Sony and Universal Prohibit Sharing Via Zune 325
ack154 writes "Engadget has a story about Sony and Universal Music apparently denying Zune owners the ability to 'squirt' songs by certain artists to other Zune users. That's right, if you've actually purchased songs from the Zune marketplace and happen to run into another Zune owner, you're prohibited from sharing certain songs. From the article: 'In a non-scientific sampling of popular artists by Zunerama and Zune Thoughts, it looks like it's roughly 40-50 percent of artists that fall under this prohibited banner, and the worst news is that there's no warning that a song might be unsharable until you actually try to send it and fail.'"
All Access Squirt Passes (Score:5, Funny)
Re:All Access Squirt Passes (Score:5, Funny)
iPhone implied feature (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:iPhone implied feature (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'm pretty sure the Zune would let your share non-DRM'd mp3s as well.
Re:All Access Squirt Passes (Score:4, Funny)
So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Why even bother including a transmission service if it isn't just limited to be barely useful, but not have it work at all for half of the songs you can legitimately get?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:So... (Score:5, Funny)
I mean, how many other logos [bdmonkeys.net] can you make look like a cat-butt?
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Zune has a bigger screen and Wifi compared to Apple iPod of same price.
It has a stupid firmware OS or whatever that runs on it full of DRM.
If there is a hacked firmware upgrade that disables all the nastiness, would you buy it? If you could upload your entire mp3 collection to your zune and transfer files via wifi to other people without any limitations?
Just look at the Sony PSP.
If you have to hack, are there not better options? (Score:3, Insightful)
If you want to buy something you have to hack anyway - aren't there then a lot of other, better, devices to look at rather than a Zune? Like for instance the PSP which has a much higher resolution screen, or other devices that have keyboards. Realistically how useful is even a hacked Zune, when you can get other devices with even better raw features for around the same price?
Re:It's Microsoft, not Sony (Score:5, Insightful)
The reason Microsoft have to have restrictions on wireless (or indeed any) transfers is because if they didn't, Sony, Universal and everyone else would not license their music to be sold on the Zune market place and the Zune would be dead in the water.
Do you think that Microsoft enjoy all this bad press and confusion the crippled wifi functionality is bringing them? What exactly is in it for them asides from the teeny tiny percentage of the few sales they might see after a users' trial runs out and they buy the track in question? They'd make more money by not bothering with restrictions in the first place because they'd shift more units.
The reason Apple haven't put out a wireless mp3 player isn't because Microsoft simply 'beat them to it', it is because if Apple did, they'd be subject to the same restrictions. They decided that it'd be better than to leave it out entirely than to risk leaving users with a negative experience after dealing with all the record industries' draconian bullshit.
Anyone who thinks the iPhone is going to allow them to transfer music around freely like Mircrosoft 'should' have done with the Zune is in for a rude awakening. The way things are looking with the iPhone, you'll be lucky if you can set one of your mp3s as a fucking ringtone.
The fact that you think they haven't carefully thought about ALL of this simply stuns me.
What's that sound? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What's that sound? (Score:5, Funny)
Take the statistic with a grain of salt. (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, both of 'em.
The chances of them meeting are far lower than the 40-50% chance of their "squirt" failing. Yet another unverifiable, speculative statistic.
Re:What's that sound? (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, that's "zijun" in Hebrew. Now you see the *real* reason for the product's name.
The one place Apple gets it right. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
How do you want to be abused today? (Score:5, Funny)
--
U.S. government violence has stopped the centuries-long violence in Iraq and created a peaceful democracy. NOT!
Re:How do you want to be abused today? (Score:4, Insightful)
Its not as if Microsoft has a choice in this matter.
Re:How do you want to be abused today? (Score:5, Insightful)
If Microsoft can't make the application work as advertised or disclosed, they should offer a different set of features.
This is the best evidence yet that this whole "squirting" business was invented by an uninformed marketing department, that wasn't aware of the real-world limitations Microsoft's partners were going to place on the system.
