Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.misc > #4930 > unrolled thread

Apple's Devious U2 Album Giveaway Is Even Worse Than Spam

Back to article view | Back to comp.misc

Contents

  Apple's Devious U2 Album Giveaway Is Even Worse Than Spam Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-16 12:06 +0000
    Re: Apple's Devious U2 Album Giveaway Is Even Worse Than Spam Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> - 2014-09-16 09:56 -0400
    Re: Apple's Devious U2 Album Giveaway Is Even Worse Than Spam scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) - 2014-09-16 17:05 +0000
    Re: Apple's Devious U2 Album Giveaway Is Even Worse Than Spam Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-09-16 21:26 +0000
      Re: Apple's Devious U2 Album Giveaway Is Even Worse Than Spam Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-09-17 12:41 +0200
        Re: Apple's Devious U2 Album Giveaway Is Even Worse Than Spam Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-09-17 13:23 +0000
          Re: Apple's Devious U2 Album Giveaway Is Even Worse Than Spam Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-09-19 07:40 +0000
            Re: Apple's Devious U2 Album Giveaway Is Even Worse Than Spam Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-09-19 16:37 +0000
      Re: Apple's Devious U2 Album Giveaway Is Even Worse Than Spam RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-09-18 11:17 +0000
        Re: Apple's Devious U2 Album Giveaway Is Even Worse Than Spam Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-09-18 21:55 +0000
    Re: Apple's Devious U2 Album Giveaway Is Even Worse Than Spam Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-09-17 12:54 +0200
      Re: Apple's Devious U2 Album Giveaway Is Even Worse Than Spam Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-17 12:22 +0000
        Re: Apple's Devious U2 Album Giveaway Is Even Worse Than Spam Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-09-17 13:24 +0000

#4930 — Apple's Devious U2 Album Giveaway Is Even Worse Than Spam

http://www.wired.com/2014/09/apples-devious-u2-album-giveaway-even-worse-spam/

   Last week, Apple gave us all a gift called Songs of Innocence. On
   Monday, it released instructions on how to give that gift back.

   The company concluded its big reveal of the Apple Watch and the newest
   generation iPhones with a curious coda: 10 years after the U2 song
   "Vertigo" was used in one of the first "dancing silhouette" iPod ads,
   the band took to the stage to unveil a surprise new album being
   distributed exclusively by Apple, and given to all users of the iTunes
   Music Store. In a press release, Apple calls this, correctly, "the
   largest album release ever." "A big moment in music history. And you're
   part of it," crows the U2 page Apple set up on its website. "Never
   before have so many people owned one album, let alone on the day of its
   release."

   This is all technically true, but bloviating aside, there's a very
   simple reason why this is unprecedented, and that is because it doesn't
   make any sense. Never before has such a major technology company also
   operated as publicist for a creative artist. The whole endeavor yearns
   desperately to be a landmark new innovation for the music industry,
   perhaps something along the lines of Radiohead's legitimately
   earth-moving In Rainbows, which was self-released with variable pricing
   in 2007 and remains the gold standard against which music industry
   innovation is measured.

   ...

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#4932

On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 12:06:27 +0000 (UTC), Rich <rich@example.invalid>
wrote:

>http://www.wired.com/2014/09/apples-devious-u2-album-giveaway-even-worse-spam/
>
>   Last week, Apple gave us all a gift called Songs of Innocence. On
>   Monday, it released instructions on how to give that gift back.

It reminds me of those horrible, chaos-filled days of death and
destruction when every Windows95 CD came with not one but TWO music
videos on them (Weezer's "Buddy Holly" and some other one). Worse,
this was back in the day when 10MB was actually a noticable use of
disk-space! Sometimes the videos were even installed onto the
hard-drive! The only way to get rid of it was to totally get rid of it
was to wipe the HDD and then destroy the CD-ROM.

I'm still trying to recover from the emotional scarring.

One cannot help but feel sympathy for the poor wretches suffering
through the terrible calmity of receiving a free song on their phones.
How they must envy the dead!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4933

In article <j9Sv+huNv+aW9h8xJUr8W3FU@dont-email.me>,
Rich  <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>http://www.wired.com/2014/09/apples-devious-u2-album-giveaway-even-worse-spam/

Why is the phrase "first-world problems" coming to mind as I read this?

