"Apple didn't want Beats, it needed Beats" →

Amazing how quick the winds can turn huh?

Since the rumours about Apple buying Beats started there has been a lot of articles about why Apple would ever want to by Beats, especially for $3 billion. Now that the deal is official instead of questioning why Apple would want Beats we get articles about how Apple needed to buy Beats...

Ah, sensationalist tech journalism.

The article tries to make the case that Apple needs Beats for the streaming service because purchasing music is a dying trend and iTunes Radio has been a disappointment... Over 20 million users and the third largest streaming service in the US, and that's from March so they did that in six months, Beats Music isn't exactly on track to beat that.

The only disappointing thing about iTunes Radio is that it's currently limited to the US and Australia.

Pretty sure Apple did in fact want to buy Beats and not out of a need, I kind of doubt the Beats Music streaming service was the major interest as well.