For example, I'm sure someone would love to sell a radio that shows album art, but if doing so requires an internet connection for the radio, and regular updates of radio schedules from a web service, and rights negotiations, and on, and on, and on, the someone might want to consider selling something that would actually work, as opposed to something that's got bullet points up the wazoo but doesn't.
It isn't MS's fault the music is restricted, any more than it's Apple's in their case, but Microsoft's implementation within its restrictions is broken, and not going to win it converts in the MP3 market. Given, of course, that they're really serious about taking a share of the MP3 player market, or if all this isn't some twisted "tactical" maneuver to "position" some "platform" for some reason known but to Chair-Man.
Re:How do you want to be abused today? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd argue that it *is* Microsoft's fault to some degree. I can't think of any major technology company that's been going in for DRM as heavily as they have been. Even Sony was happy with a mere root kit for their DRM, and backed off when enough people complained; whereas in Vista MS has added not one but two levels of access *beyond* the formerly root-equivalent Administrator level to support their DRM schemes, and requires specialized hardware support right down to the silicon for HD content's DRM.
Microsoft has tremendous influence in the market, they could have done a lot to keep things relatively sane if they tailored their systems to the needs of their customers rather than the media industry. And, with just a little marketing savvy, they could have made a mint doing it as well, as Apple's phenomenal success with kinder gentler and more consistent DRM schemes has shown.
The media companies may be pushing this bullshit too hard to stop entirely, but the tech companies owe it to their shareholders as much as their customers to push back for solutions that are, if not entirely and ideally free, at least *usable*.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The options are:
1) put in the stupid DRM features and get a license to sell the specified content
2) don't put in the stupid DRM features, and watch as people continue to buy iPods because of the diverse selection of music available in the iTunes store
3) don't sell a device at all
Re:How do you want to be abused today? (Score:5, Interesting)
But even in the immediate sense, MS might have benefitted from showing a bit of spine.
Basically, Microsoft has chosen to:
1) put in stupid DRM features,
2) *and* watch as people continue to buy iPods because when they buy something form iTunes they don't have to guess which of a handful of DRM policies dictates how they can use a particular song,
3) *and* continue to not sell their devices at all.
The whole point of Microsoft's tanking of Plays for Sure in favor of Zune was supposed to be a smooth consistent user experience. Giving half the Sony and Universal tracks you sell different restrictions than the others without telling the buyer is *not* smooth or consistent. They'd have been better off just skipping those tracks altogether if needs be.
That's basically what Apple has done in that kind of situation with Sony in Japan and Austrailia. If a label doesn't want to deal with your terms, just launch without them, and if you start making money they'll cave in eventually. Sacrificing usability for one label's whims is a loosing proposition in the long run; I would think that's especially true when you're trying to buy your way into the market, as Microsoft seems to be in this case.
Re:How do you want to be abused today? (Score:5, Interesting)
And if Microsoft was the only entity coming to the party, that strategy might work for them now too. But they're not. They're competing in an established market, where the market leader nets the vast majority of sales, and where the market leader has an established/loyal following.
I guarantee you if Sony and Universal music were not available in the Zune store, you'd be sitting here laughing at Microsoft because their music selection was non-existant. And you wouldn't buy one. And neither would anyone else.
So, they made a choice that sucks, but still puts them (worst case) at feature parity with the market leader. Scenario 1 is still FAR better than scenarios 2 and 3. In fact, you could even argue that the companies preventing their music from being shared will sell fewer songs than the companies that do, meaning that eventually they'll see all the money they're losing and ask to turn it on.
I'm not arguing that DRM doesn't stink, and they got a crapton of things wrong with the Zune. But regarding the DRM crap, everyone is throwing the wrong party under the bus. I guarantee you they didn't WANT to waste time, money, and effort putting this crap into a device.
