Slashdot Mirror
iTunes Music Store sells 275,000 Tracks in 18 Hours
physicsnerd writes "According to this article on Billboard.com, Apple's iTunes Music store sold 275,000 tracks in its first 18 hours of operation. The Register.com estimates that this netted Apple just under $100,000! Not too bad for a 99 cents store."
Impressive considering the connection problems people were having. Remains to be seen what usage will be after the hype settles down.
This is a good thing but I have a feeling that the numbers in 60 or 90 days will have a lot more to say about how viable this is.
They need to sort out international licensing too, This could be huge in the UK where albums frequently cost as much in pounds as they do in dollars here in the US.
Windows users (i.e. 95 %) continue to download stuff from kazaa.
for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
Can't wait for no DRM? That is like saying you can't wait until Best Buy gets rid of those pesky cashiers. Why don't they just trust me to leave an appropriate amount of money for the goods that I walk out of the store with?? They are treating me like a criminal. Wah.
I'm really excited about this service. Hopefully it will be able to provide me with some music for my Internet radio station. Still trying to figure out whether these music files can be re-encoded properly, though, to be webcast on Live365(my webcast host). Harold VoyagerRadio.com
Harold
What I can't believe is how the recording industry went along with this. I guess someone with a brian finally took charge of this part of the business there. I wonder if the other online music sites will follow this example? Nice to dream. Anyways, I hope the website doesn't require me to use a Mac. :-)
SPAM solution made easy: 1 spammer, 5 cords of rope, 5 hourses, and fireworks. Be creative.
Something I really appreciate about this move from Apple is that they are actually offering the only decent point of comparison with GNUArt :
Besides p2p which is illicit, they are indeed selling professional stuff whereas GNUArtists are sharing their own amateurish but "Open-sourced" stuff ; once people will realize they have to pay 7425$ to fill their new iPod, they'll also want to visit Free galleries such as ours.
So, we can only benefit from this "competition".
Thanks, Herr Jobs !
Trolling using another account since 2005.
This should send (yet another) wake up call to the music industry. Online music trading is so pervasive only because it beats the hell out of paying $18US for a music cd. This is merely a step in the right direction - this is by no means perfect or even viable long term. I don't give this good chances over time - a pioneer is the guy (or gal) laying in the field with an arrow in their back. But, it's a start, and maybe it'll whack some of the riaa/mpaa execs with a cluebat.
Now all that needs to happen is for Apple to go out and get a massive catalog of Indy music they can represent, give profits to the artists and kill the big record labels.
this is funny AND true. ever stepped into the huge conglomerate music stores of late? same music they were selling last year, just with different band names, and song titles......
The state of music today would certainly allow Indy to take over, just because of creativity alone. Apple would be wise to catalog Indy music. (and those profits of 100,000 would be ten fold.)
We're like rats, in some experiment! -- George Costanza
I was very envious today when my friend with his ibook was able to log into iTunes and download 15 songs in minutes. Since it stores you credit card, it is perhaps TOO easy to download songs (Parents giving credit card numbers to kids may find a large bill next month).
I may now have to buy an Apple just to use the service. It's easy to use, has a wide selection, and is everything a music service should be. Only time will tell if they have the pricing right.
I don't know what took the music industry so long.
I started thinking, Why is the price $0.99 versus $1.00? Then I expanded on that and started thinking about how Apple come up with their pricing scheme. What is the optimal pricing? Was $0.99 selected by guess and by golly? What is the right price? Does anyone know how the $0.99 price was actually selected? My guess is that it was a ... guess.
How to Download YouTube Videos
I love macs and all, but what if I want to listen to downloaded music on the equipment I invested in that only supports MP3? AAC wont work in my Aiwa CDC-MP3, will it? NO. Guess I stay with Limewire.
Karma: The shiznight, mostly because I am the Drizzle.
Why so many downloads? I thought Macs had Gnutella clients.
yeah I'm joking
Trolling is a art,
While I don't really like DRM, I can see where the music industry is coming from on the topic, and I suspect that they were the ones behind the whole thing.
What I'd like to see is a per-song DRM, where the artists or labels get to choose whether the song can be freely copied after purchase or not. Perhaps that, coupled with a price change for non-DRM-enforced songs, would push the rest of the industry in the direction we all want it to go. I'm sure the indie crowd would get behind the idea, as well as the brighter label execs and artists.
if that 200k songs represent say 50k users, what's to say that the number doesn't begin to rapidly rise? this may particularly be the case if connection issues prevented downloads. i am a mac user, though my primary personal machine is a tablet pc. when itunes is available for windows, i will likely start to purchase some music. if they can get 25% of my purchases that's $500 a year... though most of my purchases are from independent labels. purchasing universal music is looking less and less silly.
The problem is that this also netted Visa/MC around $40,000 in processing fees, depending on the avg songs per checkout (I'm assuming 2).
On the plus side, at least it's not Paypay, then you'd be talking 150K in fees, and the accounts would all be suspended.
Lets hope apple makes a payment system someday.
- Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
According to CNet, Apple appears to be looking for a developer to help create iTunes for Windows. Seems like a smart move to me -- the Windows user base is clearly vastly larger than Mac, and Apple will still be getting a slice of online music sales -- plus they give another reason for Windows users to buy an iPod.
I keep hearing great things about iTunes too, in that it's apparantly quite a bit better than most music database software. Personally I'm still looking for a good music db/organizing program for either Linux (preferred) or Windows (thank you samba) - I'm in the process of ripping ~1000 CDs to high bitrate MP3 for my TiVo and am in desperate need for some cataloging and playlist creation tools. From what little I've heard iTunes would fit the bill and do it well... but obviously I still need to find something until then (suggestions welcome).
Once they roll this out for Windows or Linux, I'll have a hard time fighting the impulses. It's only 99 cents, right? Cheap! 15 or 20 tracks later, I'll realize I just dropped $20.
Apple may very well succeed because of the low investment necessary... and because at only 99 cents, the instant gratification may get addictive. Smart move on their part.
For you PC users who haven't seen the store, let me tell you, that place is addictive as crack rock. The default settings are such that you click "buy song" and it starts downloading. With a cable modem, I was able to get an album of 9 Tracks in a few minutes. All without getting my lazy ass up and going to the store.
I expect that within a year, there will be MUG meets where the topic of discussion will be "Music Store Addiction:How I lost my wife and house downloading music".
Just wait till Apple releases iTunes for Windows, so you PC users can join in the fun.
Burn Hollywood Burn
According to Fortune: "The iTunes Music Store will initially offer 200,000 tunes, paying the record companies an average of 65 cents for each track it sells."
Apple gets $.99 for singles, but less for albums (I bought a 20 track album fo $9.99)... and I'm sure that they need to pay the credit card companies some percentage, and then pay Akamai for the servers, and Amazon for the one-click patents... so I doubt they make more that 15 cents per song on average... but that's still a good margin... but more like $40,000 than El Reg's $100,000 estimate
There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
...well, almost.
:-)
It might make sense to consider something like a 17" iMac as purely a home-entertainment component. Sure, it's $1800, but you'll probably eventually spend more than that at the iMusic store
Anyone want to bet on how many days go by before someone has reverse-engineered the MaciMusic store protocol and written an app that masquerades as iTunes-on-a-Mac thus allowing Linux and Windows users to purchase music through Apple?
G.
Well, from what I've heard (I can't use the store since I'm stuck with Windows), you can recommend artists. So, go recomend all of your favorite independant bands. Hopefully, Apple will decide to pick some of them up.
