The Beatles/Apple issue is probably related to the legal disputes between Apple Computer (now Apple Inc.) and Apple Corp, the Beatles label.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v._Apple_Computer)

I also think the significance of the Beatles being on iTunes is that they have been a bit of a hold out along with a few other artists when it comes to embracing this latest evolution in music (iPod, mp3, and so on). A few artists have tried to hold out saying that letting consumers have so much control over what format their music is in (not just digitally but also concerning individual songs vs. albums) would destroy the art form. Clearly the consumer is actually winning this round.

Now, will the next round be between buying songs vs. renting them?

Oh, and my next life goal is to not ever own a copy of Windows Vista. When the old PC gets unstable (or should I say more unstable), I’ll have a good excuse to buy an iMac to put next to my PowerBook (yeah, it’s an old G4 but find me a 4 year old PC that runs this well. Or even a one year old PC.)

My mom is not a techie at all. She has Beetles in vinyl. Her CD collection hasn’t been migrated, but she could buy the iTunes tracks and let her iPod auto sync. That is within her skill set.

Part of the significance is that it should mark an end to the long standing feud between Apple Inc. and Apple Records over the name Apple. As for the value of having the Beatles on iTunes, it is the same as having any artist on iTunes, it allows you to purchase music in your PJs.

I am a Beatles fan and always will be; I have many of their original 45s and some 33s. I also have almost all of their works on CD, but there are those hard to find recordings (live at the BBC, Past Masters, etc) that if available on iTunes make life eaiser.

Apple Inc. would not have pursued this if they did not think it would make a fare bit of money, and it will.

The primary reason digital downloads of the Beattles are of interest is in “the long tail.” I would bet there are a huge number of possible consumers willing to pay $.99 for one song, but unwilling to pay $8 for a Beattles CD. I’m sure there are many people that , like myself, are not huge Beattles fans but like one or two of the songs. Since iTunes came out, I think I’ve only bought an entire album twice compared with about three hundred individual downloads. I often like one or two or three songs on a CD but don’t like the rest enough to pay $.99.

Unbundling is a powerful force that lowers the minimum buy-in required to own a song. In the days of CDs I would buy a whole CD sometimes to get one song, but only if I really, really liked the song. The music industry sometimes forced me to buy songs I didn’t want. However, the result was a massive decrease in my personal music spending relative to today.

Because music is a luxury, most customers are very sensitive to price. In the Long Tail book, Chris Anderson includes an example where Rhapsody decreased the price of a song download from $.99 to $.49 and saw a sixfold increase in downloads. Lowering the price of acquisition for “Hard Day’s Night” to $.99 should seriously stimulate sales. In addition, the convenience factor of not driving to the music store is big.

Of course, nothing about this argument relates to the Beattles in particular. I suspect the same phenomenon would happen for any song on iTunes. The main difference between the Beattles and every other band available for digital download is the Beattles are HUGE so the effects are greatly magnified.

For me, I guess it would be kind of a re-discovery of the Beatles. I’ve got 8-tracks and vinyl stowed somewhere, but if I could go to I-tunes and creep through the old stuff, that might prod me to buy a few albums that I already own. Moving medieval technology to my Mac is a PITA, so I’d rather lay down the coin and buzz it to the hard drive!

Another reason to have the Beatles on iTunes is so fans can download remastered versions of their music if and when it becomes available. I have most of the Beatles CDs but they are all from the original releases. Go listen to the Beatles Love podcast to learn more about what is being done with their music.

I have some Beatles music on 45’s and LP records and all of the CD’s. An iTunes announcement won’t be a big deal for me, even remastered versions as mentioned earlier. I’ll continue to buy the CD’s for the sense of ownership the physical disk offers, not to mention backup security. But for the younger generation who may not know their work as well, the iTunes availability will give them the option of buying individual tracks just like any other band. It is my opinion that their music is timeless so making the music available thru the modern distribution channels keeps it fresh and available for everyone to discover or rediscover.

