Found this Salon piece via Dave Winer, and it’s an interesting assertion – I think – of the network effect. Most of the so-called iPod killers I’ve seen fail for a simple reason – they try to out-iPod the iPod. Much like trying to out-Dell Dell, this approach in my view is one with limited returns. As Salon points out, however, the XM Satellite competes – and I use that term loosely – not by attempting this same dead end tactic, but by offering something the iPod can’t offer (at least in its current form). The new device has something the iPod does not – network connectivity. This gives the device new content. Fresh content. Live content. Etc. You get the point.
Now just to inject a bit of reality into this speculation, the device at this point is a poor competitor to the established iPod – I’m not exactly clamoring to give mine up. But the potential here really does interest me. While you’ll inevitably see binary comparisons of cached content (iPod) vs streaming content (XM), I think it’s more likely that the two will find a way to coexist. Graft the XM functionality into my iPod, for example, and now you really have something interesting.
I suspect everybody will have a different take because interest in satellite radio’s content varies widely, but for me the pull is simple.
