3 ms·
One of Lala's products that I tried involved purchasing songs without the ability to download, but they were stored in my music locker on their servers. Althoug
by dstein64 15y ago
One of Lala's products that I tried involved purchasing songs without the ability to download, but they were stored in my music locker on their servers. Although these songs couldn't be downloaded, they cost only ten cents a song (I think, but can't remember the exact amount). While this was restrictive relative to purchasing DRM-free MP3s, it cost a lot less and was all I needed in some cases. I hope that either Amazon, Google, or Apple offers something similar at a low price, as I'd like to give it another try.
- MatthewPhillips 15y agoThat was what made Lala so brilliant: 1) No subscription requirement. I'm not convinced that the average consumer spends $120 a year on music and wants that expense every month of paying for a MOG, Spotify or Rdio. 2) Extremely low per-song price made "impulse" buys easy. 3) Matching your library to their catalog without uploading. 4) A really nice web interface. Extremely good for 2 years ago. Amazon's is so-so, and I haven't tried Google's yet (looks good from screenshots). I doubt Apple will do one at all.
- mynameisdom 15y agoVery well said. But don't forget the full-length free preview of any song. I loved that "once and only once" feature.
- MatthewPhillips 15y agoI forgot all about that, yes that was a killer feature as well. That turned out to be the killer feature for Google's music search as well, and made it infinitely less valuable when Lala went away.