The thing is while the
- Apple vs. Apple is interesting.
- Apple carrying the Beatles is interesting.

Neither (or both) makes for a major announcement. Even if it had the whole Beatles catalog on a special beetle shaped iPod I don’t think it’d be a big deal.

The U2 iPod has been around but still not huge, they had the whole Harry Potter collection on a special Hogwarts edition iPod but that fizzled. I guess they did make a big deal out of the Vertigo iPod commercial…

I’m thinking some AppleTV or even the iPhone ads would make more sense.

That’s assuming they aren’t ready to release a widescreen iPod yet…

As for regretting buying a Mac. I regret buying my iMac. I should have bought the 24″ one… hahaha. Actually, my regret is more that there isn’t a “Mac.” Basically, a scaled back Mac Pro. I don’t need that hefty workstation, but this iMac I’m finding is more limiting than I had thought I could get away with.

That and owning Apple really is a luxury that gets expensive :)

The addition of the Beatles clicks on so many levels, as mentioned above.

One big thing will be the remastering of the music. The original CDs are 20 years old and have never been remastered. My digital transfer of vinyl records sound better.

If you need an example, just listen to the tracks on the Beatles’ “1″ compilation, the Yellow Submarine “Songtrack” or their newest compilation “Love” and compare the sound of those tracks to the regular releases on CD. The new compilations sound far better.

Also, the Beatles’ first four albums have not been released in Stereo on CD, nor have their best albums (Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt. Pepper) been released in mono. Perhaps this is a time for such releases?

In short, these should be the best-sounding digital releases of the Beatles catalog in 20 years.

“I understand their historical significance, but not being a fan myself…”

Am I the only one that finds it disappointing that Cali isn’t a Beatles fan? For better or worse (probably worse), I can’t help but find myself deeply suspicious of people that can’t recognize the intrinsic genius of the Beatles’ songcraft. *winky face to indicate I’m only (half) kidding here*

But more to the point, it’s also interesting to note that during the Macworld keynote, one of the first songs played during the iPhone demonstration was “Lovely Rita” off of Sgt Pepper’s. You could also catch a glimpse of Abbey Road during the coverflow demo. Given the contentiousness of the Apple vs. Apple hatefest, I seriously doubt his Steveness would work in such an obvious overture to the Beatles at a major product announcement unless some sort of deal was imminent.

I regret buying a Mac. I regret the fact that I have to use one almost daily. I used a Mac as my primary work-station at work since 2002 so I think this qualifies me as a very experienced Mac user. But even though I’ve used a Mac at work, I never bought one for home because in my opinion they were too expensive and not worth the money (and I mean that literally… they aren’t worth the money you have to pay for them). But, when Apple came out with the Mac Mini I thought it was cheap enough to buy as a home machine and it would allow me to bring work home that I could only do on my Mac at work. So I bought one but it never really filed the need I thought it would. It soon became an $800 unused, brick sitting on my desk. In fact, I hate using Macs so much that after buying the Mac Mini (and not using it) I realized I was going the wrong way. Instead of trying to make things Mac friendly at home, I should do the opposite and make things PC friendly at work. The problem was, work wasn’t going the buy me a new PC, so I solved that problem by bring in one of my own PC’s to use at work. Since then I have slowly weaned myself off the Mac and I now use my PC for 90% of my job. Hopefully in the next month or two I will be able to give up the Mac completely.
So what issues do I have with Macs? Well I could go on forever but I will try to sum it up….
1. I loathe the lack of control I have with a Mac. I feel like I’m boxed in when I’m on a Mac. I have limits to what I can and can’t do when I’m on a Mac. I like the fact that I have unlimited capabilities on a Windows machine. I can change anything I want, I can run anything I want and I can tweak anything I want.
2. There are less choices on a Mac. One Windows I have unlimited choices. There are unlimited choices in software, from productivity to games to open source software. The phrase, “anything you can do on a Mac can be done on a PC” is extremely valid. But what makes that point even better is the same can’t be said in reverse. There are STILL things that you can do on a PC that you CAN’T do on a Mac (75% of the popular games out there springs to mind). And let’s not get started on the amount of hardware available for a PC verses a Mac!
3. Macs don’t tell you what’s wrong half the time. At least on a Windows machine, when something does go wrong, it usually tells me what went wrong. On a Mac, I get to sit there and look at a spinning pinwheel for half an hour.
4. This next one is just my opinion and is more of personal preference but… I don’t think Macs are easier to use. I personally think they are more confusing than Windows. I think Windows interface is easier to navigate and is more intuitive than Macs. I have spent the same amount of time (over 5 years) using OS X as I have with Windows XP and I still find OS X to be confusing and cumbersome.
In my group of friend I have a few that are Mac only and a few that are Windows only. What annoys me the most about my Mac friends is how they never fail to mention the problems Windows has with viruses, spyware and worms. It’s almost like the relish in the fact that Windows has these problems. But I always think to myself, wouldn’t it be funny if the roles were reverses and Apple had 95% market share and Windows only had 5%… then those of us in the Windows camp could sit back and explain to the Apple guys that OS X sucks because of all the viruses, spyware and worms that are out there attacking OS X.
As for hearing about all the people who have switched to Macs but never hearing about people who have switch back (or sticking with Windows and not switching at all). The reason is, most people like to brag about how they’re a maverick or an underdog. Nobody brags about using something everybody else is using (even if it is better).