If Apple starts selling Indy music, then they can either do it at a lower price, higher profit, or both. Without the record labels in the way, set Apple's cut at $.33, the musicians' cut at another $.33, and that makes for a $.66 song. Pretty good competition for the RIAA, really.
Of course, then they'd have $6.66 albums.
this was extracted buy using an eyecon0meter(gpl) scan of this site, before & after application of va lairIE's patentdead corepirate ?pr? PostBlock(tm) device.
all for a little more monIE?
let the music pay?
eXPplain US away as pairannoyed if you will?
Anyone who has not used iTunes does not understand just how convenient the store is. It's an entry right in your playlist collection (with a different icon). One click on it, and you're at the intro/overview page (or the last page you visited without quitting iTunes). iTunes' built-in search box works on the online catalog in this mode, type something in and it pops right up. Or you can switch to the categorized column-view browse mode (same button to switch any other playlist to browse mode), which is indistinguishable from browsing your local library except for network lag and the Buy button. Find a song you like, and one more click makes it download directly into your library and start playing. It's seamlessly integrated and completely oriented around impulse buying. I'm sure (I *hope*) for most people, one dollar per song is worth the removal of the time and aggravation cost of using P2P (aside from the time spent downloading on my modem, I can find music in the store faster than it would take to find Limewire on my HD and wait for it to gather a server list).
> Can't wait for no DRM? That is like saying you can't wait until Best Buy gets
> rid of those pesky cashiers. Why don't they just trust me to leave an
> appropriate amount of money for the goods that I walk out of the store with??
> They are treating me like a criminal. Wah.
Sad part is, even thou the above was posted by an AC and modded down to -1 flamebait, he's 100% right and not flaming anything at all.
Those moderators should be ashamed.
Someone told me that they don't start charging your credit card until you hit $20 in purchases. They seemed to think you could run up 20 songs without having to pay. I think that they'll eventually get around to charging us, but it would suggest that Apple doesn't have $100k in their bank right now.
The real question is if this is a prudent thing for businesses to do online. I think it's a pain to go to the credit cards for every $.99 transaction because the credit card companies just take most of that with their fees. But if you wait , you may never get the money. What will happen if people close their account before buying that 21st song?
* As is generally the case, my opinions do not reflect those of my employer.
The music industry doesnt give a shit.
Think about it.
Under the current system, they press and market the CDs. The retail chains sell them. The retail chains pay for the whole infrastructure for shipping and whatnot.
Aside from production and marketing, there is no overhead for the producers.
If the producers had to set up their own 'online retail' outlets, there would be a massive amount of overhead for servers, software, bandwidth and staff. It would cost them more to distribute the music this way.
Third parties would have to create the e-biz infrastructure, shoulder that overhead, and pay the producers their due royalties. This is what Apple did, and there's nothing stopping someone else from doing it except cash and lack of customer base.
The RIAA/MPAA dont give a shit either way, so long as they aren't losing money on the deal.
...but as with anything new there will be a lot of people checking it out the first day, kicking the tires and stuff. Personally I don't think there is enough variety and 99 cents is far too expensive. 49 cents a track and I'll start thinking about it.
The meme police, They live inside of my head
Windows users (i.e. 95 %) continue to download stuff from kazaa.
Which means that if a client was availible for 100% of the market, perhaps they could have sold 275,000*20 = 5,500,000 tracks in 18 hours. It's math even RIAA monkeys could figure out.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
You're right! That poor, larger than a fist, less loving than a dildo, object, being forced to violate Hillary Rosen. It is both brutal and inhuman to that object.
Here in Canada I can't buy squat from the iTunes Music Store, but I have been playing with it since it 'opened for business' - we can preview, but not actually buy anything outside of the U.S.
.Mac users can peddle their wares through the online store. I hope their selection grows quickly (yes there's a lot of stuff missing right now). I hope they increase their bitrate (I can hear the difference between the streamed previews and actual CD's). The DRM is not ideal, but in practice it's not imposing. Windows version is coming soon. ...And... dammit... bring it to Canada! iWant to go shopping!!!
If I was allowed to buy, I probably would have purchased 10-20 songs by now.
Yes I have Acquisition (a really sweet Mac Gnutella client), and I have the usual assortment of piracy^H^H^H^H^H^H file sharing tools for Windows, but in that sea of file searching it's easy to lose one's vision of a really nice way to download music.
For example: I figured I would try to find some old Tears For Fears music. In the search field I just typed "Tears For Fears". In less than 5 seconds I had a track listing of 6 different Tears For Fears albums, including tracks I never knew they had done (did you know they covered Bowie's 'Ashes to Ashes'?)
Let me say this another way to better illustrate just how cool it is: it was EVERY ALBUM TRACK, listed only ONCE. I pick the song and I get it, really fast. With a file sharing app I pick from a list of thousands of different rips of the same songs, all of varying quality. I hit download, and maybe the host is slow. Maybe I get a "swarmed" download that won't be reconstructed properly when it gets here. Maybe it won't even really be the song I think I'm downloading. Maybe I get "remotely queued". Maybe it looked like a good bitrate before I downloaded it, but it turned out to be a crappy rip.
On the Apple service I hit "play" and I'm previewing the music in real time. I hit "download" and I've got the actual song I want, with no glitches.
Seriously - with these advantages, plus the fact that it is actually legal, I can't see why people wouldn't shell out a buck a song.
Like everybody else I hope Apple creates an indy section, maybe even something iDisk-based so that
Dont have mac hardware etc, but I have tried this emusic which I liked. Unlimited downloads for 9.99 a month (for 1 year) or 14.99 a month (for 3 months). It has streaming samples so you can see what they have beforehand (mostly rare stuff moreso than mainstream), Plus a 50 mp3 free trial.
Uh, ten $0.66 songs make a $6.60 album, I'm afraid. Eleven $0.66 songs would make a $7.26 album. Perhaps a discount on the 11th song to $0.06?
This is a big story outside the 'geekosphere'. How do I know this? The other day, my father said 'So, what do you think of this new music thing that Apple is doing?'
!?
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Sorry for the harsh subject line, but I find it difficult to believe that a person can make it more than a few years in life without noticing that virtually every consumer product is priced this way.
$9.99, $99.99, $17,995 (for say, a car). We've had this as long as I've been alive, and from looking into older catalogues it's been standard practice in the retail industry since at least the 60's. EVERYONE rounds their price down slightly, so it appears cheaper when you quickly look at it. In fact, in the past decade many stores have successfully gone to a '95 cents' model, where $9.95 somehow looks more appealing to the shopper than $9.99. A whopping 4 cents less profit, but an amazing increase in sales.
Psychologists have known about this for eons, and marketing types do this routinely. 99 cents just looks cheaper than an even buck, to most people. In fact, it's so bad that if I'm in a store with someone, see something for say $395, I'll comment "wow, four hundred dollars for that?". Almost invariably, the person I'm with will say "no, it's only three ninety five". People are so used to this that rounding up prices just seems wrong, somehow.
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
Does anyone know what platform they host their servers on ?
Some review said they sold about 4 tunes ever sec. and abt 275000 tunes in 18 hrs. If an average tune is about 5MB, that's a lot of bandwidth.
How long can the network sustan this kind of load ?
Do all the music tunes download from same location or is it a distributed network ?
