No. of Recommendations: 0
hi Fools,

TraderJoSeF said:
I for one dont understand the rage over peer to peer technology other than it has created a situation where the public can acquire copyrighted material they otherwise would have to pay for free.

Well, it also gives artists that aren't part of the recording industry "sharecropping" (as Courtney Love puts it here: ) exposure. Theoretically. It needs more nurturing before Matchbox 20's pirated material falls behind unknown indie acts as the main source of traded material. On the other hand, the obscurity of selection is often baffling. It's generally a lot easier to track a random song down on Napster than on the web.

When the music industry comes to its senses and offers its catalog of copyrighted material online for a reasonable fee in conjunction with value added services there will be no use for a service like Napster.

What value added services do you think would make this compelling? I really like Napster. Napster is a community-esque model based on IRC. People know it and like the concept. It appeals, I think, because it taps into the roots of the net, a sort of "damn the man" philosophy.

Napster cant give me access to my music from any net connected device as it will require me to download and store each file on each device I wish to listen.

Couldn't Napster provide this functionality? It wouldn't be out of the question to store the MP3 on their server and then beam out it and delete it as soon as it is done playing. But that isn't even the point (see below).

The future is seen in companies like with its Beam-It service which will allow you to listen to your music from anywhere that the Internet reaches. Napster is merely a transitional technology and is not efficient from a cost standpoint nor does it provide the flexibility the consumer demands.

Storage-based playing is probably not going away anytime soon, either. Do I necessarily want to have to rely on perfect connectivity in the subway just to get my MP3's? Is that feasible? How long will I have to wait before bandwidth is no problem for wireless devices? I can stream MP3's at school on a fast network connection, but I dare not try that on a modem at home, and certainly not with wireless modems. I agree that wireless portable playing is important as a long-term inevitable goal, but never forget the popularity of dedicated devices. MP3Men will probably be very popular as RAM gets cheaper, size gets smaller, and usability reaches Palm-ish levels of brainlessness. Would you rather have to pay a constant fee to be connected to a service that streams MP3's to your car, or have a 20 gig hard disk of MP3's that you can FTP to from your house? People will want the choice. Napster gives you the digital goods.

And as for cost... what costs? Napster has software development and little bandwidth as the users directly connect to one another. Companies streaming MP3's do much more data transfer (and therefore have much higher costs). I would like to know what other costs you see in Napster's model. Keep in mind that I am critical of peer-to-peer as a monetizable (is that even a word?!) model, I just don't see that as being one of the chief criticisms.

Print the post  


What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.