1. well i would be pissed actually if apple would "decide" for me to listen to, say, 50 cent
  2. I have had similar thoughts, yes. The ideal release in my eyes would've been free, but allowing customers to have a choice. Promote it heavily on the iTunes store if you want, but give people a choice. Now, it's no difference to me that Apple shoved this into my library, it's going to be there anyway. But if we take Beyoncé for example who also did the surprise release, if that had been forced into my library, I would not have been overly impressed. Same goes for any future artist (except U2, can we subscribe to this service?). If it is listed as free on the home page of iTunes, I might check it out. I probably won't buy it if I do like it, but I'll check it out.
  3. yeah, I get what you're saying Ross1441. It's like with the Super Bowl performances every year, the act gets trashed by everyone who is not a fan because they're inserting themselves onto people who don't care about them's television set. To take all the criticism from non-fans that U2 will get for forcing this album onto people has to require a huge ego!
  4. Right, I thought about the same. The examples you guys give are quite good. We're ok with it because it's U2, otherwise...
    I was worried people might actually raise privacy issues with Apple. Seems they got away with it, and it will have a positive effect for them overall I guess.
  5. Just read some random tweets, the folks complaining seem to be random teenagers and hiphoppers. They're plenty who are grateful for the gift. Although a free accessible album would've been better, perhaps.

    Funny tweet: 'Only U2 can stoke album rumours for 5 years and still release it as a' surprise album'.
  6. When could we expect to see the album available for pre-order?
  7. It has been awhile since I have responded to a thread, but this is my first U2 album release I have experienced and it is amazing. Love the new album. Can't wait for a tour!
  8. If Apple put an album from anyone I was remotely interested in my iTunes I'd be fine with it. I'd definitely listen given the fact that this was a huge event and will be talked about in the future just so I could be a part of it.

    If I really hated the artist, I'd probably send a funny/annoyed Tweet about it and quickly delete. No big deal.
  9. Originally posted by dieder:Just went through it for the first time. Frankly, I am not that impressed. Are they trying too hard? I get the same feeling watching the footage of yesterday...but the best U2 albums are always growers so I will listen to this a lot the coming days


    I definitely can't say I was not impressed on first listen but I wasn't blown away. I've played it about 3 or 4 times since and am loving it. The only thing I want to listen to.
  10. I think in the end, i have to accept that U2 as sad as it is, aren't in the position to create something interesting, since POP! :-(


  11. All we need are 10 or so performances of "Happy Birthday" and we've got ourselves a tour!


    The responses to people waking up to find U2 in their itunes library pretty much reinforces what I thought regarding the change in U2's mindset. With NLOTH, they wanted to make an album in an attempt to please the crowd. With Songs of Innocence, they are making music for their own sake, not for anyone else's.

    What people have said before is absolutely right. The people who hate U2 probably still hate U2. Having a new album randomly show up in your library is not going to convince a U2 hater to stop hating U2. However, I would argue that the bold move not only rocked our world, but also drew in many more new fans. In addition to haters saying that U2's album showing up in their library is a hack, there are even more people who are posting things like "Didn't think much of U2 until this album showed up in my library." Personally, I was drawn to the U2 camp by Vertigo, so I'm pretty sure this new album is going to be drawing in new fans, especially since it's FREE.