What's an average/min/max download speed you get ?
for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
I mean, at 20Euro per CD with 10 songs, their offering is very competitive. DRM? Don't care too much: I can burn it on CD and it's usually from a CD that I listen to music. I also have a MiniDisc player/recorder and the DRM has only slapped me in the face once, when a musician friend of mine gave me a CD-R-Audio.
Good idea recommeniding the indy bands... I think I'm going to do that.
Anyone could have predicted this. Gee, everyone's going nuts downloading music, burning it to their own CD's.. I wonder what would happen if we gave them an opportunity to give us money for this? Now it's a huge race to provide a service like this on Windows. What a bunch of dumbasses.. why the hell did it take Steve Jobs to twist the recording industry's arm to make this happen?
- jon
Ganymede, a GPL'ed metadirectory for UNIX
As someone who switch to Macs last year, I read about the announcement a little after it happened, downloaded iTunes4 and gave it a test run.
I don't know about the connection errors others were reporting, as I didn't have any. I already own an iPod, so the AAC/MP3 issue isn't one for me as it is for some others making posts here. I also had no problem setting up my account - I had an account when I bought my first Mac a year ago, and just used that.
The biggest thing I noticed when I started it up was the ability to finally buy the 1 song off of a track I wanted. Bob Dylan is OK, but I just wanted "Growing in the Wind". That's it. A buck later, and I had it. Another 2 or 3 minutes later, it was on.
From there, I wound up spending $20 on the service. No problems, except that it didn't have everything I wanted (I'm still trying to get Queen's Bohemien Rhapsody). But I spend more in 2 days than I've spent on music in 1 year.
Is is perfect? No, but you don't need an iPod - you can burn the music to a regular audio CD if you like, and either rerip this to MP3 (with a loss of quality), or just play the CD in a regular player.
But so far, it's 95% of what I've wanted with online music sales. Hopefully they'll get more music on there, maybe even some game/anime music (as that stuff is *way* more expensive than it needs to be), and more players out there will start support AAC. I'm not worried about the latter - since its part of the MPEG-4 standard, that should only be a matter of time and a firmware upgrade later.
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
This is a good thing. Someone had to take the risk of trying something like this, and now that we have this initial success the record labels really have to reconsider some of their decisions regarding internet distribution.
Most of us may not agree with the use of DRM and AAC files, but progress is best made by a series of compromises. Considering what the music labels really want to shove down our throats, I think Apple has provided a pretty consumer-friendly compromise. Now that they have set this precedent, I think we can feel a little more secure that things can't get any worse, but hopefully better.
Now they just need to begin the slow process of removing the big evil record labels from the picture by offering independent artists that are self-produced or produced by small labels. Of course since becoming redundant is the real fear held by the RIAA and their ilk, this "compromise" may be harder to achieve.
If RIAA thought Napster/Gnucleus/Kazaa/etc took a bite out of their sales, wait until they see what peeps selling music online will do. I guarantee it - a successful business model selling music/tracks online will utterly destroy the current model of ~$20 CD's sold at Best Buy.
MOD PARENT UP +1 Please!!!!! Some of us out here still have a conscience when it comes to downloading music without ripping off the musicians!
Teh current album price is either $.99 per song or $9.99, whichever is less. I changed it to be $.66 per song, or $6.66, whichever is less because one of three parties was eliminated from the equation.
I would be one of the people downloading a tune, but I don't own the hardware. I'd like to see the stats on what songs were downloaded.
Anyway, I got this in my email box this morning from Michael Robertson of Lindows and former CEO of MP3.COM. I find it coincidental after this Interview session, and I find his comments about Apple selling out intersting. The text of his (mass) email follows:
Most of you probably know that my former company was MP3.com, which was instrumental in bringing digital music to the masses. One of the things we stood for at MP3.com was the consumer's rights over their own music collection. Our belief was that consumers who purchase their music should have the ability to convert that music into a format they like and put the music on any device they desire. We even tried to get a law pushed through congress affirming this (we did not succeed in that attempt). The last five years have seen multiple attempts to limit consumers' rights via DRM (digital rights management) technology. These are schemes which add "big brother" restrictions to what you can do with your own music library.
It's no secret that the major record labels want to embed restrictions into music and force those restrictions onto customers, but recently they've been getting help from some surprising sources -- namely Microsoft and Apple. While I was the CEO of MP3.com, Microsoft repeatedly offered millions of dollars to us to convert the library of tunes at MP3.com from consumer friendly MP3 to Windows Media format. We always politely declined. Microsoft's strategy was that if they could get the whole world to convert to Windows Media, then they could get the record labels to pay them huge sums to limit how consumers could listen to their music. Thank goodness that hasn't happened yet, because having your music "expire", disappear, degrade in quality, not be able to burn to CD or load onto your devices is an awful consumer experience.
Microsoft is at it again though, trying to use their money and dominance in the OS to get a foothold in music by selling out consumers. Recently, news.com reported that Microsoft is cozzying up to the leading CD restriction company. This means we're one baby step away from all music CDs ONLY playing on Microsoft Windows XP. Imagine having to buy a copy of Microsoft Windows XP for every music device just so you can listen to your own music, and even then being restricted from making a compilation CD for your car!
Apple has understandably succumbed to pressure from the music labels to bolster their chances of securing music licenses for their iTunes music service by trampling music buyers rights. The 2.4% of the world which use Macs will find out that all the music in their newly announced service is wrapped in a digital padlock. This gives Apple (or the record labels) the ability to control what a buyer can do with the music they purchase. The user doesn't get to pick which computer they can listen to their music on (Macs only). Forget any device that isn't an iPod, like my current MP3 player (tiny, no cables, rechargeable battery - nice). Don't even think about burning a disc full of 100 MP3s to play in your DVD player. (Have you noticed virtually all new DVD players will play MP3 files?)
Straight ahead of us is a world where CDs will only play in Microsoft Windows XP computers. Digital songs you buy online will only work with Apple software or an Apple sanctioned portable player. You will not be able to burn any of the music you've purchased onto an MP3 CD to pop into your DVD player. That's a sad and expensive world for music fans because labels and large corporations will extort money from their users who just want to enjoy their own music.
When you pay for music, you should be able to enjoy that music in all the different and convenient ways available. I'm still a big believer in the value of MP3 because it ensures that the
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"First things first -- but not necessarily in that order"
-- The Doctor, "Doctor
n/t
Fuck that, I want to see what music they offer before I give them any info. What is this fucking Costco? Aplle can kiss my brown eyeball.
Why pay when you can download them for free?
opennap.sourceforge.net
+++ David Watts 5495 0.0 0.5 1888 884
The RIAA would first multiply the number based on the speed and number of your cd drives, and the barometric pressure in Thailand :)
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
I think I can...
I really need to spell check my posts. Either that or learn to spell. Recommended/recomend. In the same paragraph, no less. That's almost as bad as Lewis (or was it Clark?).
Call me old fashioned but I personally like the idea of 'Albums'. With decent bands you get what the artist wanted...A collection of songs that represents an time/place/idea. As a cohesive whole it sounds better than a single and has a much better listening experience.
With that in mind I would like to be able to download whole albums off iTunes and while that is happening they ship me the pysical CD/Vinyl as well. I wouldn't even mind paying retail CD prices + Postage. This way I get a CD/Vinyl which is superior to any downloadable music format and the convienience of instant listening gratification.
Until this happens I will still buy 99% of my music from the store.
[Please type your sig here.]
Looks cool and all, but seeing as the music industry is already collecting hundreds of dollars a year from me in levies on blank data recording media, I think I'll keep doing what I'm legally allowed to do: copy any music from friends as much as I want.