Thanks, everyone! Das, I’m sorry - that’s so sad!

Niki - I didn’t say I don’t like the Beatles, I’m just not a “fan”. A fan is a person who buys everything someone does. I just meant that’s not me. I’m a fan of Norah Jones and Jennifer Love Hewitt - I’ll buy and watch everything they put out. And there are tons of people that are “fans” of the Beatles. That’s why I asked the question the way I did. Does that help ease your disappointment in me? ;)

Ugh, the controversy. I’d be able to buy Cali and take her more and the show more seriously if she had more professional mannerisms on the screen. The constant wiggling is CLEARLY entertaining, but it seems to me I’m watching her show to see her wiggle and act like a little girl, and not to see any tech news. I’m not alone. I wish there was a level of professionalism on the mannerism level, because without that it seems like Cali’s geek tv show is more a gimmick than a real tech site. I’ll totally keep watching, but not for the reason the show produced. I assume. That’s my 1.5 cents.

@das7282

1) care to elaborate? do you mean in terms of visual settings? I’m not quite sure what you’re getting at

2) I would say with intel hardware, technically, you can just load up windows and you’re golden. But I know what you mean. Parallels fills that need for me. And I don’t believe you should get a Mac if you game a lot.

3) I have to disagree here… window’s BSOD’s can be the most ambiguous screens in the world

4) eh, you’re right, it’s personal preference. And I hate the stupid spyware argument too. All software has problems, the one that has the most market share usually is targeted first.

@Linh

1) Elaborate? Well let me give you an example. I have a Power Mac at work that has a Gigabit Ethernet card built in. For some reason it won’t run at Gigabit speeds anymore. It did at one time but it won’t now. The problem is, I don’t know why. I’ve looked at every setting I could find and have even tried setting it manually to Gigabit speed (and yes, I am connecting it to a gig switch). My point is, I can’t figure out why it’s not working correctly and OS X isn’t telling me why. If it were a Windows machine, I could (or can) diagnose the problem from within Windows. I could open the device manager and it would probably tell me what’s wrong with the card… The drivers are corrupt, the hardware is failing, it conflicting with another device, etc… In OS X, I’m boxed into what ever it decides I need to know and only allows me to change what it decides I need to change.

2) Apples hardware is still too expensive even if it can run Windows now.