Spend 5 minutes running through the various options in your head; consider the market environment, consider what (normal) people want, consider the demands of the music companies, consider what the law allows, and consider what kind of negotiating leverage you have available.
Your suggestions so far demonstrate a lack of understanding of the market environment and the kind of leverage Microsoft has available.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The fact is, people want a product they can
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Make a device that allows limitless wireless sharing, plays every format it possibly can, with a rocking interface.
That is, how about making a product that's actually better than what the competition offers. It's just a small percentage that uses iTunes anyway, people rip from CDs, copy from friends or download.
Re:How do you want to be abused today? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why on earth should Microsoft even negotiate terms? It's not like all those 80-gig iPods out there are filled with songs purchased through iTMS; most of what they're playing are mp3s, not AACs.
If Microsoft wants to sell a *music player*, they don't need to negotiate terms at all. They don't even need to fucking *talk* to the likes of Sony. This is *Microsoft*. If they want to capture a significant percentage of the music player market, and maybe even take some of that market away from Apple, then they shouldn't negotiate terms. They should worry about making a music player that people are going to *want to buy*. Like, maybe something that plays every damned format of audio you can stick on it, including Vorbis. Maybe something that features improvements over the iPod interface (and there are quite a few interface improvements that should be readily apparent to anyone who has used one).
You know, give the customer something he's willing to buy, at a price he's willing to pay for it. Why should MS talk to Sony and BMG and Universal? Shouldn't they be talking to their target customers, instead?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:How do you want to be abused today? (Score:5, Interesting)
I think they were aware of its limitations when they added the feature. In my opinion, it was never intended to be an actual useful feature. They just wanted WiFi as a bullet point on their features list, to differentiate their product from Apple's. Whether the feature actually did anything useful was an afterthought. That's why the WiFi was crippled from the start.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sounds to me EXACTLY like everything else Microsoft has ever done...
Sure, they'll advertise the millions of things Windows CE can do, but just fail to mention it's ridiculously crippled, and just BARELY fits the most basic definition... "Word Processing" means a crappy equivalent of notepad, with no options and horrible input methods that make it impossible to use even for tri
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Such an absurd presumption from Microsoft. It's not even serious enough to be considered a joke.
Re:How do you want to be abused today? (Score:5, Interesting)
At the very least they could label songs that are restricted. At the very least. The fact that they don't label them as such, and now people can't share the songs as advertised is pretty bad. Of course, the record companies are just plain brain-dead to think they should restrict free advertisements of their music. From what I understand, the whole sharing process is designed to encourage users to buy the songs they borrow, once their limited-use period runs out.
Morons. All of them.
Re:How do you want to be abused today? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Sony and the other music companies haven't forced Microsoft to implement anything. Microsoft could have chosen to manufacture an MP3 player and set up a music store selling MP3s from more enlightened companies and artists. They could have created their own niche in the market and targeted those not well-served by Apple's lock-in model, while also selling music playable on iPod
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It is Microsoft's own fault that they, one of the most powerful companies on earth, have bent over double-ass-backwards for the music corps. It's like they don't even TRY to negotiate--they do the most favorable thing the music corps can come up with, and hope that those good graces will somehow propel them forward.
Apple went to the table and hammered out a deal. Initiative wins the day over being a lickspittle. Fault: Microsoft.
Of course they do (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Surprised? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Surprised? (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand, I'm reasonably sure this move is going to end up costing Sony and Universal money, so there's that to be happy about.
Re: (Score:2)
I more expected the industry to simply withold the content so the Zune would have very little music to offer. It would be like the Beatles who simply refuse to permit distribution in any format except physical albums in either LP or Compact Cassette.
It would have been funny if the Zune marketplace had very little content and then the remainder of providers pulled out simply due to too small a marketshare.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What next? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What next? (Score:5, Interesting)
Earphones that measure your skin conductance while listening to songs, and then auto-rate the song based on your pleasure response. On the back end an E-bid style site allows music producers to buy the marketing data.
