Credit: GoogleI meant to write this Thursday when I was introduced to Google Music, but for some reason I couldn’t make it happen. No worries I had all day Friday, Saturday and Sunday to churn out another masterpiece. Nope…nothing, I simply couldn’t gather my thoughts together to do this write up of another Google failure. Perhaps it’s been the recent binge I’ve been on or that the expectation of this new venture by Google only to see a wasted product. Fret not, dear friends, I’m not venturing into Hunter Thompson territory, I’m merely filling my lungs with the smoke of the blessed plant that muddles my mind into so much mush. I’ve got this today, though; I’m on the right track finally at four o’clock in the afterfuckingnoon.
Alright, so Google Music…I mean, what a colossal let down. I expected something phenomenal. Why? I don’t know. Google doesn’t do anything phenomenal except that Google image they change every day on the search engine part of their media empire. I wanted to like Google Music. I wanted to write a glowing review on how they’re making digital music different than iTunes or Amazon, but frankly it’s the worst of the three. There is nothing at all special about it, with the possible exception of their exclusives and I’ll touch on that later.
Google is supposed to be an innovator. The so-called geniuses that work there are supposed to be ahead of the curve. Their search engine algorithms are quite nearly science fiction, it is pure unadulterated brilliance. It’s remarkably better than any other search engine out there, including wannabes like Bing or Ask[Jeeves]. So how come they can’t seem to translate that brilliance into anything else they do? Sure they can buy things like YouTube, but even that could turn into an abject failure if the new antipiracy bill passes through Congress. Google Plus is a joke that insiders already claim is basically dead on arrival and boring. Google has been reduced to copycats. “Apple makes millions off music, let’s give it a go. Facebook makes millions off social networking let’s do that too.”
Then again, when they do try new things they lose their talent. Witness Dodgeball which spawned Dennis Crowley, who grew so frustrated at Google that he went and started Foursquare which is practically monopolizing people’s attempts to help stalkers find them. Now we come back to Google Music. Its interface is difficult to use. It took me fifteen minutes to figure out how to download the music I purchased. There’s a download manager that is fairly similar to Amazon’s download manager, but a little more complicated even for someone that is rather tech savvy.
Then there’s the matter of their pricing structure. To me, the reason Amazon is so successful at being the Walmart of the Internet is that they not only offer a variety of items you didn’t think you needed, but they also offer a pricing structure that is affordable to most people. What Google Music is effectively saying is that they’re on par with iTunes. They’re not. The arrogance that purveys through the campus of Google Headquarters is stifling their attempts to make waves (not a Google Wave pun) in the digital music field. They should be trying to corner the market that Amazon caters to or making their own niche, but doing the same thing as iTunes is just an untenable business model.
What they could do and there may be a little hint of this on their front page, is to be the only music site that sells bootleg concerts and demos. That would catapult them into another realm with music aficionados. Suggesting that Google become a boutique style digital music site may be astonishing, but think about what a small site like Wolfgang’s Vault is doing. They take concerts from any number of Classic Rock artists and sell them to a public that is buying external hard drives to hold their music libraries. Think about what Google could do with every genre and the vast amounts of money they can use to purchase such content to give to an eager world. If Google could dig into that market while turning a modest profit on their other overpriced digital items then perhaps Google Music could be a huge success. A Brussels Affair the live bootleg that has been circulating the Interwebs for years and is currently on sale for $4.99 with the previously unreleased “Dancing with Mr. D” offered for free as bait to unsuspecting consumers, is one example of this.
Another thing Google can do is to copy the iTunes model of getting artists to come in and play live performances or give them exclusive content. It’s the exclusivity that will drive people to Google. If they attempt to go after people craving everything their favorite artist has done then they will absolutely be a success. However, if their success is tied to iTunes’ business model, which at this point looks like the most plausible conclusion to draw, then this will be another Google failure and lead to the question “Why doesn’t Google stick to their search engine and stop spreading themselves so thin?” It’s a valid question and for Google’s sake one I hope we’re not asking in six months to a year from now.
Download Trance Torrents…
[...]Google Music: A Review Of Mediocrity – eBurban[...]…
[...] eBurban [...]
I think the motivation here has more to do with having an option for Android consumers than really breaking new ground and changing the game. I think Google Music will accomplish its limited purpose successfully.
[...] want. The number of songs in Google Music or Amazon is still only half of the iTunes database. eBurban suggests that it’s “exclusivity that will drive people to Google,” not the [...]