Sorry folks, but this is far too late to stop this embittered consumer from ripping you off.
Oh, and at 99 cents US per song, that makes it over $15 Canadian for an average album - just about the same price I pay in stores if I wanted to buy a CD. Complete with media, case, and liner. Who's ripping whom off here?
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
People...
Did anyone actually expect that right off the bat the service wouldn't do great? The mac zealots of course wanted to be part of "Apple History" and can now say "I was there" when the kool-aid mixer launched the revolutionary service (Emusic is a much better model and one of the few online music service survivors but since Steve's hype machine isn't working there you don't hear about it). After a while the numbers will come into alignment. Now that the courts have said that Grokster and Morpheus can not be held responsible for what they do, look for centralized, truely anonymous p2p which will kill any pay for music service and send the riaa into fits.
If you really love music and want to pay for the variety, go to Emusic.com. NO DRM AT ALL and works for anyone who can use the internet.
Karma means nothing to me, so suck it...
Yep. I beg to differ with the previous post, though: the RIAA is already starting to pay attention. How can they not? They're losing money!
Harold
Someone else that we know has been getting behind the action of it all. Microsoft has been distributing content with their own DRM through ALTnet on Kazaa.
PressPlay is already on the same path using Microsoft DRM.
Siggy Say, Siggy Do
Most credit card companies charge an average of 3% on transactions, so 3% of .99 = $.0297 per song, times 275,000, that's roughly $8,000. If they pay 65% to record companies, $176,962.5 goes to them. That leaves 32% for Apple, or $87,120. Not too shabby if I say so. That might just cover some of their bandwith bills and hardware investment.
I think the significance of this it that major distributors have signed on to a service that isn't locked in to Microsoft-proprietary file formats. If the Apple store is successful, more distributors will be signing on to this, or looking into other ways to get online.
Yes, Apple's music comes with DRM. I don't think major distributors will sign up without it. Apple's model is less restrictive than many of the current online music sellers. Consumers haven't seemed willing to pay for music that's severely locked down. Apple's venture will show distributors whether we're willing to pay for greater freedom with our tunes.
I really don't think we're going to get a DRM-free future. Sad but true. Unless Apple fully documents their DRM technology so that other companies can build devices that can play these modified AAC files, we may be trading Microsoft's proprietary lockdown for Apple's. I want open formats for everything--including DRM technology.
When all you have is an axe, everything looks like a grindstone.
ignore this.
Not exactly, DRM affects me after I've paid for something, a cashier doesn't.
Whether you buy the music online or from Best Buy, so long as the producer makes the same amount of cash, they dont give a shit. Really.
.com bust. You can fault them for a lot of things, but not for being pragmatic when it comes to doling out investors cash.
What slashbots keep saying, though, is that the RIAA should "wake up" and invest billions in a new eCommerce infrastructure that they must maintain, because it might be profitable. Why would they? Especially after the
Build it and they will come. Apple built it, and they came to the tune of $100,000. I'm sure setup costs were at least a magnitude of order greater than that, and they're still in the hole. But so long as it's Apples gamble, the RIAA could give a shit. They're out to make money. Whether they make it from online sales or from plastic spinning discs, they dont care.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Evidently you've missed out on the self-checkout lanes which are starting to become popular.
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
Isn't it interesting how very few (if anyone) reading Slashdot is at all surprised by this? And yet the MPAA and RIAA continue to fight the digital revolution! Well, it may not be a true revolution, but it is a major change in how people access entertainment these days. Just like how the VCR drastically changed the movie industry by making it EVEN MORE money than it was showing a few movies per theatre.
;)
And yet, I'm perplexed that the whole of the music industry exec's can actually be so incredibly blind to the fact that they should be embracing technology rather than shying away from it. IIRC, they were also afraid of the CD back in the day. Then again, we are talking about "Hollywood" and music types, and if history shows us anything, they're not exactly the brightest kids on the block. Maybe they should read that story on slashdot yesterday about not taking care of your environment.
If Apple can keep this up, or even grow the business, it could soon account for the bulk of their profits: if we extrapolate 100,000 in 18 hours to a year, we get almost 50 million dollars net profit, compared to their current $65M/year net profit.
On a related note have you ever gone to a 24 hr supermarket at 3 in the morning and when you're ready to leave you can't find a cashier. Happened a few times while I was at college. After looking around for 5 minutes I'd just grab a bag and leave. It was usually just a magazine or something.
Including the Beatles as I recall...
Andrew
> How about 'an open format' ?
Concidering everyone else is still stuck on MP3, which is not open at all (and is even more expensive than AAC to use) you can hardly fault apple for this.
Their option is no worse than what anyone else is using.
Its amazing, apple offers many features that everyone conciders great, and on this one feature they do basically the same thing (use a closed format like everyone else), and thats the feature that gets bashed.
MP3 is closed, and requires licencing to make encoders or decoders.
redbook (audio CDs) are also closed format and requires licencing (Though i dont know about the costs for that one)
AAC is closed.
Seems to be you should be bitching at EVERYONE that isnt the 0.01% of the population that uses a computer and OGG, not just apple.
This just shows that Free Market > Price Fix
"I can not bring myself to believe that if knowledge presents danger, the solution is ignorance" - Isaac Asimov
Apple states that the 128-kbps AAC "combines sound quality that rivals CDs with smaller files sizes (compared to MP3s)." Someone reported that Apple said during the original PR event that some of the tracks actually sound better than the original CD tracks because they went back to the original master recordings to encode. Ok, I'll buy all that. AAC offers better compression and higher quality at lower bitrates. Fine. If really true, I might even consider re-ripping my CDs to AAC and saving some disk space. IF it's really that good. But as I said, the proof is in whether I can hear a difference. All other technical mumbo jumbo is meaningless.
I previewed a number of songs the first night it was operational and was fairly impressed. Definitely much better than 128 kbps MP3. Then I put my headphones on and started to notice possible compression artifacts. I wasn't sure if I was imagining these or whether I was really hearing something, so I started listening to the previews of tracks I already have, ripped from original CDs. I compared the preview tracks to my MP3 copies, which are high quality VBR averaging a little over 200 kbps. I went back and forth between the store preview and my copy numerous times, and always felt like I heard compression artifacts in the previews. I wanted to setup a true blind test to make absolutely sure I wasn't being biased by knowing which sample was which, but I haven't had time this week.
Apple's Discussion board for iTunes has numerous topics debating the quality of the AACs. Some people swear that the previews are lower quality, and what you get when you buy is perfect. Others say just the opposite. Apple itself says of the previews, "You'll hear a 30-second sample that rivals CD quality sound." Doesn't exactly say that the preview is the same quality as the purchased track, but kind of implies it too. MacInTouch has tons of reader reports that are interesting as well.
I suppose ultimately I'll have to spend $0.99 and see for myself what happens. I'll try to choose a track that I have, and whose preview sounds pretty bad. If the purchased track is indistinguishable from the CD, I'll be a happy camper. But if it's the same as the preview, I'll be severely disappointed. I'd so love for this to take off, as it is the future of music buying. I think Apple has done a good job of balancing consumers' fair use rights with the rights of the copyright holders. If this flops, it'll be more fodder for the RIAA to push legislation through that protects their dying business model. (sorry, had to get political for a second there)
But mainly I'm excited about the prospect of buying music this way. Hopefully in the near future, they'll have liner notes, etc available as a PDF when you buy. And lots more artists, including any that are out of print. That would so rock. So many CDs on my wishlist now are so hard to find, and I'd buy them in a heartbeat if they were available this way now. So please, Apple, don't let us down on quality! And if the quality really is subpar, let's all send them feedback (link at the music store main page) until they listen!