Microsoft: What do you want to think today?
Re:What next? (Score:5, Funny)
No, you pay up front for the enjoyment rating of the song. If your enjoyment goes beyond what you have paid for they bill you again.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
We're working on this. All the user has to do is re-enter their Zune Marketplace PIN when the earphones sense a temperature swing. This will-reenable playback.
Here at Microsoft, we're really excited about the new features we can leverage our technology to bring to you.
-Steve Ballmer, Robbie Bach, and the Rest of the "Don't get it Gang", Working for You, The User.
Heh. (Score:5, Interesting)
Sony: O Rly? Squirt this bizitches.
Ahhh, the mysterious world of corporate interaction.
Re: (Score:2)
The Zune is not. Far more damage is being done to Sony than the other way around.
Re:Heh. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's really much worse than that. For all the complaints, and the long-term rivalry between Sony and Microsoft, they are STILL selling computers only with Windows, and making software for their equipment Windows-only, going out of their way to shut-out Mac and Unix systems.
And with their huge product line-up, and money to invest, they could single-handedly do more harm to Microsoft (by switching to something like Linux on their machines, and making Linux-compatible software for their devices) than the more-often touted small-game players like Dell. Plus, it would probably pay off for them, as they'd have a far better chance of capturing the pro market with Unix workstations and notebooks, preloaded with digital multimedia software, than with the clumsy joke that is Windows' multimedia capabilities.
Like this matters (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Even more wrong if you speak a language where "squirt" typically means exactly what you think it means.
I'll predict that if Microsoft markets the zune internationally, the advertising campaign will fail even more badly.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
There, in order to simulate telephones, researchers had figured out how to digitize speech, squirt it into the computer, then turn the bits back into sound waves afterwards. [harmony-central.com]
You only have so much radio capability (power for transmitters, sensitivity for receivers). You can cov [seqair.com]
Re:Like this matters (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Well, that's what you'd expect from sickos like Heinlein.
Re:Like this matters (Score:5, Funny)
I heard somewhere that George Michael was recently spotted squirting his songs to various passersby at a rest stop in New Jersey.
I can think of worse things (Score:5, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft won't even follow it's own legalese anym (Score:2, Interesting)
==========
14. Content Usage Rules
All music you purchase or acquire on a subscription basis from the Zune Marketplace is subject to this agreement and any other applicable terms and conditions, including limitations imposed by the use of digital rights management (DRM) technology. Content may be used for personal, non-commercial use only.
14.1 Purchased Content Usage Rules. You are authorized to use the content that you purchased from the Zune Marketplace on up to five (5) total authoriz
Re:Microsoft won't even follow it's own legalese a (Score:3, Informative)
Section 14 deals with DRM and essentially says you're bound to whatever restrictions Microsoft imposes.
Section 14.1 does not discuss sharing songs from Zune to Zune but rather limits how many of your personal computers can play the songs.
The last section explains how you can burn the purchased music.
Where's the violation?
Re: (Score:2)
All music you purchase or acquire on a subscription basis from the Zune Marketplace is subject to this agreement and any other applicable terms and conditions, including limitations imposed by the use of digital rights management (DRM) technology
I think GP is referring to the fact that the music is subject to "any other applicable terms and conditions". It's not that MS is violating anything, they just pass the buck onto the music Industry to make up rules - hence the new "squirt" rule.
Not really a problem (Score:5, Funny)
Given the near astronomical odds of actually finding another Zune owner within a 20-mile radius that you'd want to share your music with, I think this problem is pretty much moot.
Apple bends the RIAA over, the RIAA bends MS over (Score:5, Insightful)
Now Microsoft was fairly nice to the RIAA and even paid them a royalty per MP3 player and now the Zune's most vaunted feature, their crippled wireless, can't even be utilized correctly. If the Zune had any steam amoung any geek circles (not that I think it did), this will surely kill it because it had few other advantages. It seems the RIAA and its member companies have royally screwed Microsoft.
