Current Events

TOPICS:

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

297 | 298 | 299

 ... 487

Next

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next

wsj

wsj

I'm lost
September 2002

NOV 29, 2004 05:44 PM

let me see if I understand this, we are bitching about Apple because they want to sell the single for half the price the record company is requesting. The Label is at loggerheads with Apple, but we want to spend more money on it?? Maybe I am just a capitalist pig, but I would have to place the blame here on the Label not Apple. And if you are so damned concerned there are much better ways to contribute to charity (I don't know but I think straight donations sans free gift cut the NPO overhead a lot).

TKS

QuixoteVII

QuixoteVII

Tampa, FL
April 2003

NOV 29, 2004 06:25 PM

I found this on MacNN.Com. It seemed to sum up my view.

Article wrong, misleading
154748
11/25/04, 1:52 am EST

This article is terrible.

1) The opening sentence is false on its face, "THE Apple iTunes music store has refused to sell the charity Band Aid song Do They Know It’s Christmas? because it would damage the company’s dominance of the download market." They dominate the market & they're not selling it, but not selling it is certainly not a ploy to continue their dominance. The write makes it sound as if Apple is in favor of beating puppies, essentially.

2)"Millions of iPod owners will not be able to play the track over the Christmas period." Wrong again. They can still buy it via CD and rip it to iTunes. This one demonstrates bias & ignorance.

3)"The song cannot be made available for 79p because Band Aid must maximise the cash raised from each sale." This is just stupid. Of course it can be sold for 79p. And they don't have to do anything-- they seek to maximize the total amount of cash raised, and raising the per-sale price won't necessarily do that. They think 149p is the ideal price, but maybe not. And Band Aid CAN make it available for 79p, they have CHOSEN not to. This one is pure stupidity.

4) "Five million iPod players have now been sold." Well, more like 8 million according to this, http://forbes.com/personaltech/2004/10/15/cx_ah_1015tentech.html . Chalk this one up to laziness.

It's obvious that the writer here has an ulterior motive (pressuring Apple), but this is such a poorly written article that it's hard to believe it got published in a major newspaper.
Comment posted by: jrome

freshprncebelair

freshprncebelair

Ellicott City, MD
June 2004

NOV 29, 2004 06:30 PM

Sean said:
I think apple made the right decision. Single songs are always 79p (or 99 cents in the american store). Thats the price of a song. Always. They make an exception for this song, maybe next time eminem puts out a record he demands they charge more for his music, and then bands are all charging different prices. Now apple can say, all songs 99 cents. No exceptions, either we sell it at that price or we don't. Maybe I'm as bullheaded as Steve, but I would say the exact same thing. When you go to buy a song in itunes you know how much it will cost every time, and that consistency is important to apple to have in their product.




Additionally, it's all profit for the record companies. They don't have to physically make anything to sell. All they have to do is give their "OK", and the song will start making money. The only costs to Apple are incurred for bandwidth and credit card micropayments.

remusisdying

remusisdying

Brighton, MA
March 2004

NOV 29, 2004 06:39 PM

Gwendolyn said:

imagoldfish said:
I just get irritated when "news" comes with built in commentary. But I'm overreacting. Your commentary was in fact pointed towards asking if anyone had ideas about why Apple chose to act in this way, though in my defense, it's plenty clear what you think of the issue. Headlines are there to grab attention, it's unfortunate that they also end up being the starting out point of your post, thus gearing one towards a specific reading.



Our news always comes with built-in commentary, if you don't like it, don't read it.

