Do you want to rent your music?

I would rather rent my music than own it. I'd rather be able to impulse download without breaking the bank. I can certainly understanding everyone's desire to own their music though - but how many of us would rather just download to our hearts content?

There's room for a dual model.

I use the Rhapsody subscription service on Sonos, and it is awesome. I've recently switched to a Mac, and use iTunes heavily for podcasts, but not yet for music, because it has no subscription service.

If you haven't tried a subscription service, don't knock it until you try it. It changes the way you listen to music; it encourages you to listen beyond what you normally listen to. I've discovered so much music because it's there to be listened to. Can't recommend it more highly. Everyone of my friends who have tried it has never gone back.

Subscription services are great when they incorporate personalized playlists. With Rhapsody, the system looks over your taste in music and generates a playlist based on your taste. Then you dump it on your player and it's a personalized radio station. Imagine if the star ratings you made in iTunes actually meant something. I think it's wrong-minded to look at subscription services as a competitor to owning music-- it's more competition for pay (satellite) radio. On the other hand, once you have a subcription, I think you'd find that you would rarely ever buy music.

I have record albums from the 1960's that I still enjoy. Owning is the only way to go!

I have to agree with the people who mentioned their satellite radio subscription. For less than some of these subscription services I get a far broader range of music and I don't have to do any work to get it. I turn on my radio (or use my computer), pick a station and just listen. If I hear something I like I make note of it and look into it later.

Any subscription based music service seem like an enormous hassle to me. I would have to go to all of the work of looking through music catalogs, trying to decide what I want to listen to, load up my iPod and then repeat endlessly -- at the end of which I don't own anything after all the work I have put into it. I'd much rather pay for my satellite radio where I know my money is going to pay the salaries of working people who put passion and creativity into choosing what music they will play for my enjoyment.

P.S. Don't forget podcasts as a way to get exposure to a lot of music you may not otherwise come across. They're free and you won't ever lose access to them just because you forgot to pay or couldn't do so.

I too would be interested in a subscription music model. In fact, I'd cancel my XM and fill my iPod. The quality is so much better!!!

As long as Sirius is around, I pretty much have no need for any subscription service, Zune or otherwise.

Like #14, I think the truly "killer" subscription is a much cheaper sub (say $3-5) for a restricted number of tracks (say 20-50).

This answers the new music, browsing/discovery, sample question, still promotes purchasing, provides the same value to many subscribers paying from $10-15, hurts the other subscriber options, and removes most criticism/drawbacks of iTunes. And Apple would probably quickly have as much if not more subscriber revenue than the competitors.

I think a movie sub would be great.

I can't believe no one has commented on lala yet. Seriously, if you want to explore new music, that is the way to do it. $1.75 for a CD sent from another member and you get to decide whether to keep it forever or put it up for trade. If you haven't tried it yet, why not?

I'd do both.
Rent to check out new stuff, and keep my emusic subscription to buy (which I now use to sample new music, so I might reduce the subscription)