I guess this shows how business truly gets conducted and how the RIAA should be dealt with when it is whining.
A present to Microsoft:
http://allaboutfrogs.org/stories/scorpion.html [allaboutfrogs.org]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Universal is trying to psyche itself up to standing up to Steve Jobs and iTunes by demanding a cut of every iPod, I suspect this was part of the reason MS rolled over for Universal in the first place, 1% of every iPod is a fortune, 1% of every Zune is a pitance. When ever pressed, they stop short of saying they will pull th
Re:Apple bends the RIAA over, the RIAA bends MS ov (Score:4, Informative)
An out of left field idea that has been voiced before, but is now actually closer to reality. Apple has settled their dispute with Apple Records. A recent Slashdot story mentions a British band that made the Top-40 with an online-only release of their single.
How many artists would jump at the chance to directly release their music on iTunes?
There's plenty of money to be made in the music business without excessively bleeding the artists or the consumers. A direct to iTunes model could be a catalyst to ultimately changing the way artists reach their listeners. It's also Steve Jobs' tactical nuclear weapon in his dealings with the record labels.
Well planned product offering.... (Score:2)
Is the HAHA tag applicable here?
Fine with me. (Score:3, Funny)
That's the "feature" we were all waiting for. (Score:2)
Seriously though I just don't understand how something can come to a market like this with a major selling point like this crippled the way it is. This is a perfect example of the difference between Apple's approach to the iPod and the way pretty much everybody else has gone at it. If the recording labels had tried to limit a similar feature in the iPod this way it would have likely
One more reason to use AllofMP3.com (Score:3, Insightful)
I haven't paid for music in almost 10 years... until this year: I've spent almost $700 on AllOfMP3.com
And all the evidence points to the fact that I'm not alone. AllOfMP3.com is making millions.
Illegal? Yes. Sure, whatever. So is Limewire. And there's no potential for revenue generation there.
Say what you will about AllOfMP3.com but there's a profound lesson there that the labels and the RIAA should learn from:
They're getting people who don't spend money on music to spend money. That's huge.
When the "real, de-facto" option for consumers is free vs. DRM crippled -- they should be rejoicing the fact that
there is, in fact a middle ground: DRM-free, high-quality music (not 128bit crap) at a price that
makes sense given the lack of shipping, manufacturing and retail overhead.
I still contend that if the labels embraced the pricepoint and the formula they'd be making multiples over
what they're making now.
The problem isn't piracy. The problem ultimately is greed.
Their business model is hilariously weak, and instead of adjusting to market forces like all other industries
must do -- they're attempting to ram it down the throats of consumers.
Good luck boys.
Re:One more reason to use AllofMP3.com (Score:5, Informative)
You look like the perfect person to answer my question.
Why pay for music from allofmp3? It's (sort of) legal, but the artists still don't receive anything. Which means it's like buying from the RIAA, only cheaper. Which means it's like p2p, only more expensive.
Downloading from allofmp3 is about as "moral" as just straight downloading. What's the point in paying for it?
I'm not the OP, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
2. Kinda-sorta secure connection: nobody else snooping on your IP address.
3. Your choice of recording quality: no "fake" songs uploaded by the RIAA.
I'd buy THAT for a dollar!
Re:One more reason to use AllofMP3.com (Score:5, Insightful)
I haven't bought anything from allofmp3, but have read answers to questions such as yours the million or so times they've been posted to slashdot.
Basically, people buy from allofmp3 for three reasons.
1) Convenience. Easy to find songs.
2) Consistent tags (no foo fighter songs with "Christian Rap" as their genre [or spelt as foo fighters, Foo Fighters, Fo Fighters, Foo Fighter])
3) Reliable song download times. All http, songs will take the same amount of time to download instead of ranging from minutes (for very popular songs) to weeks (for obscure, only shared by one guy in peru on dial-up songs).
