It’s hard to conclude much from the Apple acquisition of Lala. Except this: it validates Lala’s model of cloud-based song purchases.
Lala’s product model is that you pay for the right to listen to a song on demand, even if you don’t download it. One streaming listen is free, more are ten cents, download is a dollar.
This is central to what Lala is, so it’s not going away unless Apple is planning to gut Lala and keep just a few resources. The iMeem acquisition was that kind of thing. But Lala is on top of its game and this isn’t a desperation deal.
So it seems pretty likely that we’re going to see something like Lala’s cloud-based purchases in the iTunes store.
cnet claims it’s a gutting
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10409472-93.html
that rings true considering so much of apple’s process is non-automated as they have kept control over the public face of their products.
assuming that’s totally wrong (which is a lot more fun) and this is a play for cloud streaming, it strikes me how apple is always 3/4ths of a step ahead of the market. Nothing too out there, not even executing all that brilliant, but just forward leaning enough in a sexy, swarthy turtleneck.
Speaking of not executing all that well… what’s the asinine part of iTunes? Sync’ing, downloading and actual physical management of the files – it’s the thing that drives mildly techie people batshit insane. What a happy coincidence (?) if the thing they paid the least attention to in the design of iTunes is the next thing to drop off the table. Were they being sloppy? or visionary in their prioritization?
That “3/4s of a step” formulation about Apple is really nicely said.
Like when they went into selling songs by the download it was pretty retrograde even then, but it was also forward looking. Carefully modulated to avoid being too far ahead of the market or the customer.
I think with syncing they were being sloppy and didn’t know or care. When it comes to the internet part of things they have a gigantic blind spot.