amungusPremium
join:2004-11-26
America Reviews:
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| maybe... It depends on a couple things.... maybe...
See, I already subscribe to Rhapsody. I know Comcast had a deal with them, but who knows how many subscribers actually stuck around after a few months...
The only problem w/Rhapsody is when artists/albums/songs just DISAPPEAR. It is by far the most aggravating thing about the service. I can deal with the occasional technical glitch, the occasional upgrade that isn't so great, the occasional little thing here or there, but I simply cannot stand it when I find things in my library just "greyed out" and GONE from the service. It happens to things that've been there for YEARS (yes, I've been a subscriber for years) or some things that I found a DAY ago 
The only other thing that's somewhat of a let down is the lack of rare content. Not a whole lot of b-sides or rare albums etc. Even eMusic, with all of its indie stuff is lacking there.
If there were a legal, wide open distribution system, with all the weird rare things out there, and none of it disappeared -forever- (  ) I'd consider it.
If Rhapsody, at $15/month (for "to go" service, they upped the regular "unlimited" from 10 to 13) can do what they do, make a whole client program, organize everything, make sure all "metadata" is there, and have video's, new releases, and editorial content, there's just no way I can see paying more than that for such a service. No more than $15/month, and it'd probably be worth it.
I can't see how this would be a bad idea, really. Even if you don't use it, ISP's could lower the cost of "normal" (read, lower speed - most people don't NEED even 5-10Mbps!) broadband anyway, and with this the price would probably settle down to around $5 more than what most people are paying ... In short, it COULD be worth it to anyone that cared, and wouldn't affect people (like TCH-Xtreem) who don't care.
I'd also be willing to bet that even those who claim not to care would give it a try and still find some things of interest........ That's the nature of music....
Looks like people over there in Denmark actually have a good idea in the works... |
|
| said by amungus:Looks like people over there in Denmark actually have a good idea in the works... Even the part where you have to pay for it whether you use it or not??
»Flat Rate ISP Fee For Unlimited Music Downloads?
Each broadband subscriber would pay sixteen Euros ($23) a month, whether they downloaded music or not.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
| Do you ever have unused minutes on your cell phone at the end of the month? Same principle, in my opinion. Use it or lose it!
- Tate
--
Happiness is an OC-48 in your basement... |
|
RayWPremium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
kudos:1 | said by Done_Posting:Do you ever have unused minutes on your cell phone at the end of the month? Same principle, in my opinion. Use it or lose it! - Tate Feces is still feces. I do not pay the sewer plant to pump it into my house, I do not want to pay the RIAA for the privilege of pumping the musical equivalent into my computer. I do not download music now, and I doubt very highly if I could find $23 worth of music a month (a year?) in what they would "allow" us to down load that would be worth my time to push down on the mouse button. You can pay the tax/graft if you think it is worth while, but I do not want it, do not need it, and have better things to spend my money on than support some fat cat's vices.
I like how some people gripe at congress for making a new tax to raise money for their yachts and trips, but it is ok for the RIAA to do the same.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. |
|
amungusPremium
join:2004-11-26
America Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
Well, the more I think about it, I don't know...
In theory, it's a neat idea - kind of like the "tax" on music cd-r's...
If it balanced out so that it were closer to $5 or LESS, then yeah, I don't think I'd mind too much ... keep in mind I also don't like a whole ton of newer music, most of it flat out sucks.
Now, if it were just slammed on me, "oh hey, yeah, your bill just went up $23 for something you 1) already pay a service for, 2) don't need or want - darn right I'd be mad 
The idea is interesting though, if it does happen to work out for those people...
Not that I would want it here, just that I think it's interesting in theory  |
|
 ThalerPremium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3
·DSL EXTREME
| reply to Done_Posting
said by Done_Posting:Do you ever have unused minutes on your cell phone at the end of the month? Same principle, in my opinion. Use it or lose it! Glad you have the money to burn. Me? I'd rather have the money in my wallet. If I intended for my internet to be a total and complete music gateway package, I'd go buy CDs and/or an online music store account. However, seeing as how RIAA bands are still reliably crafting crap, why should I be forced to pay for a product I don't want? |
|
| I understand what you and the previous responder are saying. I was under the impression that this would be an opt-in service, not a mandatory tax. Was I wrong?
- Tate
--
Happiness is an OC-48 in your basement... |
|
| said by Done_Posting:I understand what you and the previous responder are saying. I was under the impression that this would be an opt-in service, not a mandatory tax. Was I wrong? - Tate The Denmark flat rate pricing was a proposal for a MANDATORY tax added to every broadband user's bill for broadband.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