Say hello to zMac.
Aside from production and marketing, there is no overhead for the producers. (emphasis added by me)
So just what SHOULD the producers be paying for, if not the production?
When I was growing up in the country, a cousin of mine literally did not believe that companies made money off selling candy bars because they were so inexpensive. The writeup for this story reflected this, excuse me, hick attitude. .99c per track for 12 tracks is more than the cost of a CD. If anyone thinks this is even evolutionary, I'm puzzled.
What would be evolutionary would be recognizing that music sales over the internet makes music available to a global audience, and that word of mouth, including some cases of "piracy," (free sharing) is key to this equation. What would be revolutionary would be applying this knowledge to all different areas, so that anyone who produces any content, whether they are musicians, political pundits or writers can make a living off it.
Now we have the entertainment industry who has their teeth on music costing lots of money with lots of middlemen, but in our modern world it really doesn't make any sense and is something that we have to overcome somehow or another. Piracy and the intelligence of hackers who circumvent retrograde attempts to block free sharing are indicators of the way we should be going.
The other big news yesterday was that Steve Jobs confirmed that Apple is going to start putting up independent music once they get all of the big label music they negotiated for uploaded:
from: http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,4 48048,00.html
"Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
Am I the only one that noticed this here?
.gif but if you click on it it does a search for this post...talk about redundant. I think it might be some sort of FBI spy pixel maskerading as something innocent. Then again, maybe it's time for an increase in my dosage.
There's a black pixel on this post just a little above the third '0' of "Apple's iTunes Music store sold 275,000". It's supposed to be some sort of
Do you think the megastores would keep selling the same thing as last year with a fresh coat of varnish if it weren't, you know, selling?
Are you sure this crap isn't exactly what the market wants, even if it's not what you and I want? That creativity doesn't actually make sales in the music biz?
Because it sure looks that way to me...
(Consider not just music stores, but also just what it was actually possible to find on Napster, for instance. Creative, new, indy music? Not really. The latest Eminem & Britney Spears collaboration piece? For sure!)
Do you have a
hehe...just pony up and buy a Mac...you'll never look back.
That analogy is flawed. DRM is more like Best Buy sending a security guard home with you to make sure you don't use the products you buy in any way they don't approve of. For instance, I can play CD's I purchase in any number of players, copy them to my various computers, enjoy them on my portable player, and so forth. My music server is a Linux box, though; I cannot use it to play DRM-encumbered music, because Apple has not chosen to make Linux software available for their protection scheme. That's their prerogative, but it means that their music isn't terribly useful to me.
I applaud Apple's effort to be reasonable, but DRM is still unacceptable. I wrote a short essay on why I believe this; it's on my site.
Furthermore, sharing is a fundamental part of experiencing music. I believe that noncommercial song swapping should be fully protected under copyright law.
-John
Here's something that I'd like to know (I don't have a Mac and can't use the store) - does the ASM track which music you've bought in the past so that if your hard drive blows up/gets stolen/damaged/or anything else which causes your music that you bought and downloaded to be lost you can download the songs again?
$45 per U Colocation Special
This for me could be a real killer app. I may just go out and get a Mac for the ability to use i-tunes. I would probably get an i-pod for the hell of it as well. Cool.
But I suppose food kinda has built-in DRM; it eventually goes bad, and you can't copy it. Perhaps we might eventually see this sort of self-serve stuff at regular retail outlets?
Qualitas edurus commercium, nullus penitus net rimor, nullus deus beneficium
I think this is going to be a major "stye in the eye" of all those who claim that Napster et al are nothing more than common theves. When people are clammoring to buy a product that can be stolen fairly safely, I think that's saying something (read; most people don't mind anteing up for what they use).
Interestingly enough, this could VERY easily be viewed as a Very Good Thing by all the IP-based companies. Proof-positive that people will climb over each other to buy your product if you just let them but they'll obtain it by other means if you don't.
But will the RIAA & company view it as such? No. Why? Because what they want more than revenue is control. Because control, in their current model, is equivalent to a sustainable business. When they start loosing control of how the product can get to market, when they lose their status as the so-called gatekeepers of IP whose ass you must lick to be heard, they're screwed. You can't abuse people when you aren't the only game in town.
Then it becomes a buyer's market. Which, trust me, is the last thing these people want.
My
Limekiller
"They-ah Smaaht!"
I notice a lot of people who haven't used it are complaining about the low bitrate .aac's. Well, I actually bought a Live Phish track today that I have also ripped at 192k mp3 and level 6 ogg. I listened to all three with my MDR-EX70 neodymium driver earbuds, and guess what? They all sounded pretty much the same.
Keep in mind that Apple doesn't have to pay Akami, Amazon or the Labels immediately, so they get to make money on that money until the bills come in.
DRM? Low-bitrate crappy AAC? I'm not going to even consider this service until it's 320kbps DRM-free MP3, and the prices are more reasonable, like $0.05 a song.
we have two 'books running jaguar and the itunes sharing is really slick, via an airport extreme (with old-style cards in the 'books).
since this works so well between computers, i was wondering if there is some gizmo, far cheaper than an ipod, that could grab the signal and output the sound to standard RCA jacks. (of course a cube would be really sweet too.) i know the new ipods have some kinda output from the cradle, but they don't have a wireless remote.
And evidently you've missed out on the shocking revelation that those self-checkout lanes have been something of a disaster, as they facilitate theft (gee, who'd have thought?).
Apple owns a portion of Akamai, doesn't it? If anything, them using their servers is probably a lot less of a cost factor than one thinks.
And the Amazon 1 Click charge also gets factored into their Online Store sales as well and hopefully its not a Per-Click Charge.
It will seem like pennies but 100 pennies equal a dollar and so forth.
The iTunes Music Store is a nice service and something I've been waiting for and hoping someone developed.
And just about anyone that says $.99 is too much, they're probably expecting to get everything for free. And if they're expecting that... they're probably pirating music.
I'm probably going to get flamed for this... eck.
TW
Television is dead. Long live That Weasel Television
...of this conflict with the Kazster crowd.
Somehow, if people don't make purchasing something as convenient and cheap as you expect it to be, you have the right to take it.
In the case of utilities with true monopoly on the electric power coming into your home doubling their price in a two month period, I could see the justification in say altering your meter to cut the price back down to where it was. This wouldn't seem unjust to me.
In the case of charging too much for music (not food, not power, not water, CDs), and not making it available online with massive bandwidth and high-bit rates for cheap, I can't really see how this entitles you to buy one copy and distribute it to 400 people, any more than waiting five minutes at the QuickMart entitles you to a free magazine.
How does this work?
Your logic makes absolutely no sense at all. You are still buying the songs on the iTunes Music Service, which is what you are doing when you approach the cashier. Best Buy does not go home with you and make sure you don't copy your brand new VHS of Snoop Dogg's Doggystyle to another tape and give it to a friend, or burn a copy of 50 Cent's latest jamz and sell the copy.
You must have missed the clerk or security guard who stands there and monitors you, and checks to see what you walk out with is whats on your reciept.
This usually takes longer than just letting the cashier ring them up.
And you'll never see them in a store like Best Buy, with so many high-priced, yet easily pocketable items. And there's no way to remove the anti-theft boot from a CD/DVD at the self-checkouts either.