The headlines are to grab attention and get people talking, as you said-- and this one is doing just that.


yeah, i guess it is too much to ask for the built-in commentary to be based on anything other than a quick reaction to spurious information.

imagoldfish

imagoldfish

Chicago, IL
April 2003

NOV 29, 2004 06:53 PM

From what I have gleaned, the information itself isn't spurious - Apple indeed refuses to sell the song. I'm not going to complain about the commentary. As I said, the point is to have a discussion. That discussion could easily be "Your commentary is stupid". It's happened that the same news item has been discussed in several threads. The commentary does have the tendency to set the tone for discussion, but that's ok. As the lady said, if you don't like it, don't read it.
I still think the headline, or thread title, is ridiculous, but perhaps it's intended to be overblown sensationalism? I don't know that the headline itself actually got people talking - I mean, I clicked on it. Not because I thought "Oh my God, they do?!?" but because I thought "Oh lord, what are people freaking out about now?" but whatever. I was certainly unnecessarily snarky.

remusisdying

remusisdying

Brighton, MA
March 2004

NOV 29, 2004 06:57 PM

imagoldfish said:
From what I have gleaned, the information itself isn't spurious - Apple indeed refuses to sell the song. I'm not going to complain about the commentary. As I said, the point is to have a discussion. That discussion could easily be "Your commentary is stupid". It's happened that the same news item has been discussed in several threads. The commentary does have the tendency to set the tone for discussion, but that's ok. As the lady said, if you don't like it, don't read it.
I still think the headline, or thread title, is ridiculous, but perhaps it's intended to be overblown sensationalism? I don't know that the headline itself actually got people talking - I mean, I clicked on it. Not because I thought "Oh my God, they do?!?" but because I thought "Oh lord, what are people freaking out about now?" but whatever. I was certainly unnecessarily snarky.


didnt mean to imply that the info in this article was spurious, just that seems to be the case many times. and 'snarky' is a great word.

MisterSatan

MisterSatan

Portland, OR
August 2002

NOV 29, 2004 07:02 PM

Sean said:
I think apple made the right decision. Single songs are always 79p (or 99 cents in the american store). Thats the price of a song. Always. They make an exception for this song, maybe next time eminem puts out a record he demands they charge more for his music, and then bands are all charging different prices. Now apple can say, all songs 99 cents. No exceptions, either we sell it at that price or we don't. Maybe I'm as bullheaded as Steve, but I would say the exact same thing. When you go to buy a song in itunes you know how much it will cost every time, and that consistency is important to apple to have in their product.


Grinch.

wink

Doghouse_Reilly

doghouse_reilly

I'm lost
February 2004

NOV 29, 2004 07:08 PM

So... Steve Jobs, do you enjoy beating your wife?

"But I don't beat--"

It's a simple yes or no question, Steve.

PointBlank

PointBlank

New York, NY
November 2004

NOV 29, 2004 07:09 PM

Point Blanks Internet Truism 1845:

You make fun of Apple, you get angry nerds.

s5

s5

STAFF

San Francisco, CA

NOV 29, 2004 07:14 PM

i'm siding with the evil capitalists on this one. if the song's producers wanted to do charity work, then they should take whatever pay cuts necessary to raise the amount they want to raise.

llouys

llouys

Brazil
August 2003

NOV 29, 2004 07:22 PM

I suppose it's kind of irrational to measure how much people care about an issue by the number of comments in the threads on a discussion board, but compare the number of comments in this thread to the number of comments in the threads about the Darfur conflict.

Steve Job's ego, the great humanitarian crisis of our time.

whatever

almostfamous

almostfamous

NEWSWIRE

United Kingdom

NOV 29, 2004 07:37 PM

louys said:
I suppose it's kind of irrational to measure how much people care about an issue by the number of comments in the threads on a discussion board, but compare the number of comments in this thread to the number of comments in the threads about the Darfur conflict.

Steve Job's ego, the great humanitarian crisis of our time.

whatever



you see the problem there is, they didn't think of a sensationalist enough headline wink

GravesForTheDays

GravesForTheDays

Grand Rapids, MI
November 2003

NOV 29, 2004 08:08 PM

I dunno, does they?

Sivart

Sivart

Saskatoon, SK
June 2004

NOV 29, 2004 08:33 PM

has it occured to anyone that had they decided to sell the song for 149p, this thread would be about how outraged everyone is that apple dared to deviate from their standard 79p price?

Dr_Zoidberg

Dr_Zoidberg

Raymore, MO
June 2004

NOV 29, 2004 09:54 PM

demetrius_z said:
.