Many people don't care about moral issues, but find the above factors worth paying a few cents per song.
Frankly, all of the above should be exceedingly obvious to anyone who's ever downloaded music from p2p.
Re:One more reason to use AllofDownloading MP3.com (Score:4, Insightful)
You know, the stuff that the "legit" music distributors are supposed to provide.
Re:One more reason to use AllofMP3.com (Score:5, Insightful)
AoMP3 PAYS about 20% of song's price to artist. That's MORE than artists get from ITMS.
Re:Not exactly. (Score:4, Informative)
The levy collected on blank CD-R, memory cards, etc in Canada was not distributed to the artists, and only a portion of it went to the record labels as such. The rest of it? Disappeared in the accounting nightmare that is the recording industry; and do you have any idea what the Record labels did with the share they were given directly? Yep, swallowed it up in the accounting nightmare.
The artists get squat, even when everything is done on the up-and-up. So forget the issue of AoMP3 screwing the artists. They aren't. No more than anyone else is.
And they legally cannot pay the artists directly anyway, they have the pay the record labels.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
To quote AoMP3 FAQ:
We pay Russian Licensing Societies 15% for all music. The Russian Licensing Societies will in turn pay the copyright owners, not necessarily the artists. Despite no legal requirement to do so, we are currently considering paying original performing artists 5%, regardless of who owns the copyright to the underlying work.
Can the copyright owners actually collect from Russian Licensing Societies like ROMS.
Yes. Similar to Music Licensing Societies in other countries (like ASCAP and BMI in the US), all a copyright owner needs to do is contact the Russian Licensing Societies (e.g., ROMS) and show proof that they own a copyrighted work; after which they can collect accumulated proceeds.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Plausible deniability my friend.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If you don't like the RIAA, that's fine, but the solution is to support indie music, not ripping off RIAA music through AoM or Limewire because that's still rei
I think you're wrong (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh Noes!!! (Score:5, Funny)
Duh. (Score:5, Interesting)
Well of course there is no warning that a song might be unsharable! If they warned you, you might not buy it.
And Universal gets paid for each Zune sold, why? (Score:4, Interesting)
http://billboard.com/bbcom/news/article_display.j
"Yesterday, Microsoft agreed to share revenue from Zune sales with record labels and artists. Forcing the issue was Universal Music Group, which at deadline is the only label named in the program. UMG refused to license its music to the Zune unless it could receive a percentage of each device sold, in addition to standard music licensing fees for downloads and subscriptions.
"These devices are just repositories for stolen music, and they all know it," UMG chairman/CEO Doug Morris says. "So it's time to get paid for it."
When I saw the headlines on Engadget I thought for sure Universal wouldnt be one of the labels, after all Microsoft chose to pay them off causing good ol' Doug to say he's entitled to a chunk of iPod sales as well. This begs the question: what was the point of the payoff? What did it get them?
Re:And Universal gets paid for each Zune sold, why (Score:5, Interesting)
You answered your own question! Precedent for forcing the same kind of "deal" on Apple is the payoff. Microsoft doesn't give a shit about the Zune; that's why it isn't a "PlaysForSure" device (and probably why it looks like a piece of shit too). It's greatest value to Microsoft is as a sabot -- a shoe to throw into Apple's works.
Wow that is... quite sublime (Score:3, Insightful)
What they mean is (Score:3, Funny)
This time for sure, Charlie (Score:5, Funny)
aaahh hahahaha! (Score:2)
Not that "squirting" was actually simple to begin with, nevertheless, this is how Universal repays Microsoft? F*cking classic.
Hopefully the nanotech battery angels will come down, make WiFI PMPs practical, and allow sharing that is at least similar to iTunes library sharing. And hopefully by then Universal will have pulled its
Hrm. No wonder ZuneSpam isn't out yet... (Score:2)
I guess with so few Zunes sold, well, the effort isn't worth the rewards. Though, captive audiences...
