And heck, since the Mac world is holding its collective breath waiting to see what Monday's Stevenote will bring, no one will mind if we make it Slightly On-Topic Napster-Bashing Day as well, right? Not that we harbor any specific ill will towards the service, mind you, at least not the way we held a grudge against BuyMusic.com. Now there was an iTunes Music Store competitor (we use the term very loosely) fully deserving of every ounce of bile we virtually spat at it, since it sought to pimp off the iTMS's success while simultaneously badmouthing it in its very marketing campaign, and we couldn't be more pleased that it faded from irrelevance into total invisibility in less time that it takes founder Scott "We'll Sell A Million Songs A Day" Blum to count all six of his brain cells by twos. (Yes, okay, so we're full of rage. But at least this is marginally cheaper than therapy.)

So here's the latest on the Napster front: as faithful viewer JoeHD40 pointed out, the beleaguered service has a new strategy to stem the bleeding of millions of dollars each quarter, which is to toss another $10 million (in Roxio stock; you didn't seriously think that Napster still has any actual cash left, did you?) at mega-retailer Best Buy as a bribe promotional fee so that Best Buy will promote Napster as its "leading digital music service" with "in-store marketing activities," "extensive broadcast, print, and online advertising," and even a co-branded version of the Napster software posted to the Best Buy web site. Says Best Buy's veep of digital entertainment, "Best Buy believes that the strength of the Napster brand, together with the experience of Napster's subscription service, makes this an ideal digital music solution for our customers." He utterly failed to add, "But that's not going to stop us from selling iPods like freakin' gangbusters, despite the fact that they're completely incompatible with Napster's service."

Now, what's very interesting about this situation is that while we see the Best Buy deal as a flailing last-ditch attempt by a dying service to stay afloat until someone tosses it a rope (c'mon, you can't smell the 180-proof desperation wafting off that "let's give away free MP3 players" move?), others seem to be touting the arrangement as nothing more than a routine but savvy business alliance. Following the announcement, Fool.com opined that "Roxio rocks," while The Register notes that the deal ought to provide "the kind of marketing Napster needs." And Wall Street showed its approval by sending Roxio shares up 20%.

From our perspective, though, no matter how effective the deal turns out to be, it serves as proof that Napster's entire business plan was dog food to begin with. Wasn't Napster supposed to conquer the market solely on the strength of its brand? That was its whole song and dance; over and over again, that's all we've been fed-- the "strength of Napster's brand." It's even still being parroted by Best Buy veeps in press release verbiage. Napster's spiel was that it would succeed and Apple would fail because everyone on the planet already knew the Napster name and knew that it meant downloadable music. So, uh, how come Napster has to spend another $10 million it doesn't have on a marketing promotion with Best Buy to get its name out there?

When your one-trick pony's one trick turns out to be a dud, jump back Loretta, because things are only going to get uglier. Any bets on how long it'll be before Napster takes a permanent dirt nap? Because right now we're figuring its only shot at profitability will come if people suddenly decide that they really do like the idea of renting their music, and that's an "if" we wouldn't want to hang many hopes on...