My thoughts exactly.

FallFromGrace

FallFromGrace

Seattle, WA
March 2004

NOV 29, 2004 11:31 PM

Doghouse_Reilly said:
So... Steve Jobs, do you enjoy beating your wife?

"But I don't beat--"

It's a simple yes or no question, Steve.



Ahh... the old Loaded Question. I love em.

Gwendolyn

Gwendolyn

SUICIDEGIRL

Indiana, USA

NOV 29, 2004 11:41 PM

FallFromGrace said:

Doghouse_Reilly said:
So... Steve Jobs, do you enjoy beating your wife?

"But I don't beat--"

It's a simple yes or no question, Steve.



Ahh... the old Loaded Question. I love em.



I think Loaded Question would make a good band name.

dem_z

dem_z

United Kingdom
June 2004

NOV 30, 2004 04:14 AM

remusisdying said:
yeah, i guess it is too much to ask for the built-in commentary to be based on anything other than a quick reaction to spurious information.


There is nothing stopping you from writing and submitting news stories. I look forward to reading your articles.

almostfamous

almostfamous

NEWSWIRE

United Kingdom

NOV 30, 2004 05:35 AM

Sivart said:
has it occured to anyone that had they decided to sell the song for 149p, this thread would be about how outraged everyone is that apple dared to deviate from their standard 79p price?



i wouldn't give a fuck, people do out of the ordinary things for charity all the time.

Nic

Nic

SUICIDEGIRL

United Kingdom

NOV 30, 2004 09:59 AM

This single is a pile of crap anyway. One of the tools singing on it didn't even know who Bob Geldof is.

Spare yourself the earache and just go donate some money to Oxfam.

Scopitone

Scopitone

Irvine, CA
OLD SKOOL

NOV 30, 2004 10:16 AM

Sean said:
I think apple made the right decision. Single songs are always 79p (or 99 cents in the american store). Thats the price of a song. Always. They make an exception for this song, maybe next time eminem puts out a record he demands they charge more for his music, and then bands are all charging different prices. Now apple can say, all songs 99 cents. No exceptions, either we sell it at that price or we don't. Maybe I'm as bullheaded as Steve, but I would say the exact same thing. When you go to buy a song in itunes you know how much it will cost every time, and that consistency is important to apple to have in their product.



s5 said:
i'm siding with the evil capitalists on this one. if the song's producers wanted to do charity work, then they should take whatever pay cuts necessary to raise the amount they want to raise.



Nic said:
This single is a pile of crap anyway. One of the tools singing on it didn't even know who Bob Geldof is.

Spare yourself the earache and just go donate some money to Oxfam.



These people said everything I came in here to say.

Point_Blank said:
Point Blanks Internet Truism 1845:

You make fun of Apple, you get angry nerds.



Make fun of PCs and you get legions of angry nerds.

One_Pure_Thought

One_Pure_Thought

East Greenwich, RI
October 2003

NOV 30, 2004 04:52 PM

Scopitone said:

Point_Blank said:
Point Blanks Internet Truism 1845:

You make fun of Apple, you get angry nerds.



Make fun of PCs and you get legions of angry nerds.



No. PC's are the punching bag of all the hipsters out there. You mess with Apple, you mess with the hipsters


Asshole #1: "Dude, I'm like so fucking creative. What computer should I get that will tell the world, 'I'm fucking awesome'."
Asshole #2: "Fucking apple man, the look fucking awesome when you're in starbucks surfing the net and drinking your grande nonfat sugar-free vanilla caramel macchiatto."

Edited to say that I do think that Apple does make a strong product that does do a good job and in some ways are better than PC's. However, I'd just like to point out how I think it's ridiculous that Apple has become a status symbol and how a lot of people who know nothing about computers will defend apple cause all their other asshole friends love apple too.



[Edited on Nov 30, 2004 by One_Pure_Thought]

tretiak

tretiak

San Francisco, CA
March 2003

NOV 30, 2004 05:07 PM

I thought this article would be about how Neslte bought Apple, in which case the answer to the headline would be "yes."

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next