|
I used to hold on to magazines until I moved and had to haul hundreds of pounds of paper to the dumpster. There's no way I would keep any of that now. The thing is, as long as you're paying your subscription, your content doesn't have to expire. If you need to reference a periodical you read three years ago you just download it again. The idea of the consumer maintaining space, either physically or virtually, to store media/content is illogical. The basic usage pattern, for me, is I know I want to watch a program, listen to a song, read a book and I want access to that media no matter where I am or what I'm doing. I guess I could schlep it around with me but I'd much rather let someone else handle the storage and I just take what I need and when I need. The simple fact is that under our current system, none of us own any of the content (unless we've created it ourselves). Even if you have a physical book in your possession you are just licensing the use of it. Granted, none of the distribution models I've seen thus far are that great but they do continue to improve. I just don't understand why I'd want to pay for something to "own" it on a medium that won't exist in 5-10 years. In 25 years does anyone really expect to have a book purchased from the Connect Store in a still readable format? It's yours, you paid for it, but unless you have a piece of hardware that still supports it (and Sony is a leader is long-lasting formats) you are out of luck. I know people that have DVD collections they paid over $10,000 to attain. In 10 years they are going to have the equivalent of a bunch of 8-tracks cassettes. With the rate of technological change we need to figure out a distribution model that works, not hang on to outdated methodologies.
|