Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Microsoft Ad: It Costs $30,000 to Fill iPod

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 61 comments
Tags :

Microsoft has made tons of headlines with its Laptop Hunters series of advertisements. Microsoft has released the latest in its new campaign and surprisingly, it’s not about PCs, but rather media players.

Microsoft hired Wes Moss, a certified financial planner to explain the kind of money you’ll spend trying to fill an iPod with music as opposed to a Zune. The commercial is fairly straight forward. With iTunes' "a buck a song" pricing, you’ll spend $30,000 “filling the latest iPod.” With ZunePass, you can have unlimited music, for $14.99 per month.

However, there’s one tiny problem. The $30,000 versus $14.99 per month argument is all well and good but that assumes the user is starting out with no music library at all. Using Moss’s 120 GB iPod example, it’s hard to imagine someone buying a high capacity MP3 player if they don’t already own tons of music. It also doesn’t factor in peoples’ CD collections, photos, or videos they might want to store on their iPod. 



Moss makes a good point. Who has $30K lying around to spend on music? And as a heavy consumer of music, I’m all for subscription based services. This ad would probably have worked better with one of the lower end iPods purchased by those who don’t have a huge music library and likely would be starting from square one. Then again, Microsoft wouldn’t get to tell you your Apple MP3 player is costing you $30K if they went with the Nano.

Check out the ad here. Oh and for those interested, Engadget points out that Wes Moss was booted off of Donald Trump's The Apprentice in week eleven.
 

Discuss
Display all 61 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 35 Hide
    stlunatic , May 12, 2009 4:59 PM
    Its also ilegal to urinate in public...
  • 29 Hide
    stlunatic , May 12, 2009 4:54 PM
    Why not just download mp3s off the internet for free?
  • 20 Hide
    tenor77 , May 12, 2009 5:03 PM
    stlunaticIts also ilegal to urinate in public...


    So is sex in public. Turns out we weren't alone on the beach after all.
Other Comments
  • 29 Hide
    stlunatic , May 12, 2009 4:54 PM
    Why not just download mp3s off the internet for free?
  • 35 Hide
    stlunatic , May 12, 2009 4:59 PM
    Its also ilegal to urinate in public...
  • -9 Hide
    mindless728 , May 12, 2009 5:01 PM
    oh no, the RIAA just got your IP address, lol
  • 11 Hide
    Platypus , May 12, 2009 5:02 PM
    It's about time they did some advertising for their Zune. I do like the $15/mo versus having to pay $1 (sometimes more since they raised the rates a little) for every single song you want to put on your iPod.

    Now if only they would make the Zune in a variety of methods, along with a variety of accessories (like anything that keeps the user from having to worry about wires while they're exercising), I think I'd be all over this one.

    That might make a nice article in the future. iPod accessories vs Zune accessories, and whether they are worth it or if they're just another little thing to try to nickel and dime you. $30 wall charger for the iPod, anybody?
  • -9 Hide
    norbs , May 12, 2009 5:02 PM
    bustaprActually that ad should really have been thrown at itunes and not the big expensive ipod that nobody ever fills. Its true that subscription services are better but thats really when your zune would last more than a week. I had a zune and it toased on the first day.


    aww so you didn't even have a chance to have it crash on you on new years?
  • 20 Hide
    tenor77 , May 12, 2009 5:03 PM
    stlunaticIts also ilegal to urinate in public...


    So is sex in public. Turns out we weren't alone on the beach after all.
  • 6 Hide
    norbs , May 12, 2009 5:04 PM
    tenor77So is sex in public. Turns out we weren't alone on the beach after all.

    yes he was with a woman?
  • 12 Hide
    stlunatic , May 12, 2009 5:05 PM
    There are sites where you can download music LEGALLY for FREE...
  • 14 Hide
    stlunatic , May 12, 2009 5:13 PM
    No, I dont pee in public but my dog does... Wanna join him?

    Getting back to the topic, imagine you have a band or you are a musician who isnt well known or famous, and you have a new track or recording you want to share with the world via the internet. Say you put this on piratebay or myspace or whatever... That is not illegal :( 
  • 13 Hide
    xantech22 , May 12, 2009 5:16 PM
    Ipod users are brainwashed into buying their music from itunes and pay $1 for a song.