  _/_
 / v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( http://alfter.us/            Top-posting!
 \_^_/                              >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4937

On 2014-09-16, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:

>    The whole endeavor yearns
>    desperately to be a landmark new innovation for the music industry,
>    perhaps something along the lines of Radiohead's legitimately
>    earth-moving In Rainbows, which was self-released with variable pricing
>    in 2007 and remains the gold standard against which music industry
>    innovation is measured.

Bunch of whiney shoe-gazers.


-- 
Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 40th day of Bureaucracy in the YOLD 3180
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere,
diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies”. Groucho Marx.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4943

On 2014-09-16, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> On 2014-09-16, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>
>>    The whole endeavor yearns
>>    desperately to be a landmark new innovation for the music industry,
>>    perhaps something along the lines of Radiohead's legitimately
>>    earth-moving In Rainbows, which was self-released with variable pricing
>>    in 2007 and remains the gold standard against which music industry
>>    innovation is measured.
>
> Bunch of whiney shoe-gazers.

FWIW I don't like RadioHead either but we had the choice whether to get
that album or not.

-- 
People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know
we don't                                           -- Bjarne Stroustrup

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4948

On 2014-09-17, Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> wrote:
> On 2014-09-16, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2014-09-16, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>    The whole endeavor yearns
>>>    desperately to be a landmark new innovation for the music industry,
>>>    perhaps something along the lines of Radiohead's legitimately
>>>    earth-moving In Rainbows, which was self-released with variable pricing
>>>    in 2007 and remains the gold standard against which music industry
>>>    innovation is measured.
>>
>> Bunch of whiney shoe-gazers.
>
> FWIW I don't like RadioHead either but we had the choice whether to get
> that album or not.

There's a First World problem for you.


-- 
Today is Setting Orange, the 41st day of Bureaucracy in the YOLD 3180
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere,
diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies”. Groucho Marx.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4980

Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> On 2014-09-17, Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> wrote:
>> On 2014-09-16, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2014-09-16, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>    The whole endeavor yearns
>>>>    desperately to be a landmark new innovation for the music industry,
>>>>    perhaps something along the lines of Radiohead's legitimately
>>>>    earth-moving In Rainbows, which was self-released with variable pricing
>>>>    in 2007 and remains the gold standard against which music industry
>>>>    innovation is measured.
>>> 
>>> Bunch of whiney shoe-gazers.
>> 
>> FWIW I don't like RadioHead either but we had the choice whether to get
>> that album or not.
> 
> There's a First World problem for you.
> 

You say this like it's a bad thing.  I think we all prefer having "first
world problems" don't we?  I mean, when was the last time you almost died
because the malaria drugs got hijacked by rebels in the interior?

First world problems - my favorite kind.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4989

On 2014-09-19, Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2014-09-17, Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> wrote:
>>> On 2014-09-16, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 2014-09-16, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>    The whole endeavor yearns
>>>>>    desperately to be a landmark new innovation for the music industry,
>>>>>    perhaps something along the lines of Radiohead's legitimately
>>>>>    earth-moving In Rainbows, which was self-released with variable pricing
>>>>>    in 2007 and remains the gold standard against which music industry
>>>>>    innovation is measured.
>>>> 
>>>> Bunch of whiney shoe-gazers.
>>> 
>>> FWIW I don't like RadioHead either but we had the choice whether to get
>>> that album or not.
>> 
>> There's a First World problem for you.
>> 
>
> You say this like it's a bad thing. 

It's irony. I suspect you septics don't do irony.

(Like bronzy, only harder.)


-- 
Today is Boomtime, the 43rd day of Bureaucracy in the YOLD 3180
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere,
diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies”. Groucho Marx.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4960

On 16 Sep 2014 21:26:14 GMT
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:

> On 2014-09-16, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
> 
> >    The whole endeavor yearns
> >    desperately to be a landmark new innovation for the music industry,
> >    perhaps something along the lines of Radiohead's legitimately
> >    earth-moving In Rainbows, which was self-released with variable pricing
> >    in 2007 and remains the gold standard against which music industry
> >    innovation is measured.
> 
> Bunch of whiney shoe-gazers.


