To: Doren who wrote (169957 ) 5/29/2014 7:26:19 AM From: Ryan Bartholomew Respond to My guess is this demographic is mostly Android, but those who are iPhone users like those golden phones. High income users are more likely iOS. Women are more likely iOS. So if you're referring to high income men, you have two opposing variables. I'm immersed with entrepreneurs, and not many I run into have an iPhone these days. So that could be a factor, too.So we might see some conversion to iOS products, along with a ready made music service, and status hardware. I guess we'll see. The hardware nor the existing Beats streaming is likely the target of this acquisition. It's more likely the talent and perception and the hope that together they'll create a new service that will give Spotify, Pandora, and other streaming services a run. After all, MP3 downloads are going the way of CD purchases.... streaming is where it's at. Apple is smart and sees this, so it's their way of cheaply ($3,000,000,000 is nothing to them, and much less than they would have spent to vault into the lead) joining the fray. What perplexes me is the fact they went about it this way instead of creating it themselves from the ground up. The Apple of yesteryear would have created their own product and tried to steal the thunder, not bought into it.Another thing, I doubt anyone here has used the Beats streaming service. For all we know the technology IS superior to Spotify et al.Does anyone here use Spotify or Beats or any other streaming service? Yes, and Beats is no Spotify. Though I'm not a huge fan of Spotify, either. The service you prefer depends largely upon the content you prefer and the way you like it mixed up. If you want to select and create your own playlists, Pandora won't do, but if you like to be presented with best-guesses as to what you might like, it is great. If you seek unique content, especially content not limited to music (e.g., talk radio, comedy, specific hosts, etc.) then SiriusXM is probably your cup of tea. And so on.
