Slashdot Mirror

I can't add music through iTunes Music

I can't even seem to delete the stupid U2 album they foisted upon me

1) These can't both be true.

2) You can delete that stupid U2 album from your account.

Just in case anyone still hasn't removed that BS music from their account here is a link https://itunes.com/soi-remove

I removed it from mine as soon as the tool was available.

Not complaining that I can't run the latest os just that I can't revert to the last (or even the first) version that worked.

To remove the album, users need to:

• Go to http://itunes.com/soi-remove
• Click Remove Album to confirm you'd like to remove the album from your account
• Sign in with the Apple ID and password you use to buy from the iTunes Store

Apple warned that, once the album has been removed from a user's account, it will no longer be available for them to redownload as a previous purchase. If they later decide they want the album, they will need to get it again.

The album is free to everyone until 13 October 2014, and will be available for purchase after that date.

http://itunes.com/soi-remove

http://store.steampowered.com/
http://itunes.com/
http://netflix.com/
http://hulu.com/
http://spotify.com/
http://pandora.com/

I developed Audiotorium Notes a couple of years ago for my niece who was just starting college. Since then it has been featured by Apple a number of times in their back-to-school apps lineup. Note taking + audio recording + dropbox syncing goodness. http://itunes.com/apps/audiotorium

I like the fact that Chrome is just always up to date and they are continuously releasing. I don't have to worry about what version I'm using. Shouldn't all browsers move to that model?

KD

--
Kilroy is Here.
http://itunes.com/apps/kilroy

http://www.magnatune.com/

http://www.amazon.com/Indie-Music-CDs/b?ie=UTF8&node=266023

http://www.itunes.com/indiespotlight

that took all of 30 seconds

So? http://www.itunes.com/app/MyVibe (or http://www.mypleasure.com/myvibe.asp if the first doesn't work.)

Disclaimer: I make it, so I'm biased. There's a vid on youtube http://youtube.com/kiwamedia or you can download the free iPhone app of one of our first releases Seb's Tail from itunes.

http://kiwamedia.com/qbook
http://itunes.com/apps/kiwamedia

QBook is a touch enabled color children's book. I've been working on this for a number of years now, its the first ebook that features touchable text. You simply swipe your finger over the text to hear it read aloud, tap words to hear them or touch and hold to hear the word spelt and each book contains multiple languages (so far we have US English, Maori, Spanish, Portugese, French, Japanese, German and Italian... still working on Chinese), so its great for language development for both adults and kids. Kids love it because they can explore the words at their own pace. Parents can also record the story in their own voice.

I've talked with a lot of publishers and most of them have not migrated their childrens books to ePub format due to its lack of support for full color pictures and text styling (kids books often use lots of different fonts etc).

Its been well received so far and we have a large library of material which is due to be released over the next few months. We've spent a lot of time making the tools to build these books easily, we have a WYSIWYG editor that allows us to follow the format of the books and can then hit a build button and see the app running on the iPhone or iPad simulator.

We already have our books optimised for iPad and we believe that QBook takes full advantage of this industry changing device. We foresee this becoming a great educational tool for children as well as a language learning tool.

I personally read alot of material on my iPhone and the only down side is the screen size just isnt big enough. Of course the iPad resolves this issue and I think the iPad will become the market leader by the end of this year.

It's called BrokeAndroid. It lets you smash up an android phone on your iPhone. I guess it's ok if you're ripping on Android http://itunes.com/Apps/BrokeAndroid

What strikes me in the story about David Barnard is the quote "Then came the expenses: $29,000 for programmers, $15,000 living costs, $14,000 to Apple, $7,000 for marketing, $5,000 for legal and administrative services, $4,000 for logo and Web-site art, and $1,800 in loan repayment."

Apparently, Barnard paid someone else to do the work for him. That's fine, if course. But the cool thing about being a geek is that you don't _have_ to. Most people here on slashdot would probably be able to code up an app all by themselves, in spare hours. I did, and although the game is only really popular in The Netherlands (it's a traditional Dutch game) it pays for my iPhone. Not much more, but I didn't sink anything but my spare time in it. And coding is fun, so even if it wouldn't have made a dime it would still be time well spent.