When you make your first purchase on any given day, they put a $20 hold on your card and record your charge
Subsequent charges just bump up your total for the day
At the end of the day, they remove the hold, and charge your card, once, for the day's total
To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
Why is this newsworthy, other than the fact it's a hardware manufacturer doing this?
.wma file) but I have yet to encounter a track that I couldn't burn to CD from within Liquid's player or WIndows Media. Liquid Audio's player is free for the download or you can get a more capable edition for $20, so that's pretty much a non-issue.
I've used Liquid Audio (http://liquid.com/) several times to download tracks to my Windows box. Granted that the tracks are in one of two proprietary formats (liquid audio's format or a
Concerned with DRM and the lack of portability? I am too. I like to listen to my tracks on my desktop and occasionally on my laptop when I'm across campus studying. When I download a track (or several) the first thing I do is burn a CD. You now have an unfettered backup on a CD playable anywhere, plus you can re-rip it to MP3 if so desired.
I've bought several tracks and a few complete albums this way, and the sound quality is quite good (to me, anyway). Here is the audio codec info from one track, "Stealin'" by Uriah Heep: Windows Media Audio V8, 128 kbps, 44 kHz, stereo. Plus I can replace the DRM copy of the track with the non-DRM copy to keep my collection unfettered and completely back-upable.
Maybe it's the music selection I'm missing, or somethign with the integration between the site and the iPod. That very well could be the case, as I've never used an iPod or a modern Mac (last one I used was a 128K Mac where a 20MB hard drive was huge)
Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
With a name that sounds like a Yiddish curse, what do you expect?
Now I can buy my favorite music for $5 instead of $17, since I really only like five or so songs on each cd. On some poor cd's, I only like one or two songs. Now the pressure is on musicians to make not just 10 decent songs on a cd, but 10 hits on a cd. Singles may become even more popular now. And for the record, Apple is hiring a Windows engineer to port it to Windows. What I really want is iTunes running on Linux. That would rock! The second best new feature of iTunes is the rendesvous enabled music serving. I can have one set of music on one Mac, and play on my other three Macs (with much smaller hard drives, I might add). But the one Mac has an 80GB hard drive and can store my whole collection. Pretty sweet.
Who moved my sig?
I own several Macs (as well as PCs) so getting access isn't an issue.... ...BUT, how good is the archive? For example, I listen to metal, 80s metal, not this "modern" rap-crap that pretends to be metal.
..eBay on the other hand...
Does the store hold such gems as Destruction, or Venom tracks? Without it, Mac or no Mac, I'm not one of their targets...
So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
True, it doesn't facilitate theft, but then you have to compare that against the 4 or so cashiers that you didn't have to hire.
Live web cams
With this announcement, it has been unequivocally proven that RIAA missed the boat big time.
This is what happens when an industry fails to innovate. They can play the blame game all they want, they lost because they didn't keep up with what consumers wanted.
Apple did and is going to win this round.
-- I am. Therefore, I think!
If you haven't noticed, you can burn the AAC files to CD. Then, pop the CD back in and rip the MP3s off.
AAC sounds fantastic. I usually rip MP3s at 160-192 kbps, using VBR. This makes very nice sounding MP3 files, and I can't tell the difference between the MP3 and the CD. The only draw back, is that they are kinda large, but with a 20 Gig iPod, I'm not too worried.
AAC actually sounds as good, as far as I can tell, as my MP3s do. So all this talk of "low bit-rate" and "DRM-sUckS!" is ridiculous. If you don't like the DRM, burn a CD (or 10 before changing the playlist), and re-import it as MP3s and never think about AAC again.
It's only when we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything...
Do you think Apple could make a physical presence in music stores a possibility?
Much like the Software-2-Go kiosks in stores, there could be a Music-2-Go kiosk. You would create or sign into your AMS account and purchase music. An extra $2.50 or so for the on-site burning, cover art, etc. I don't think it could do the booklets, but maybe...
Of course, you would also be able to burn music you already own. You fly across the country, stop into a music store, burn a CD for $2.50, and pop it into your rental car's CD player.
It's an interesting thought.
That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
AAC is *at least* as open as MP3. Before someone mentions Vorbis...
If you only use Ogg Vorbis:
Then you don't use a portable digital music player... which would suggest you hang around a computer to listen to music... which is a really boring way to be...
4 tracks a second means 120 million tracks a year or roughly about 3% of all retail tracks sold by the music companies which have licenses with apple. my guess is that for every 1 apple owner, there are 100 CD player owners. So an average Apple owners are buying three times more tracks than an average CD player owner is buying in retail market! Indeed amazing if the trend continues.
Theft from customers, or theft from cashiers. Take your pick.
Cashiers have far more ability to steal than customers, as they know the policies and regulations of the store and can find ways around them.
and i guess you also missed out on the magnetic tag detectors that they have on stuff at best buy.
3% is way too high for the volume that Apple's doing. I would be very surprised if their per-transaction charge was even as high as 1%.
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
Does anyone here recall when Apple released the iPod? The story here on slashdot contained two sentences after the submission. One of which simply read (and I quote): "Lame."
I think it's fair to say that "Slashdot wisdom" concerning these things isn't exactly a great indicator of success or failure. Everyone here on slashdot either has an iPod or wants one. Yeah, even if it doesn't run Linux.
Slashdot readership as a whole may contain a lot of knowledge and wisdom. That's why I come here. But it certainly doesn't have a finger on the pulse of consumer-oriented technology.
And for the record, I think Apple has gotten this thing about 95% right straight out of the gate. Clearly it is going to be the model for how this is done for everyone else. Kudos to them. They deserve it.
You like your Macintosh better than me, don't you Dave? Dave? Can you hear me Dave?
http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZSearch.woa/wa /advancedSearchResults?searchTermHere
With iMovie it is incredibly easy and fun to make movies from video and pictures. With iDVD it is easy to burn DVD's which are playable just about everywhere. With iTunes music store you can now buy the 1 song you want for your video and bring it to life -- that's ilife.
Even aside from your odd sentence structure, the word "quickly" must mean something really different to you than it does to the rest of us. Maybe it means "slow and frustrating"?
You mention P2P stuff, but you don't seem to have looked for anything less common than Britney's latest hit... I had a little Limewire phase, but dang it if I have the time to hassle with that.
But I agree, the parent was a Pollyanna post. I also gotta notice that a lot of people bought music on this service fast. Maybe you should be wondering why instead of flaming away, you know? Hint: the answer is not "Those Mac people will believe anything 'cause they're zealots." Maybe it has something to do with Apple seriously thinking about how to hit the sweet spot so they could satisfy the customers and the labels. You think?
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
At the self-check out lane at my grocery store, the conveyor belt actually detects an object passing through (there is a scanner halfway down the belt). If you haven't scanned it, and it detects more objects than you scanned, it stops, backs up and calls an employee.
Apple's DRM only makes it more difficult for the masses to share the music after purchase. What Apple and the Music industry is banking on is the impulse buy. They have priced these songs at such a level that people don't think twice before just purchasing a $.99 song. The impulse buy is the entire concept behind this store. It's just as easy now to acquire the song for "pennies" as it is to go download it over your favorite P2P.
Apple is betting that they can watch the actions of the people who are using the service, and figure out how to make it even better. Right now they're tracking customer tendency, and with the customer data being completely real-time and digital, they can analyze and react. They're banking on making it easier and more attractive than P2P sources.