The funniest part (Score:5, Interesting)
Just how unpopular is it?!?
Hold nail on coffin, beat with hammer (Score:2)
I actually pity Microsoft in a small way, and recalling their other boners (such as BOB), I can't wait to see what the
Comment removed (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
New Ads (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Warning - Only 50% of your beats may result in squirting?
Microsoft is a bunch of moron (Score:2)
Sigh, mind-bogglingly stupid... but irrelevant... (Score:5, Interesting)
Anyway, as I said the Zune pass is the main reason to have one, it lets you download whatever you want from the marketplace.
Now, odds are if you have a zune, you have the pass. Maybe not, but likely so.
So. If you meet another zune owner (and I'll admit this has never happened to me, and I live in one of the ten largest metro areas in the US), and you both have zune pass --- meaning whatever the song is, you could go home and download it and keep it on there for as long as you were a member (forget the 3 days 3 plays) --- you still can't zip it over there. Ridiculous. I guess you might as well just tell them the name of the song or artist.
The wifi feature of the device is pretty much a non-feature. The zune pass is really the only feature at this time. Something apple could easily implement, and hey, I hope they do at some point. But they'd probably have to pay through the nose after microsoft's deal for that. but that's neither here nor there.
Given the pass, the player is still worth it for me. They may update its firmware someday and add other stuff, but as I said, I mainly have this for the pass.
I actually keep the wifi turned on (sacrificing some battery) because on the zune boards I frequent (Zunerama [zunerama.com]) they kind of encourage everyone to do that in hopes paths might cross (on the boards this has resulted in exactly one reported encounter of people that didn't buy them together)...
Someone even went and made a way to chat with Zunes over wifi. How? Well, it lets you share photos. So he created a set of pictures with every letter of the alphabet, plus common phrases and emoticons. So you share photos in a certain order and your recipient can view the pictures to put together the message. A staggering amount of effort...
Anyway. Given that its Sony, and Sony and Microsoft are currently enemies on the gaming front, dunno if its somehow related. Sony doesn't allow sharing of music on PSPs, does it? I have a sony ericsson walkman phone which doesn't seem to have much in the way of DRM enforcement on it. It is supposed to have some kind of associated store from Cingular, but never got around to using it.
Most assinine thing... (Score:3, Insightful)
The day the label companies start actually doing good for their customers and artists is the day hell freezes over.
Why is this so surprising? (Score:4, Insightful)
Apple: Okay, it's $.99 or nothing.
MusicExec: But...
Apple: No.
MusicExec: We need...
Apple: No.
MusicExec: It's not enough...
Apple: No.
MusicExec: Okay fine.
Apple came up with FairPlay to give the Music people some peace of mind. As far as DRM goes, it's about as consumer friendly as I've ever seen. They've also limited iTunes sharing to the local subnet only. However, Apple also recognized that in order to grow the market they have to provide value to the consumer. Argue against that all day if you want. Millions of iPods and billions of tracks sold at the iTunes Music Store prove that they are providing value.
Here's what happened at Microsoft:
MusicExec: We need...
Microsoft: You got it.
MusicExec: We want...
Microsoft: Whatever makes you happy.
MusicExec: Jump.
Microsoft: How high?
Microsoft is not about creating value for consumers. It never has been. It's about dominating markets and doing whatever it takes to reach that end. Don't fool yourselves. Any value created for the consumer is an afterthought. This "limitation" was built into the Zune from the beginning. Microsoft is going to do whatever they can to get the labels to sign on so they have content to sell. This includes crippling the touted abilities of the Zune and paying the labels a percentage of each Zune sold. It has nothing to do with providing value to the customer.
Oh and one last thing. Do you really think the artists see anything of that $1 from each Zune sold?
For once in Apple's existance, they are competing in a market space with Microsoft where they are equal. They both sell music players, they both have music stores. May the best one win.
(and yes I'm voting for Apple)