First world problems maybe, but I think it's been an uncomfortable
reminder for many that their device is not truly "theirs" to own.  Much
as the incident when Amazon.com pulled Orwell's 1984 off of readers'
devices without authorizing (oh, sweet irony) reminded Amazon Kindle
owners the same thing, a whole lot of Apple iphone owners were just
reminded that Apple has complete power to put stuff on - and take stuff
off - their devices without so much as asking permission.  That's
uncomfortable for a lot of people who were focused more on the
shininess of being among the first to own the new model.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4974

On 2014-09-18, RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
> On 16 Sep 2014 21:26:14 GMT
> Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 2014-09-16, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>> >    The whole endeavor yearns
>> >    desperately to be a landmark new innovation for the music industry,
>> >    perhaps something along the lines of Radiohead's legitimately
>> >    earth-moving In Rainbows, which was self-released with variable pricing
>> >    in 2007 and remains the gold standard against which music industry
>> >    innovation is measured.
>> 
>> Bunch of whiney shoe-gazers.
>
>
> First world problems maybe, but I think it's been an uncomfortable
> reminder for many that their device is not truly "theirs" to own.  

Spot on.


-- 
Today is Sweetmorn, the 42nd day of Bureaucracy in the YOLD 3180
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere,
diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies”. Groucho Marx.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4944

On 2014-09-16, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
> http://www.wired.com/2014/09/apples-devious-u2-album-giveaway-even-worse-spam/
>
>    Last week, Apple gave us all a gift called Songs of Innocence. On
>    Monday, it released instructions on how to give that gift back.

<snip>

>
>    This is all technically true, but bloviating aside, there's a very
>    simple reason why this is unprecedented, and that is because it doesn't
>    make any sense. Never before has such a major technology company also
>    operated as publicist for a creative artist. The whole endeavor yearns
>    desperately to be a landmark new innovation for the music industry,

To me its horribly reminiscent of they way all my local radio stations
got taken over or merged in the early 2000s and then used the same
playlists.  The formula "you will enjoy what we provide" doesn't work.

By the end of 2002 I wasn't hearing any new music on the radio good enough
to prompt me to buy an album, so yes I did stop buying CDs of new stuff.

Actually that me onto another subject.  In 2002 Big Content was moaning
about piracy affecting sales, when in fact a lot of folks my age were
keeping CD sales quite buoyant as they bought the CD versions of stuff
they already had on vinyl.

-- 
People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know
we don't                                           -- Bjarne Stroustrup

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4947

Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> wrote:
> On 2014-09-16, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
> > http://www.wired.com/2014/09/apples-devious-u2-album-giveaway-even-worse-spam/
> >
> >    Last week, Apple gave us all a gift called Songs of Innocence. On
> >    Monday, it released instructions on how to give that gift back.

> <snip>

> >
> >    This is all technically true, but bloviating aside, there's a very
> >    simple reason why this is unprecedented, and that is because it doesn't
> >    make any sense. Never before has such a major technology company also
> >    operated as publicist for a creative artist. The whole endeavor yearns
> >    desperately to be a landmark new innovation for the music industry,

> To me its horribly reminiscent of they way all my local radio stations
> got taken over or merged in the early 2000s and then used the same
> playlists.  The formula "you will enjoy what we provide" doesn't work.

It was worse than that here.  They all became "talk radio" during the
morning drive hours, such that there was one song per hour, 300
commericals, and the rest of the time was taken up by the "shock jock"
and friends just talking about crap no one cared a damn about.

> Actually that me onto another subject.  In 2002 Big Content was moaning
> about piracy affecting sales,

Big Content moans about piracy affecting sales because they utilize the
incorrect formula that "one pirated copy always equates to one lost
sale" when the reality is that many of those pirate copies would never
have been sales.  The "pirate" would simply have done without before
buying the album.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4949

On 2014-09-17, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:

> Big Content moans about piracy affecting sales because they utilize the
> incorrect formula that "one pirated copy always equates to one lost
> sale" when the reality is that many of those pirate copies would never
> have been sales.  The "pirate" would simply have done without before
> buying the album.

Hear, hear.


-- 
Today is Setting Orange, the 41st day of Bureaucracy in the YOLD 3180
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere,
diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies”. Groucho Marx.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.misc

csiph-web