You can still monopolise one market while being less heavily involved in others.
Look at the other thread on the end of the CD. It seems to suggest a Soviet-style allocation of commodities to institutions: downloads handled by iTunes and CDs by Amazon. Doesn’t it mean anything that your product will have virtually only one major outlet? And that one being geared up to favour a particular hardware?
Yes, but even 75% of a market doesn’t constitute a monopoly, especially since other outlets, like Rhapsody, are profitable. Apple’s prices and policies are fair and consistent with other vendors. It’s really just a strong market position. It may become a monopoly, however, so the discussion Is relevant
The popularity of iTunes is because of consumer choice, not because it is the only option available.
The price of an iPod is almost half the price of a comparable Zune MP3 player. Why? Because of economy-of-scale. The popularity of iTunes (and the iPod) means Apple can sell more units at less per-unit-profit. The consumer gets a better deal. Apple gains market share and makes a profit. That’s competition.
Apple has proven a high-tech consumer products company can survive, and flourish, with only a tiny market share. Their competition with the PC illustrates that; with PCs running Microsoft Windows enjoying about 95% market share to Apples 5%. Apple has done extraordinarily well in marketing iPod and iTunes, by meeting the needs/wants of consumers at an attractive price point and being strong competitors.
I bought a Zune 120gb and a Zune HD. Both were about $20 less than the comparable iPod at the time of purchase. The Zune software is (IMO) vastly superior to iTunes. For a company that supposedly stakes their reputation on user friendly and ergonomic design, iTunes is a total cluster F application with pretty much every design principal mistake and consumer unfriendly restriction possible. iTunes is popular because they had an early lock down and distribution system of content that matched the content a large consumer segment was interested in. It wasn’t the first, by a long shot, with the delivery model. But, they were first with major label “star” content. They also managed to do that at a time when a young generation were primed to accept that media.
I still find even the highest bitrate mp3 downloadable content to be horrific to listen to for other than background noise. But, that’s a different discussion.
I’ve been looking for an alternative to the iPod; something with comparable drive-size that’ll play MP3s without any DRM restrictions. I own the songs on CDs to put on it.
I looked at the Zune this week. The cheapest I could find a 120GB model was almost $500 USD with tax and shipping. That’s about twice as much as a comparable iPod. If I can get a Zune of comparable size and price, then I’m going for it. If anyone can recommend a U.S. based retailer (online or chain-store, makes no difference to me), I’d be grateful.
Holy crap, the prices have jumped considerably. Maybe because the Zune as a device line is dead. I paid $349 brand spankin new when the 120s first came out. At the time I don’t believe there was a 120 model of the iPod. I don’t remember the exact size, but the largest capacity iPod (80?) was way more, although you could get them on sale or with discounts at ~20-25 more than the Zune 120GB. Looks like those days are over. Too bad, the Zune is better in every way than the iPod.