[waveformpc]

I was just thinking, wouldn't it be pretty sweet it iPod, or any other mobile device, offered a mobile music service via GPRS? I mean, quite a large area is now covered by GPRS. No more syncing your mobile device with your desktop to get the latest tunes, just sign in to your GPRS provider, and download the songs on the go with your mobile device...

The only potential problems I see are:

1) Cost of GPRS access (though, T-Mobile does provide unlimited for $29.99)
2) What would stop Napster and iPod from just using the idea themselves, since you would obviously have to work with them on a project like this?

I've been talking to a few programmers that could develop a front-end for these services for use on mobile devices via Java or any other supported language - But Napster requires Windows Media Player, and iTunes requires the iTunes player, which is another hurdle. Most mobile devices that carry some form of Windows does in fact have Windows Media Player, so iTunes might be out of the picture...

The UK already started doing this back in 2003, but I haven't heard much more about it - Perhaps the GPRS network wasn't large enough at the time? http://addict3d.org/index.php?page=v...pe=news&ID=117

[mxer210]

There is a new iPod with a phone developed by Apple and Motorola in a combined product partnership. It's all ready to go, but they need to find a service carrier to do it. T-Mobile is considering, but Verizon and Cingular already said they wouldn't offer it.

[waveformpc]

Originally posted by mxer210
There is a new iPod with a phone developed by Apple and Motorola in a combined product partnership. It's all ready to go, but they need to find a service carrier to do it. T-Mobile is considering, but Verizon and Cingular already said they wouldn't offer it.

The software I was thinking of wouldn't be specific to a device, and it could be installed on a phone or other mobile device that already has a service provider... The other service providers may not want to give Apple and Motorola the deep discount, their monthly GPRS service (unlimited) is $79.99 on a two year contract vs. T-Mobile at $29.99 for the same service and one year contract.

[mxer210]

No, the main problem is charging for songs. In europe, users can download ful songs on their phone, through their phone, like a phone wireless version of iTunes or Napster. Verizon adn Cingular want to have it where all songs on phones must be downloaded wirelessly through their network so they can charge $3/song and make big bucks. Apple and Motorola's new device lets you connect the phone to the computer and upload songs onto your phone from your computer, which most of the service providers don't want.

[waveformpc]

Originally posted by mxer210
No, the main problem is charging for songs. In europe, users can download ful songs on their phone, through their phone, like a phone wireless version of iTunes or Napster. Verizon adn Cingular want to have it where all songs on phones must be downloaded wirelessly through their network so they can charge $3/song and make big bucks. Apple and Motorola's new device lets you connect the phone to the computer and upload songs onto your phone from your computer, which most of the service providers don't want.

Hmmm... I think I see. The cellular providers won't let Apple/Motorola in unless they get some of the profit? I just read an article about that, and how Apple is really only "breaking even" with the $0.99 songs, getting something like $0.04 per song in profit. Does Apple/Motorola plan on allowing users to download songs via GPRS?

Like I said though, if iPod, or someone, was to develop a java based software application for PDA's or existing smart phones, users could just use those applications to both download songs from the GPRS service and sync it with the computer. That would totally bypass the cellular companies, because only those who are already cellular customers could make use of such a service (unless the cellular company shut off service to anyone downloading things through their GPRS service).

The problem is Apple developing a new device, and then expecting the cellular companies to provide cellular service to it - whereas a software based solution would use existing devices that already have access to the cellular service.

[mxer210]

The cellular providers won't let Apple/Motorola in unless they get some of the profit?

The Apple/motorola plan gives providers no profit from songs. Apple/motorola wants to have it where their gadget is just like an ipod, and music can be trasnfered freely. Verizon and Cellular are looking for profits, and smaller carriers like T-Mobile are looking for customers. They are considering the Apple/Motorola fan mainly to gain customers and increase their measely market share.

Does Apple/Motorola plan on allowing users to download songs via GPRS?

I'm not sure.

I just read an article about that, and how Apple is really only "breaking even" with the $0.99 songs, getting something like $0.04 per song in profit.

Yeah I read that too. I talked to some artists and they claim they only make 10 cents per song downloaded. According to the rumors, the RIAA is the one sucking up all of the money, aswell as the recording studios. Among the artists I talked to, most of them preferred you burning their CD and sending them 10 bucks instead of downloading it on iTunes.

[waveformpc]

Okay, I get it now...

I see that the UK is well advanced in the mobile technology arena... They have streaming audio and video, music downloads, etc.. How sweet would it be to watch your favorite sports game live on your mobile device (PDA, etc.)?

I'm not sure how someone would really begin a project like this... My bet is it would take quite a few programmers to setup a web interface that streams live sports, music, and allows people to download songs of their choice... Then, you have to deal with the fact that GPRS doesn't really stream, rather it "bursts" packets across, so there would have to be some buffering going on... And to top it off, you would need to somehow obtain the rights to distribute the media from the individual artists (songs), or the TV networks (sports, news, etc.), which is pretty tough...

But, on the upside, I am sure quite a few people would subscribe to such a service, provided good advertising/press releases/etc..

[waveformpc]

Actually, now that I did a bit of searching... Licensing for individual songs isn't really that difficult. There are two or three main firms that allow "blanket" licensing, which most major artists work with. After registering for a license (and provided you get access or whatever), you can then either:

a) Webcast a playlist of songs
b) Allow users to download songs (like iTunes and Napster)

The miminum yearly cost of the license is $400, but that obviously increases with your revenue. I am sure you still have to go out and buy the CD's in order to get the songs or whatever...

TV station re-broadcasting is a bit more difficult... I haven't really found an organization, like the RIAA or MPAA. Most companies that attempted to re-broadcast TV streams were quickly shot down by legal actions. Too bad I can't find a way to do this legally - The last site that was shut down (iCraveTV) was getting over 110,000 hits per hour for an entire month right before the judge ordered it to be shut down... One of the things driving that was the fact that the site was not subscription based - rather they attached advertisements to the bottom of each TV stream.

The CEO of the fallen company said he put almost $13 million into starting that venture up... But I must ask, what cost him so much? It certainly wasn't licensing, and even a supercomputer with a fiber-optic OC45 connection wouldn't cost that much. With the hits per hour, I am assuming it was advertising during the Superbowl?

Anyway, after reading more about streaming TV signals, RealPlayer would be the tool of choice, and is currently used over in the UK.

I haven't tested it out, but the audio and video would only be able to stream at around 20-30kbps over GPRS... Given the small resolution of the mobile devices, that's actually not too bad (what would the point be in broadcasting a 1024x768 stream to a device that can't accept an image that large?).