I wouldn't be surprised to see AAC at 160kbps, a Windows version of iTunes 4 (it's already being worked on), and a slightly lower price per song, in the near future.
This is a serious assault on the idea that you couldn't use online music distribution. Take it serious, stop judging it, and see if it works. Even if it fails, it's bound to show us the path to making it effective and viable.
It's only when we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything...
...that new song by Madonnna where she just cusses and swears all the time?
Apparently Michael Robertson hasn't yet been informed that iTunes will burn regular audio CDs that you can play in pretty much any CD or DVD player in the world.
I am sure he will issue a correction and an apology as soon as this fact reaches him.
Thats not enough to pay the management's salary during that time period. Now if only they could pay the guys who actually designed the site/technology behind it.
"Never upset a goalie, getting hit with a blocker is an unpleasent experience - facemask or not." -Me
The faster they rise, the sooner they fall.
There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
most of us won't be able to afford it.
-- Lemmy
So how long before the RIAA starts blaming it's profit loss on people buying individual songs and not entire albums?
I could easily see them come up with some lame excuse as to why it benefits the artists when you buy whole works of art instead of just a piece of it.
Ave Molech Setting
While reading Walter Mossberg in the Wall Street Journal I came upon this paragraph:
"The standard cable still hooks into a FireWire, or 1394, a port many Macs have but few Windows PCs include. So, Apple offers an alternate cable for $19 that plugs into the USB 2.0 port that's standard equipment on new Windows PCs. It will also work, albeit much more slowly, with the older USB ports found on nearly every Windows PC in the past four years. This opens up many more Windows computers for working with the iPod."
Went to the Apple website and sure enough - The new iPod dock can now connect to a USB 2.0 port on Windows machines. What is more - you can also use a USB 1.1 port for _really_ slow transfers!
From Apple Website:
"USB 2.0
For PC users, the iPod will be able to sync files via USB 2.0*, which transfers data at up to 480 Mbps and comes standard on the latest Windows computers. USB 2.0 is also compatible with USB 1.1, although data transfer speeds are much slower."
Looks like a smart move...
Adi Gadwale.
the first comment to this hint gives the format for queries to the apple music store.
Imagine a replacement for the traditional jukebox found in Bars and Billard Halls. Set up a kiosk running iTunes that excepts money and voila, you have a jukebox that you'll never have to go out and buy cds for. Think of all the money the owner could make.
Is that the 30 second song "sample" is just viral enough to infect co-workers.
Someone in your office you don't like? Give them 30 seconds of Air Supply. They'll be humming "Making Love out of Nothing At All" ALL DAY LONG!!!
Tee-Hee
"oohhh... I didn't know Schopenhauer was a philosopher!"
Surely a lot of people can find some friend in the US who will let you use their credit card number for buying songs.
If you try and re-distribute them on a mass basis you'll probably hear from their lawyers eventually (as some Napster folks found out a while back), but they don't harrass their customer base just to make life harder for the small percentage of ripoff artists.
(Score 5??? Someone boosted this AC garbage up to 5? WTF?)
if you want indy music, just got to besonic.com
It's the 21st Century Do you know what your government is doing
I can use it to search for tracks, then by locally or order the red book compliant CD so I can have the tracks without any DRM bullshit.
Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.
Do your math again. The price of an album would work out to $6.60 and not $6.66. Sorry, nice try though.
MP3 is just as closed as AAC, and MP3 is more expensive to licence the code to make those files (dont know the cost of decoders, but i believe mpeg charges for that too)
AAC is an open and free format - it's part of the MPEG-4 standard. It does have DRM capability built into it, which is what Apple is using (that's the difference between the .m4a and .m4p files - p=protected).
And since we are on the subject, why did you choose MP3, being one small part of a whole? Using mp3 to store just audio is like using a VHS tape to store just audio as well. Possible, and of course it works, but its a video format for crying out loud!!! Use an audio encoding!
MP3 is MPEG-1, Layer 3... Layer 3 is the audio 'layer' of the standard. There is absolutely no video information encoded in an MP3 file, and it's not a video format. The video format would be MPEG-1 (and specifically MPEG-1, layer 2, I believe. Layer 1 is header information.). This is nothing like storing audio on a VHS tape.
-T
Shame. The Hurting is one of the best, most understated albums of all time IMHO. You really should give it a listen. It's timeless.
Well, My local K-mart has 4 of them, and the cashier's desk doesn't seem to be manned a whole lot of the time. It sure would help if they watched those little web-cameras they installed.
I think the automated checkout system works a lot better for Grocery stores. (Kroger)
As long as iTunes will not convert the AAC songs to cassette tape I will stay with Kazaa, thank you very much. I have the legal fair use right to conver the music I own to that format, and until the RIAA, Steve Jobs and John Ashcroft stop treating me as a criminal, I will continue to be one.
Wake up people!!
Anyone want to bet on how many days go by before someone has reverse-engineered the MaciMusic store protocol and written an app that masquerades as iTunes-on-a-Mac thus allowing Linux and Windows users to purchase music through Apple?
Anyone want to bet on how many minutes it will take for the RIAA or one of the major labels to send a cease-and-desist letter alleging violation of 17 USC 1201(a), claiming that the presence of a Macintosh® computer is an access control mechanism?
Will I retire or break 10K?
and that makes for a $.66 song. Pretty good competition for the RIAA, really.
Of course, then they'd have $6.66 albums.
Don't you mean $6.60?
Transcoding (AAC -> OGG, for instance) is lossy. Whether or not it is acceptably lossy is a matter of personal taste. However, it is ridiculous that there should be *any* loss at all; I've paid for the music, so I should be able to listen to it with any software I choose, without losing quality.
/usr/local/media tree? I'm an engineer. That sort of artificial inefficiency bugs me, especially when it doesn't even accomplish its intended purpose.
Besides, burning to CD and re-importing is a pain. Is there a good, technological reason why I shouldn't be able to download music directly into my server's
-John
This is all well and good, but the appeal that downloading MP3's from Kaaza, etc., is that it is more cost effective to download than to buy CD's.
Apple's prices are no better than buying CD's. There are some interesting advantages to Apple's progam, but until it addresses the fundamental point--cost effectiveness--it will not compete with Kaaza downloads.
We have these (the self-checkout lanes) at my local Ralphs supermarket, but they remain remarkably untrafficked. I use them once in awhile.
Harold
hmmm... the original apple 1 sold for $666.66 coincidence? no can i spell to save my life? no
learn how to mod.
You have seen the new rapid self-checkout lanes at various stores, right?
I have a positive modifier on Troll. When I mod someone Troll their karma should go UP!
there are already about 4 ways to rip off the DRM. At least one comes on every mac. rip it to aiff, reencode. worried about loss of quality? Don't be. It's really very good.
:)
Really, this is a good thing. I don't like the DRM either (I have a RioCar, only plays mp3), but hey, I'm willing to pay for the artists I like, and i like not havign to get off my ass to do it
-- Who is the bigger fool? The fool or the fool who follows him? --
-T
I can hit used CD stores and find MUCH more interesting music for half the price of the Apple music store.
With the exception of eBay's Half.com, hitting used CD stores requires a driver's license, a car, registration for your car, insurance for your car (which is prohibitively expensive until the driver turns 25), and petrol. Which of those does iTunes require?
Will I retire or break 10K?
You can't re-download purchased music. BUT, you CAN back it up to CD/DVD in AAC format. You know...backups.