So the allure of the App Store is: You code up something yourself, having fun in the process, and submit it. If it makes money, that's cool! If not, it's still cool - You can point to the little icon in the App Store and say "Look! I wrote that!"; Total strangers are using your app, which is a nice compliment to your achievements. If you approach it from a pure business point of view, tallying up all the hours you put into it (or even paying others) then it's just like any other investment: It might pay off, it might not. I doubt you'll get a warm feeling from pointing at an icon in the App Store and saying "Look! I paid someone to write that!".

They have not banned this Brainfuck interpreter. http://itunes.com/apps/brainfudge Hurray for App Store inconsistencies.

Usually computer engineers have a very poor estimation on that part of the project.

Amen to that!

I worked on this about seven years ago: http://www.magicosm.net/
And wrote this five years ago: http://frimp.net/ (basically an easier to use version of Craigslist with better coverage)
And this about three years ago: http://www.moochmuch.com/
And this last year: http://www.itunes.com/apps/Pharce

My net *loss* for all this activity (compared to what I would have earned had I not taken a sabbatical from work, not considering all the time I worked in evenings/weekends while I had a full time job) is about $180,000.

My reasons for failure:
For the first one, I really probably have to chalk it up to idiocy on two fronts: we didn't make it playable/fun early in development and have early releases, and when Sun showed us off at the 2001 Game Developer's Convention and *offered to have us on stage at Java One*, I decided I couldn't afford to pay to stay another week in San Jose. The other idiocy was not ours: a funder expressed some interest, then when I talked to them they decided there was no market for another fantasy game. (This was before Dark Ages of Camelot and long before World of Warcraft.)

The problem with the second and third one is that I don't know how to advertise, or they were just bad ideas. The advertising income barely pays for hosting.

The fourth one may still come to something. It has certainly earned more money than the others. I still have no idea how to market/publicize/advertise effectively.

Coming up with a good idea and implementing is hard, but it is nowhere near enough to be successful as an entrepeneur. You need to either make the commitment to become the kind of person who can do sales and marketing, or find someone who is to partner with, or get very lucky.

In short: take the money. Building something great is *not* enough to be successful in business.

We put out Pharce (an app to let you create mocking or cute videos from pictures on your iPhone) a few weeks ago. (Video here). We sent out a press release, and got about 140 downloads a day for several days after the press release went out.

This slowly dwindled to 40, then to 20, then lower. We expected that people sending the videos to one another would lead to notable growth over time, but that appears not to be the case. (The app lets you email the video or post it on YouTube from the phone).

I am working on a small update to the app, then we're going to buy some ads. I'm just curious if your app took off on its own, or if not, where you're advertising ;-)

The industry will undoubtedly go down kicking and screaming, but down it will go - of that there can no longer be any doubt.

The industry will undoubtedly go down kicking and screaming, but down it will go - of that there can no longer be any doubt.

How do you see enforcing the law by stopping people from stealing copyrighted goods as controlling and censoring the internet. Obsolete publications models? If you want, there are plenty of high-tech ways to download your music per song and pay for it as well.

Sharing? You aren't sharing, you are leeching. If it was sharing you'd be creating movies or music to put up there and making $0 for it as a living. Piss off, sharing.

If you want to know more about this anarcho-capitalist libertarian agenda Ron Paul is pushing, listen to this this podcast. It's an interview with one of Paul's supporters with tough questions about how much of government and society would function in a scenario where there was a minimalist government centered around the U.S. Constitution.

I hear there are increasing numbers of people becoming dependent on tuning out the world and only listening to audio signals that are pleasing to their ears. This self-centered madness must stop, before we lose an entire generation to its own self-centredness! Please, for the sake of the children, donate what you can today!

How many people try to run enormous traffic sites on OSX Server? Nobody?

Yeah, because we all know how Apple hates DRM...

Actually, right now, the largest online music distribution system is not run by a record company or a holding company.

It's run by a computer company, which to my knowledge doesn't own recording copyrights at ths time.

So is Napster, which used to be Roxio before they sold all their non-Napster products to Sonic. Real, Wal-Mart and Microsoft aren't exactly big record labels either -- more like software and retail.

Therefore, I don't get the argument that the present Internet music services aren't distributing independent music because they themselves own large quantities of content -- with the exception of Sony Connect, it's just not true, unless Wal-Mart has went out and bought some labels and I don't know about it.

I have not listened to much Beethoven (aside from bits and peices in movies and such), so something like this is an excellent opportunity.
Why? is it really too hard to spend money on music? or is a 5 dollar bargain cd of weiner philharmoniker too pricey

If anyone knows any places to legally download performances of other classics, please post them.
http://www.itunes.com/

hmmm... maybe you all could start a collection to get this show on the road. ;-)

People, it's Friday (ok, maybe already Saturday Down Under), relax, enjoy the day and listen to some good music and just be happy you're still breathing.

People like to have something tangable when they buy something

Let me introduce you to something you may have missed:

"iTunes"

It emits noise after using for ten minutes, unless you purchase the "pro" version

That's just your music. Try this site and see if it helps.

Windows server: Sure, some folks buy it, but plenty don't. So far, Microsoft only has about one third of this space, and Linux is nipping at its heels. They knifed Windows for Itanium, to the disappointment of both Itanium users.

Server appications: IIS has lost market share to Apache in recent years, and Exchange isn't ubiquitous yet either. SQL server enjoys showing the web its limits.

Windows CE/Mobile/Tablet/whatever: Still no monopoly, and since sales of PDAs are shrinking and tablet PC's haven't really caught on, even if MS did take over this market...

Game Consoles: XBox did just have its first profitable quarter. Ever. But it doesn't seem to sell so well overseas, and Nintendo and Sony haven't been persuaded to go away yet.

Media: Media Center PC's aren't selling so well, and in a world with iTuneszilla stomping around, Windows Media suddenly seems less likely to rule the universe than it did a few years ago, even with "PlaysForSure."

Internet Services: Even with its added features, MSN Messenger doesn't seem to be destroying AIM or Yahoo Messenger. MSN doesn't seem to be destroying anybody in general, even if Verizon throws it in free with DSL, and even if MSN is the homepage for Internet Explorer. Now Microsoft wants to go after Google, too.

It's pretty interesting to consider that Windows Client and Office are so frickin' profitable that Microsoft can afford to throw gobs of money at their unprofitable products and divisions (which are pretty much everything but Windows Client and Office) and still have huge heaps of cash left over.

(Oh, and I left off Apple, because if 95% of the world abruptly switched to Apple, Microsoft is second only to Apple itself in Mac software development, and would still be one of the most profitable companies out there, on sales of Office for Mac, VirtualPC, etc. Also, because as long as Apple is out there, and isn't owned by Microsoft, Microsoft can point at it and say "look, there are other choices, we're not that much of a monopoly!" :)

After listening to Apple's Q1'05 Earnings call I have to say that I am concerned that the music stores besides iTunes will soon go the way of so many dot-coms. Here's two reasons:
- Apple stated in the call they have 70% market share in on-line downloads.
- Apple stated in the call they posted a small profit on the sale of now >230,000,000 songs (admittedly, these were not all in Q1'05).

If the $0.99/9.99 model is so razor thin that one company with 70% of the market is eaking by, how can six other companies who share the remaining 30% of the market hope to survive?

Napster seems to be in the lead (don't they have about 10% market share?) but it is primarily due to the subscription model they have, not selling tracks/albums. Sounds like an opportunity for Apple to swoop in and service the sub-market for subscribers to me.

But back on subject, the Creative statement that they have some type of advantage because their player submits to the DRM of half a dozen music stores that are loosing money just says to me that Creative is tightening their seatbelt on a sinking ship.

Check out their web page for the Xserve. It's their enterprise product and it's also their most technical page. It has little of their standard marketing flare and is loaded with tech specs.

I guess that all buzzword and no product stuff is why Apple recently announced Mac mini, iPod shuffle, iLife and iWork.

I guess they also are not selling big honking displays or yet another version of their iMac.

What do you have to do to lose the buzzword moniker, reinvent an entire industry?

Nah, vi is modal, Raskin hates that (THE is pseudo-modal). In addition, THE commands are English words, not (generally) esoteric control-sequences.

I believe Raskin's approach also differs in that once the command pseudo-mode is entered, a list of available operations is presented, a feature I can't say vi would be worse off to implement. (I might be wrong about this, I don't have Classic installed right now to run THE and apparently he isn't offering it for download anymore...?)

I admit that I wish someone like Raskin could get funding from some entity like Apple (or Google?) to develop a truly revolutionary, next-generation operating system. But I've used THE, and it really doesn't seem like that is it. I couldn't get any real work done with it; I found its behavior very esoteric and unpredictable at times (the dual cursors were tricky, as was the behavior of selections).

It also doesn't seem to me that THE would be very amenable to extension to more common modern computer tasks than text-editing and running snippets of Python. Imagine trying to cut a home video or organize 30 gigs of music or build sophisticated bitmap and vector art with shift-space and a small library of universal commands.

Monotonous and limited interfaces like THE, it seems, are good for monotnous, mostly single-purpose devices (the Canon Cat, the iPod, to some extent the original Mac). But it seems impossible, to me, to build a system that has the power to do everything that a modern computer does without getting a little unwelcome complexity and inconsistency. Of course, I disagree with Raskin that OSX is just as bad as Windows in this respect--why he would say something like that really is beyond me.

WMA, and WMA Loseless sound great *sometimes* but not always. I've created some samples. Tell me what you think:

To hear WMA on an iPod, click here.
To hear WMA in iTunes, click here.
To hear WMA on my home theater system, click here.

See how those compare to AAC, follow this link: itunes.com

iTunes is quite lovely, shares well across networks, and is easy as pie (I quite like the Party Shuffle feature).

WinAmp features the same (lovely with some skinning, anyway) and you can get plug-ins that turn it into a web-server for controlling which song to use over the network. Sharing across the network can be accomplished with an SMB share.

Then of course there's everyone's favorite *snore* Windows Media Player. There's really no excuse for using this.

First off, I like Linux and all, but this setup has worked great for me:

Windows 2000 PC w/ 8-channel sound on the board + iTunes + Niveus Media remote control + a three dollar cable that runs to my stereo

iTunes is, in my opinion, the best software to come along in a long time for managing a large database of music. The PC remote has its quirks (I think they all do) but it still works really well to only be $40, plus, it's a universal remote and can control my TV, stereo, and DVD player as well.

And the best part is, I can still use the computer to do anything else I need a PC for. I don't need to put a lot of time and energy into building a dedicated server for music when all I have to do is hit two buttons on the remote to start iTunes and start it playing. And while it's playing, I can check my email, play games, whatever. It kicks ass, man.

OEMs will probably just take the version with media player attached, since otherwise they'd have to research other players to bundle instead and that's probably a lot more effort than they want to put in.

Or the OEM will choose between RealPlayer and QuickTime based on whether RealPlayer Music Store or iTunes Music Store wants to pay more to get new customers.

You don't need to type "apple" into your browser to reach the iTunes page.

Listen mac, I'm tired of people insisting we editors take kickbacks from Apple. Just because people don't like our style, they are quick to jump on any additions we make to a post. I hope someday you change your tune.

Think about it: if Longhorn is a major break from Win2k3/WinXP, and products written for Longhorn (using Avalon, XAML, Indigo features, taking advantage of WinFS, etc.) won't run on these older technologies, what software company in its right mind would write code using said technologies? NONE.

I recently discovered AllOfMP3, a Russian music store, because I was trying to find music by Eva Cassidy online and neither iTunes or Napster carry her music.

This site offers pay by bandwidth download of digital music, $10(US) per 1GB, and even allows you to select the bitrate and format of your download (including MP3, Ogg Vorbis, WMA, etc).

I was a bit wary at first, and I carefully reviewed the legal info provided on the site. I was reassured by the fact that they accept PayPal and are PayPal verified among other payment methods, I decided to risk $10.

I have been greatly pleased with the results.

My questions for the Slashdot community are: Can you see any legal problems with using this site? If so what are they? This is by far the best deal I've seen in digital music, and seems to be legit as far as my understanding goes, so I keep looking for the catch. If there isn't one, well enjoy the music!

And yes I know... in Soviet Russia digital music plays you.

All these recent bills and such seem like a knee-jerk reaction to the whole Oh-God-No-The-RIAA-Is-Going-Out-Of-Business-And-It 's-All-A-12-Year-Old-Girl-With-An-Internet-Connect ion's-Fault. What these people need to do is stop outlawing computer hard drives (which it sounds like this bill has the potential to do) and instead find a way to get the media into the hands of Poor College Students and little girls -- so they can all sit back and enjoy an evening with the Olsen Twins in a bath towel -- at a reasonable cost.

