Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Dell Technologies Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Meathead who wrote (174553)	3/3/2005 12:46:02 AM
From: Dan B.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176388

I agree with your analysis there. What's more, being 50 I remember paying either 3.58 or 4.18 for albums at a local discount store. At one album per week from about '68 to '72, I spent more per month then, than Napster charges now to rent per month($10). With Napster I can't loan the album to a friend and get it back a month later covered with cat scratches(not wholly a bad thing, you see), but I can jack my computer into my main stereo and listen at home just as I did then. Back then, to listen in the car one might have bought a 2nd taped copy or bought a machine to make a taped copy. Now, I can make cassettes from Napster willy nilly so long as I'm renting and plugged into my main stereo. Renting from Napster, I could also bypass security by plugging into an "old" computer and ripping new MP-3's(surely better than cassettes I made back when - and in a similar time spent - and then I could IPOD AND share copies on disc with anyone. All in all, after inflation 10 bucks per month to rent a huge library of music available at any time, even without downloading copies(as is often the case with Napster), might be a very attractive monthly charge for lots of kids/folks. Yes, I still have a car with a cassette player in it, but much better to rip to that old computer and play discs in the next car. Dan B.

To: Meathead who wrote (174553)	3/3/2005 8:19:14 AM
From: GVTucker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176388

Meathead, RE: What would you say if I offered you a subscription to Barnes and Noble for $15/mo. Obviously this is an impossible business model but lets just hypothetically say you could take home any book, magazine, periodical or newspaper, read it and return it when you are done. You are just renting. But in the end are you left with nothing? Well, a library offers that exact service for free, and yet people go to Barnes and Noble now because they don't get to keep anything. Ownership means a lot.

To: Meathead who wrote (174553)	3/3/2005 10:47:00 AM
From: kaka	Respond to of 176388

Meathead, I think much has to do with the ways you view music, and books and DVD's. I have no problem just renting a DVD. I'm not a videophile; movies do not give me much pleasure. Every book I've read (independent of medical books and journals...they are just a waste of time), I've owned. Music is a passion for me that's more than a vehicle to get me through a work out or through traffic; I want to concentrate on the music, to be immersed in it. It's not an ephemeral love affair which I can get my fill of only to move on to the next love affair. I'll only purchase CD's ( and especially albums...a properly set up turntable through even a mediocre audio system will blow away any CD, but that's another topic!!), and through the years have amassed an enormous collection. The only obstacle to not playing them more is time, not the next love affair! But thats just me, a relative minority with this view. I think for the rest, "renting" is just fine. I wonder how many downloaded songs are actually burned to permanent CD's vs. just stored on and played from the computer? I know many ipod owners who just hook the computer or ipod to a rather large portable stereo, turn up the volume and let the party begin. Music on the devices is mainly previously owned CD's anyway. Maybe thats the larger issue. Not whether you rent or own, but the fact that new music today generally sucks, and better music played via a compressed mp3 file through earbuds sucks even worse. cheers, kaka