TechNewsWorld: Napster: ‘We Will Take Market Share from Apple’ | iLounge News


TechNewsWorld: Napster: ‘We Will Take Market Share from Apple’

“Not to be upstaged by Apple, Roxio chairman and chief executive officer Chris Gorog challenged Apple’s statistics and told TechNewsWorld his company will be chipping away at Apple’s market share with a powerful marketing campaign already underway.

“We expect as soon as we get the word out to consumers that Napster is back, it will significantly impact our growth,” Gorog said in an exclusive interview with TechNewsWorld. “We would also expect to be taking away market share from Apple on a weekly basis.”“

« Best-Selling Author Neil Gaiman on the iSkin

The Apple Store: $25 off $249 Coupon »

Related Stories



I like to see that ;o) not!

Posted by voodoo on November 7, 2003 at 4:52 PM (CST)


i WOULD like to see this. apple needs some real competition to its music store so it can be improved. right now it doesn’t have a chance against kazaa etc.

Posted by adam on November 7, 2003 at 5:14 PM (CST)


what else are they supposed to say?

“yeah, we’ll try. but in the end, ITMS will eat our lunch.”

spin the PR wheel, round and round it goes…

Posted by evilrobot on November 7, 2003 at 5:43 PM (CST)


Bring it on, Turdster!

Posted by fnj on November 7, 2003 at 5:45 PM (CST)


How typical, something that may not go Apple’s way, then people come in here and flame the story, well done.

Posted by Adam on November 7, 2003 at 6:27 PM (CST)


Come on Adam you can’t really think the new Napster has a chance.  I don’t own a Mac so I am not biased towards Apple.  I just now a better product when I see it and iTunes is better.

Napster’s interface is just awful.

Posted by RaZMaN on November 7, 2003 at 7:09 PM (CST)


yes napster does have a chance. they have a much bigger music selection

Posted by zeve on November 7, 2003 at 7:21 PM (CST)


Haha, Roxio is scared….

Posted by mongoos150 on November 7, 2003 at 7:30 PM (CST)


Napster will only work on XP and win 2000, they are leaving out to many people to even make a difference.  No way they can compete with iTunes music store, they cater to everybody!

Posted by AudioGod on November 7, 2003 at 7:43 PM (CST)


they cater to the same windows crowd as napster does.

Posted by Fiddytree on November 7, 2003 at 8:02 PM (CST)


itunes only works with xp and 2000 as well

Posted by dfgh on November 7, 2003 at 8:27 PM (CST)


Um… and Mac, too. Don’t forget, Mac users were buying an average of 600,000 songs per week before iTunes for Windows launched.

Posted by Dinky on November 7, 2003 at 10:02 PM (CST)


Guys, think about it.

Napster works with WMA - that means over 80% of the portable music players our there.

iTMS works with AAC - that means less than 20% of the portable music players out there.

Any way you look at it iTMS is a niche and Napster (and other WMA stores) is the mainstream.

Posted by RealityCheck on November 7, 2003 at 10:09 PM (CST)


yeah but theres only like 5 mac users :P

Posted by zeve on November 7, 2003 at 11:13 PM (CST)


What next? A new version of Kazaa but legalized? - $.99 per megabyte or $9.99 for a full app of your choosing? And it runs on Lindows?

Posted by kainjow on November 7, 2003 at 11:15 PM (CST)


There is already a Napster version for the Mac in beta according to this article:

Posted by lazyn00b on November 8, 2003 at 1:57 AM (CST)


No matter how you slice it, and now that eMusic turned the gun on itself, every single download service sucks at this point in time. Not neceesarily because of the model itself, it’s the lack of content. The content is simply terrible. Somewhat similar to Circuit City’s CD music stock.

Also, the carte blanche model is for the birds. Subscription service is the best model. It’ll evolve to that eventually.

So, who cares if iTMS is better than Napster or Music Match or Buymusic. They are all terrible.

Posted by zippy99 on November 8, 2003 at 5:11 AM (CST)


Certainly. I did not buy an iPod so that I could play music from the iTunes Store. I bought it because it was the best hard drive player on the market right now, and I wanted my entire CD collection portable. Out of my hundreds of CDs, I doubt there is even half a dozen available in the iTMS, and even if I did find something there that I really wanted, I wouldn’t buy it from there. Why would I? I might as well pay a little extra for the full quality physical media and have *full* control over the resulting encoded files. No DRM nonsense, just me and my music at whatever quality level I want.

Online music is a bit of a fad now, but I think it will go the same way as eBooks in the end. Good for a small niche, but most people are not going to want to sacrifice physically owning something and having full control over what they purchase. That’s the single biggest problem with all of these online music stores. They are selling the same thing for a slightly reduced price, but with only a tenth of the benefits. It’s not the small savings you might get from buying online, because the cost of the equipment required to play these tunes is so outrageous that anyone with the ability to purchase them isn’t going to be financially crushed by spending a few dollars more on a superior version of the same thing.

Posted by Ioa on November 8, 2003 at 9:12 AM (CST)


I think that Ioa is kinda right. however, i think that this form of business will be good for singles, but will soon get rid of album downloads. there isn’t any reason to use these services to replace your album purchases.

Posted by Fiddytree on November 8, 2003 at 10:20 AM (CST)


You have a point with the singles, and that is really part of a market that I am not a part of, so I neglected to think of that. And the singles issues is something that really cannot be matched in the eBook world—I guess if you could buy a single poem out of an anthology, that would be the closest analogy, but I am not aware of any system that allows that. So that is one area that could succeed. I do have to wonder if the market for singles is really big enough to sustain the entire business concept, though? I think it suffers from serving the wrong market.

Example, the average person who buys a lot of singles is going to be in a younger demographic. They are the ones following pop culture more closely, and that is really where the single engine thrives. This is also, incidentally, where the illegal trading market is largest, mostly due to lack of funds. Apple’s new “allowance” thing might help bite in to that, that was a good idea.

Now once you get into the demographic that can afford music purchases, they usually stop following pop culture, and are more interested in owning a “collection” of their favorite artists. And there we fall into the whole, “why by a restrictive one when you can get freedom of use for a few bucks more.”

The narrow twilight in between these broad demographics, and the exceptions to all rules of course, is where the niche will stick. The question is, once again, whether it is large enough to sustain itself.

Posted by Ioa on November 8, 2003 at 11:38 AM (CST)

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

If you have a comment, news tip, advertising inquiry, or coverage request, a question about iPods/iPhones/iPad or accessories, or if you sell or market iPod/iPhone/iPad products or services, read iLounge's Comments + Questions policies before posting, and fully identify yourself if you do. We will delete comments containing advertising, astroturfing, trolling, personal attacks, offensive language, or other objectionable content, then ban and/or publicly identify violators.

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.
Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter


Recent News

Recent Reviews

Recent Articles

Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter


iLounge is an independent resource for all things iPod, iPhone, iPad, and beyond.
iPod, iPhone, iPad, iTunes, Apple TV, Mac, and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc.
iLounge is © 2001 - 2014 iLounge, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy