3 ms·

"Just because Skrillex likes them doesn't mean they're actually good." They have pointed out in the article that Beats really isn't as "high quality" as other

"Just because Skrillex likes them doesn't mean they're actually good." They have pointed out in the article that Beats really isn't as "high quality" as other superior headphone sets. So, I don't understand the knock towards them. Its a product. A product that has done extremely well. There are many products out there that sell because of a celebrity endorsed it. In fact the article stated that Dr. Dre was thinking of marketing fashion before he spoke with Iovine on what he should do. Dre would have had sold some product one way or another to make money. Why not Beats? All in all, it all just worked out for Dre. Beats is a good headset made cheap and sold high. It found its star in Dr. Dre to be the face. Beats is the George Forman Grill on headphones! No reason to knock it. There are many products out there that isn't the greatest, but it works fine for most of us. Look at Windows. Now, should getting rich be the end goal of every business venture? No, but well you'd definitely want it to do fairly well. -- I think its a cool idea that they are trying to disrupt college. Especially in the fields of the Arts, why not try? More choices means more people (especially young people) get to see what's out out there, what's possible. How many articles do we need to post on Hacker News about the "youth not able to find a job even with a bachelors degree at Stanford" before some change to how we "educate" them occurs? All in all, I cannot criticize someone's business practices who's able generate $3 billion for a company let alone $1. Someone was going to do that, why not him?

6stringmerc 12y ago
Personally it bodes poorly for the future of consumer products, if such a marketing achievement can be labeled a success when a small amount of critical thinking would deflate the premise of the purchase. They're not headphones, they're status symbols. That's plenty of reason to knock it. I'd like to see actual innovation in the sense of what Dolby is doing. They're successful too, and I'm not knocking them. Would I go to the Dolby classes on innovation? Sure. Iovine? No. If you think 'disruption' in the arts is going to happen by way of long-time industry insiders, then I don't know what to tell you...other than you're wrong I guess.

6stringmerc 12y ago

Personally it bodes poorly for the future of consumer products, if such a marketing achievement can be labeled a success when a small amount of critical thinking would deflate the premise of the purchase. They're not headphones, they're status symbols. That's plenty of reason to knock it. I'd like to see actual innovation in the sense of what Dolby is doing. They're successful too, and I'm not knocking them. Would I go to the Dolby classes on innovation? Sure. Iovine? No. If you think 'disruption' in the arts is going to happen by way of long-time industry insiders, then I don't know what to tell you...other than you're wrong I guess.