The sad truth is, some people just can't afford 20 bucks for a DVD or CD, or 10 bucks for a one-shot movie ticket. While you could argue they should then live a very dull life watching paint dry, people have found that downloading the goods is a victimless crime. But now, cheap streaming videos and 99 cent song downloads appear to be changing all that and looks to be the wave of the future, so why the hell not embrace it?

I posted this as an Ask Slashdot but it was rejected. Just thought I'd throw it out for anyone looking for good digital music dirt cheap. This seemed an appropriate place.

I recently discovered AllOfMP3, a Russian music store, because I was trying to find music by Eva Cassidy online and neither iTunes or Napster carry her music.

This site offers pay by bandwidth download of digital music, $10(US) per 1GB, and even allows you to select the bitrate and format of your download (including MP3, Ogg Vorbis, WMA, etc). I was a bit wary at first, and I carefully reviewed the legal info provided on the site. I was reassured by the fact that they accept PayPal and are PayPal verified among other payment methods, I decided to risk $10. I have been greatly pleased with the results.

My questions for the Slashdot community are: Are there any legal issues I could run into using this site? If so what are they?

This is by far the best deal I've seen in digital music, so I keep looking for the catch. If there isn't one, well enjoy the music! And yes I know ... in Soviet Russia digital music plays you.

'Schultz and MacKinnon came to believe that the core Starbucks customer, an affluent 25- to 50-year-old who's likelier to be tuned in to NPR than to MTV or one of the nine gazillion radio stations owned by Clear Channel Communications Inc., probably feels ignored by the music industry.'

I tend to agree with them. This affluent 25- to 50-year-old (32, actually), pretty much only listens to NPR, but they're missing one important fact in their equation...

They're assuming I either already, or probably will, visit StarBucks.

(I've only been to Starbucks twice in my life, and the second time was to give them a 2nd chance. Needless to say: their coffee sucks, costs way too much, and I can brew a better tasting pot for myself right at home.)

Yes, I'm ignored by the Music Industry, but I've found the iTunes Music Store, and AllOfMP3 to be viable, and more preferable, alternatives.

> To compare to a test drive of a car, maybe they should allow a free sample, say the first 25% of the song.

A free portion of the song...you had better watch out, that's such a good idea, it wouldn't surprise me if all the other download sites outright stole it from you!

You mean you missed the big honking Pepsi logo right in the middle of the iTunes home page that said "Redeem your free song here"?

I've seen the replies, and the moderators are punishing me as well, but I swear, when I go to the site, I don't see any Pepsi logo. There's a big link now that says "Download now", but I don't remember seeing it there two days ago. When I click on a song title, it attempts to redirect to a "itms://" link that, since I don't have iTunes' player installed, errors out.

Where is this Pepsi logo everyone's razzing me about? Is it getting blocked by my firewall, or something? Would that mean that my sysadmin is on Coke?

A DVD burner without a reader is useless to me.
Are you saying you don't think a DVD burner can read DVDs? Are you saying you don't realize that set-top DVD players can be had for $35 at Kmart? Are you just afraid of the DVD standard because you love VHS so much?

No parallel or serial port? That means I'd have to throw out all of my hardware and buy new stuff.

What ghetto hardware do you have that needs parallel and serial ports?? You'd better say $30,000 medical-imaging systems or something, because unless your hardware is highly specialized (or essential for business but not produced in a modern version), you're at serious risk of being branded a silly Luddite. Personally, the last printer I bought that didn't have a USB port was the one I got in 1999. Next one was combo (USB+parallel) and thereafter, they're USB-only. Last serial device was an old Palm cradle (that's $30 to replace by the way, but my current Palm came with USB only.

iTunes? I've got Winamp. It's free.

I've got iTunes. It's free too. And it's better--it does everything the paid version of Winamp does (in terms of audio; QT does the video stuff), for free.

Silly troll.
Most peolpe don't want and/or need all of that stuff, and certainly don't want to pay for it.