    So they are hoping you don't have any cd's at all and have no choice but to hand them over $1 per song, you see, i myself had an ipod but without the brainwashing, I'm smarter than that and man, did i have a hard time transfering my MP3's to that blasted ipod. So i traded it for a cheap-ass $40 emerson mp3 player and after having that i didnt care that i spent over $150 for that stupid ipod because for a $40 mp3 player, it can play WHATEVER YOU WANT! and i still use it today, hasn't failed me yet.


    The moral: why pay more to pay even more for songs you already own? that's a....QOTD!
  • 8 Hide
    squatchman , May 12, 2009 5:21 PM
    I picked up the 120GB zune a while back and the zune pass subscription is pretty awesome.(especially since it uses the same virtual currency as my Xbox Live Account) The ability to purchase songs off of FM radio works really well for me and I've legally increased my music collection from a meager 10 gigs to about 35 gigs in the last four months with no end in sight without busting my wallet.

    I think the lack of a touch screen is a plus for me... One less part of the device to power and the interface is the simpler style that the itouch ditched in favor of "t3h sh1nyz."
  • 6 Hide
    solymnar , May 12, 2009 5:21 PM
    Busta, stlunatic is referring to websites hosted by bands that post their music to be dloaded for free or hopefully for optional donations etc.

    Some of it is very good, but because they haven't signed with a major label you likely will not have heard of them etc.

    This commercial is (as pointed out already) pretty far off base. The point stands that for some people a subscription based model just makes more sense.

    But for many, we have our established collection, and really only want 3-4 new songs added to it a month. That's $3-4 a month instead of $15.

    Of course if either download model makes it a pita to actually use the songs that I paid for on my devices that I own...they can get bent.
  • 4 Hide
    cracklint , May 12, 2009 5:26 PM
    I don't like many new artist, most of the artist I listen to are dead. Who deserves payment for their music? The family? I am sure the labels are more than happy to give sales revenue to the family of the deceased. If I were an artist I would hope that my legacy would be carried on by wide free distribution of my music. Man I wish Waylon Jennings was still around.
  • 1 Hide
    hellwig , May 12, 2009 5:28 PM
    "It also doesn’t factor in peoples’ CD collections, photos, or videos they might want to store on their iPod."

    First off, the RIAA would like you to stop ripping your CDs to MP3s. Anyone remember that Sony rootkit fiasco?

    Second, how much did you initially pay for those CDs anyway? More than likely it was more than $1 a song.

    Third, Photos don't take gigabytes of data, not at a resolution intended for an iPod. If you keep your 8mega-pixel photos in the default resolution taken by your camera, you could probably benefit from some photo resizing software.

    Fourth, unless you transfer all your high-def camcorder videos to your iPod, you still won't have 120GB of space being used (and if I'm not mistaken, the iPod won't down-convert, so you have to have iPod-sized videos anyway).

    In the end, how many people have a legal library of music and video they carry on their iPod that consumes the entire 120GB? No, I'm not counting professional photographers/videographers or people using their iPod as a flash-drive for computer backups. I'm also not talking about people who violate the DMCA by ripping thier DVDs into H.264 or download ripped music and video. I'm just talking average joes with a large, legal music or video collection. Not many people, and even those who do probably spent a fortune getting that library in the first place (i.e. microsofts $30k argument is still valid).
  • -3 Hide
    stlunatic , May 12, 2009 5:28 PM
    xantech22Ipod users are brainwashed into buying their music from itunes and pay $1 for a song.So they are hoping you don't have any cd's at all and have no choice but to hand them over $1 per song, you see, i myself had an ipod but without the brainwashing, I'm smarter than that and man, did i have a hard time transfering my MP3's to that blasted ipod. So i traded it for a cheap-ass $40 emerson mp3 player and after having that i didnt care that i spent over $150 for that stupid ipod because for a $40 mp3 player, it can play WHATEVER YOU WANT! and i still use it today, hasn't failed me yet.The moral: why pay more to pay even more for songs you already own? that's a....QOTD!


    Do you pee in public? that's a... QOTD!
Display more comments