3) I can’t remember the last time I saw a BSOD on Windows. Seriously, it’s been years since I saw a Windows machine blue screen and even then it was a buggy piece of software that did it, not Windows itself. In my opinion, Windows XP is just as (if not more) stable as OS X.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not an Apple hater. In fact I’m a huge iTunes user and I buy all my music through iTunes. I signed up for an iTunes Music Store account with in the first months Apple opened it (back when I could only use it on my Mac at work).

I just don’t get the cult following Apple has (and that’s just what it is, “a cult following”). I’ve used both platforms (extensively) and I don’t see how Macs are better than PCs. In fact, in my opinion, PCs are better than Macs in more ways than Macs are better than PCs.

On a side note; I just recently jumped onto the iPod bandwagon and bought myself an iPod Nano. The ironic thing is, it’s always locking up and/or crashing. At first I thought I had a defective iPod until my daughter got a pink iPod Nano and hers does the same thing. What’s up with that?

@Cali… What’s sad?

@das7282

1. Try looking in the system logs. (Utilities/console)

Also, hook up a Windows machine to the same network port to make sure it is configured for gigabit on the network side.

The only sad part is your experience with Apple, which I think you will agree. For me, I find OS X to be far easier to support than Windows. I had to install cygwin to even try to troubleshoot Windows, but I’m used to the unix type environment.

I wouldn’t ask Cali to change a thing.

@Dennis

I guess that’s what it really boils down to… “What you prefer and what you’re used to”. You see, I like Windows XP because I know it like the back of my hand. I can diagnose just about anything in Windows and there’s very little I don’t know about Windows. However, I’ve never been able to fully grasp OS X… It’s like trying to learn a foreign language to me. And I don’t attribute that to lack of experience because I’ve used OS X almost on a daily basis for the last 5+ years. (Although I did use the Windows 9x family for a few years prior to XP and OS X.)

I just think my issues with OS X are because it just doesn’t work the way I think it should work. On the other hand, Windows XP more closely matches the way I think and operate so therefore Windows XP comes natural to me. So learning Windows XP (and Windows 2000, 2003 Server) was easy for me. But learning OS X has always felt like an uphill battle (and still does). It just goes against my grain of thinking I guess…

“Lovely Rita” was actually the second Beatles song Steve played during the keynote. (I don’t remember what the first one was.)

The only reasons I can see of Apple being so happy about getting the Beatles and Apple Corp are 1-The Apple name in the production company, 2-Steve Jobs, like others who pioneered both Apple and Windows are in their 50s and 60s, I am about to reach that age, and I was just after the Beatles reign as kings of music, so they were in the middle of it. Nothin wrong with being sentimental to the music you grew up with.

Also, though I am not certain of this legally, much of the Beatles music is owned by Michael Jackson. If someone can confirm or deny that with actual notices or such, and what his actual connection is.

‘found on wikipedia’
In 1985, after a short duration in which the parent company was owned by Australian business magnate Robert Holmes à Court, ATV Music was sold to Michael Jackson for a reported $47 million (trumping a joint bid by McCartney and Yoko Ono), including the publishing rights to over 200 songs composed by Lennon and McCartney. (McCartney, who had two hit duets with Jackson, “The Girl Is Mine” and “Say Say Say”, later told Rolling Stone that while he and Jackson were working together on the video for “Say, Say, Say”, he told Jackson that there was money to be made in owning song publishing, referring to his ownership of the Buddy Holly song catalogue, and Jackson reportedly told McCartney, “One day I’m going to buy your songs.” The purchase later caused a rift between McCartney and Jackson.) A decade later Jackson and Sony merged their music publishing businesses. Since 1995, Jackson and Sony/ATV Music Publishing have jointly owned most of the Lennon-McCartney songs recorded by The Beatles. Sony later reported that Jackson had used his share of their co-owned Beatles’ catalogue as collateral for a loan from the music company. Meanwhile, Lennon’s estate and McCartney still receive their respective songwriter shares of the royalties. (Despite his ownership of most of the Lennon-McCartney publishing, Jackson has only recorded one Lennon-McCartney composition himself, “Come Together” which was featured in his film Moonwalker.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beatles