Correction: Most people want or need most of that stuff, and obviously many are willing to pay for it. Some people want actual modern technology on their laptops! And the only thing Wintel laptops can offer that is cheaper than a similarly-outfitted PowerBook or iBook is CELERON! Sorry, that's unacceptable to me. Celeron is just plain pathetic and I will never own a Celeron-based machine of any kind. Celeron laptops are for people who want to say they have a laptop and who just want to get on the IntarWeb and run Kazaa in their dorm rooms. Real computers are a totally different market.

Perhaps my entire comment can just be summed up in a revision of yours:

I disagree completely. I have no need for a parallel or serial port. I need DVD authoring. A portable video-editing studio without DVD recording is useless to me. No FireWire or Bluetooth? That means I'd have to throw out half of my hardware and buy cheap, crappy stuff. Winamp Pro? I've got iTunes. It's free. The Apple laptops are full of actual modern technology that you (and obviously, not many others) are afraid to adopt. Cheap PC laptops are designed for those with a SERIOUS budget problem, and no real demands for performance. They have their niche, but that's all it is: a niche. Many people want or need a lot of those features, and clearly 711,000 people were willing to pay for it last quarter alone.

I'm a huge fan of the iTunes music store.. So huge, in fact, that I'm actually PURCHASING music through this outstanding service and bought myself a 20 gig ipod. My inclination is hardly to convince the world to pay for their music vs. downloading them ilegally; rather it's because I happen to like paying only $10 for an album. I'm a bargain hunter.

It was bad enough that the RIAA shunned legal digital downloads long enough for the pirates to take over the industry. Add to that their decision to continually fight a customer-driven demand for a more flexible (and cheaper) medium of distribution.. Now just when something out there is working, they want to jack the price up to a level that will send all of those wouldbe legal customers back to the P2P world using anonymousnetworks.

The RIAA needs to wake up and recognize their issues here.. Their customers want a more flexible delivery mechanism, they want to pay less, and need the flexibility they currently have with a CD. Apple accomplished much of this with their product, which the RIAA will subsequently destroy with their greedy price increases.

Let's face it - in business customers drive the industry. When Americans stopped buying domestics, the industry responded with better products that met customer needs. When New Coke flopped, Coca Cola wisely switched back to the old formula.

The RIAA and its member companies had an opportunity in 1997 when illegal MP3's first surfaced to nip this problem. The early adopters were trading heavily on the IRC network, which led the rise of Napster and later Kazaa. These networks suceeded because it was just so darn tough for file traders to find the songs they were looking for. Had the RIAA member companies set up a site at any point between 1997 and 2000 (even without digital rights management), they could have easily circumvented the rise of these illegal networks. CD's themselves were insecure enough to create this massive proliferation in the first place!!

Fight them. Write to them and tell them what a stupid decision this is.

Microsoft should abandon that proprietary audio/video format they are clinging to and just go along with what the consumers have picked to be the defacto standard.

Sucks, doesn't it Microsoft?

After reading the article, all I could detect is a peculiar bias. Does Apple iPod drive Macintosh sales today... well maybe not much, tomorrow is a different day in the sales world and so forth.

1. Apple can grow sales. Is this only a next quarter mentality from the author in Money Magazine?
   
2. Apple has quite a bit of cash in the bank and can stretch with cost cutting if necessary
   
3. Macintosh Powerbook and iBook sales have been climbing from people I know personally that had been locked into PC's
   
4. There is an undercurrent of PC users will to give Apple a shot after experiencing so many computer virii, or wish to stop worring about the issue.
   

This writer pretends to like Apple when the majority of criticisms sound more like a Dell shareholder or a sour grapes relay from the record companies envious of iTunes.

Last but not least, this writer obviously masks one important point. The low margin in iTunes is assuming everyone purchases one and only one tune at a time. Apple surely does not want to brag, but people who purchase many tunes allow them to make more money. The credit card company piece allows for more profit. Special commercial deals also bypass the credit card company fees. If Apple really gets serious about the matter of credit card charges they will do a Walmart and buy a bank themselves for the best rates.

i think online media is cheaper than the printed media, and more environment friendly as well. and if if we have to pay a little bit to get online news, it is not that bad.
you can buy e-books and audio books that are cheaper than printed books. on itunes you can buy radio show, to listen at your leisure
So, what is wrong with paying a little bit money to read the news that your own leisure

CDBaby sells their downloads through iTunes, making it the best choice for indie artists wanting to reach a wide audience.