ParisParamus at 10:12 AM on April 2, 2001
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Bertelsmann, one of the companies involved in this deal, the owner of Napster?
posted by Outlawyr at 10:40 AM on April 2, 2001
posted by Loudmax at 11:29 AM on April 2, 2001
I don't know how much I'm allowed to say about this, so I'll shut up.
-Mars
posted by Mars Saxman at 12:26 PM on April 2, 2001
You think RealPlayer's bad, try RealPlayer on the Mac. It's even worse, when it has the opportunity to be; more often than not it just crashes.
I'm not worried about this though. All this is going to do is split the market into two tiers: Those who will pay, either out of moral beliefs or a lack of knowledge about post-Napster P2P services, and those who won't, because they do know about P2P and have the elevated technical expertise to deal with those services' horrendous interfaces. Besides, whatever copy-protection scheme Real comes up with will be broken in due time.
posted by aaron at 12:58 PM on April 2, 2001
I believe that Napster may very well be one of those customers. As is AOL, who announced a music service a few weeks ago.
posted by fooljay at 1:27 PM on April 2, 2001
posted by johnny novak at 3:09 PM on April 2, 2001
posted by ParisParamus at 3:34 PM on April 2, 2001
posted by darukaru at 4:17 PM on April 2, 2001
posted by kindall at 5:12 PM on April 2, 2001
Don't take this as a personal attack, but I find it amazing the number of people who waste hours upon hours writing about how RealPlayer takes over your computer, but can't spend the 3 minutes to look into the Preferences menus or install the damn thing with a minimum of hooks.
It just goes to show how sometimes Product Marketing is counterproductive. Or is it?? Hmmmmmmmm
posted by fooljay at 8:20 PM on April 2, 2001
These are precisely the people this service is aimed at. Seems to me the companies involved have recognised that music on the web, for those with a little knowledge will always be easily obtained for free.
But wait, what about all those for whom Preferences, Settings and other tricky drop down stuff is as alien as typing a URL into a browser? They're the ones coming to the net with little or no technical knowledge for whom AOL and Real logos pepper the desktop, the ones who only know the parts of the web their AOL portal allows them to see.
This isn't a Napster replacement, it's a business venture by a group of companies who are looking at the type of people coming to the web and realising there are thousands of people who'll think this is the way it's always been done, and sign up in their droves.
posted by Markb at 4:33 AM on April 3, 2001
Kindall, I think you mean to say, "Real charges more to allow you to send a decent-quality stream." Blah.
[fooljay] I find it amazing the number of people who waste hours upon hours writing about how RealPlayer takes over your computer, but can't spend the 3 minutes to look into the Preferences menus or install the damn thing with a minimum of hooks.
Well, it's easy enough to switch all that off, but it's a waste of my time. By default, a program shouldn't take over your computer. That's the problem here. Besides, when you have three or four PCs to deal with which you rebuild on a regular basis, you get tired of screwing around with the ridiculous defaults in RealPlayer (no, I don't think it's useful to be notified of a special advertisement waiting for me with a flashing system tray icon!!!) every time you re-install.
posted by daveadams at 8:20 AM on April 3, 2001
Sure, I'd rather an opt-in on all of these things instead of an opt-out, but as far as I'm concerned, people who complain that Real is taking over their desktop should be blaming themselves and not RNWK for the problem. Does that make sense?
Let's remember, there are good uses for many of these things. Most people will take convenience and automation over customization (see 99% of MSN.com's traffic) which means that RNWK is making people's lives easier, not harder. Most people are not as tech-savvy (ergo not as picky about how a computer is set up) as the large majority of the Metafilter crowd...
posted by fooljay at 4:41 PM on April 3, 2001
« Older Kent State student senate denies funding | US Spy plane lands on Hainan after collision with... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by darukaru at 9:59 AM on April 2, 2001