No. The analogy is fine. Without someone watching you at Best Buy, you could not only take stuff for yourself, but for your friends and neighbors as well. Hell, why not give out stuff to random people on the street too, if it isn't too much of an effort to carry.
Vote for Pedro
I, personally, am addicted. I have already bought 30 songs and I'm showing no signs of slowing down in the near future. I keep finding more stuff I want, and at the price I cant help myself.
I am especially impressed with their jazz selection. I am very impressed, I don't think i'll ever use a p2p for music again.
For a good buy, pick up the McCoy Tyner album, Inception, for just $5.94. It's $15 at amazon...
Thank you Apple, for taking in account all musical tastes for launch!
Could Jesus microwave a burrito so hot that he himself cou
Transcoding (AAC -> OGG, for instance) is lossy. Whether or not it is acceptably lossy is a matter of personal taste. However, it is ridiculous that there should be *any* loss at all; I've paid for the music, so I should be able to listen to it with any software I choose, without losing quality.
/usr/local/media tree? I'm an engineer. That sort of artificial inefficiency bugs me, especially when it doesn't even accomplish its intended purpose.
Besides, burning to CD and re-importing is a pain. Is there a good, technological reason why I shouldn't be able to download music directly into my server's
You have a point that going AAC -> OGG is lossy, but so is CD -> MP3, and no one has been complaining about that this whole time.
A an engineer myself, I know that none of my projets, research, or designs have ever started from a concrete idea that wasn't altered, changed, added to, subtracted from, or re-engineered to be better, safer, cheaper, of more feature filled. This music store has been open for 3 or 4 days. Give it some time. The idea is novel, and the implementation is easily changed or made more robust.
AAC is a good introductory step toward getting people away from MP3 and toward MP4 or OGG. Wait and see what comes from iMusic v. 2.0...
It's only when we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything...
>3% is way too high for the volume that Apple's doing. I would be very surprised if their per-transaction charge was even as high as 1%.
They could queue up your purchases, and only charge your credit card once a day, a week, or once a month. Ebay does the same thing.
My music server is a Linux box, though; I cannot use it to play DRM-encumbered music, because Apple has not chosen to make Linux software available for their protection scheme.
AAC isn't a DRM system -- it's just a fairly modern music encoding. Mplayer groks it. Use FAAC with it as per the mplayer codecs docs.
Frankly, I wish people would stop getting upset about folks not using mp3 (aside from those who spent a ton of money on those little low fidelity hardware players -- and even those folks knew that MP3 would be obsolete at some point). MP3 isn't bad, but neither is it up to snuff with AAC and ogg.
As for those who want losslessly compressed music...hell, we can't even convince people to give up lossy JPEG in favor of PNG and lossless JPEG. Music files are much larger -- it'll be years after lossy JPEG goes away that we move away from lossy sound compression.
May we never see th
Obviously there's going to be 10.0909090909 songs per an album.
No. No, I don't.
Look at Apple's current pricing scheme for albums. It's $.99 per song or $9.99, whichever is cheaper. With $.66 songs, that becomes $.66 per song or $6.66, whichever is less.
So, for a 10 song album, it would come out to $6.60, but for more songs, $6.66.
He doesn't seem to understand that:
If Apple didnt charge $0.99, then after paying record co's, paying for bandwidth, and the myriad other charges, it wouldn't be worth their while, and the Store wouldnt exist
If Apple didn't implement some kind of DRM, the Store would not exist, period. The Big Five would never support it, and without the Big Five's support, 95% of the listening public would ignore it, and again it wouldnt exist. Besides, the DRM Apple have given is the bare minimum, and is trivial to circumvent.
Here's the rant I sent to Apple, here's hoping they improve. Or feh, we can just follow some people's example and use eMusic.
:30, your clip is over and you never get to hear her sing! I should think her beautiful voice would be a great selling point!
:41, which is 11 seconds past your preview clip.
---
Hi! I am a big fan of Massive Attack, and am pleased to see you feature them in your "Exclusive" section in the "Music Store" section of iTunes4.
However, I cannot decide whether to buy the new exclusive album (or any tracks from it), because your 30-second preview is not a reliable indicator of what a song is actually like.
How do I know this? Because I already own some of the songs you preview.
For example, I bought the CD by Massive Attack "Protection" when it came out, so I know that your 30-second preview does no justice at all to the songs.
"Better Things" is a perfect example. Tracey Thorn doesn't start singing until 1:09, but by
Also, why is "Protection" the song not featured for download from the "Protection" album by the same name? That's the very best song on the whole disk, and it isn't there at all. Even if it were, the preview would do no good for it, either, because for this song, Tracey doesn't start singing until
If you want to sell songs, you need to put in the extra work to grab the part of the clip that is most likely to get the listener's interest.
-c
I think it'll be really interesting once the next 'big' CD comes out (a la Eminem's last CD). How many people are going to be 'waiting in line' for the Apple music store to be the first ones to download the tracks there?
yes, tyhe technical reason is that Apple would not have been able to get a deal with the big 5 with out the Pain in the ass inefficent method.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
99 cents is the right price. I feel totally comfortable blowing 99 cents multiple times for music. 99 cents is the cost of a cheap hamburger at McDonald's. And, most pop music today is about as disposable and meaningful as a hamburger at McDonalds. And as for quality, this is unimportant to me as well. We're talking about pop music here, not the Taj Mahal or the Mona Lisa. It's disposable, useless fluff. Of course I would want better quality if it were offered, but will hearing Whitesnake or New Kids on The Block in better quality improve the music any?
Next I notice one great benefit of buying music this way is you don't get a jewel case or liner notes. That's right, you heard me correct. I actually don't use either. Pretty much every CD I've bought in the past year has been immediately ripped into iTunes, the CD with liner notes stuffed in an envelope and the jewel case tossed. The CD essentially only exists for me as a backup medium. I can't remember the last time I even felt the need to look at the disc jacket. Saving the time of me chucking the box and the materials is easily worth 99 cents, and the 9.99 for an album is a steal. I hope to never set foot in a record store again, nor pay Amazon to ship me a bunch of crap I will never use, including the CD.
Secondly, one thing that is awesome about the new version of iTunes is the Rendevous capability. I crack open my iBook, and the entire library of mp3s on my main Mac appears. Holy cow ... now I can have one copy of my entire library and serve it up without lifting a finger.
Then, I read you can do the same thing, over the net. Meaning, I can be at work on my mac and have access to my entire mp3 library. Holy cow again.
I can hardly wait until they slap Airport on an iPod and do the same thing. Can you imagine just walking down the street and a new playlist shows up on your iPod from some guy walking buy you... arrrgh I'm foaming at the mouth.
The Apple Music Store: I'ts cool.
"AAC sounds fantastic"
Not at 128kb it don't. It sound good.
Why does everyone think their personal experience defines the limits of what's okay and what's not?
And why does everyone generalize so much?
The point is that without the paltry DRM that they did implement, the record lables would not have given them song one to sell at their store. This DRM implementation is about the fairest and most lenient compromise that you will ever find. I mean, come on! All it really does is add a few extra steps between the user and a totally DRM-free file. This is just to prevent casual copiers (which make up the vast majority of listeners) from making copies without thinking about it. And it prevents people from easily making thousands of CDs to sell.
If you really want to remove the DRM then, as others have said, it is very easy to do. And you can burn as many damn CDs as you want with these files! DRM not fair? Please! About the only thing you cannot do is copy a file to more than three computers. That's it. And you can even do that if you burn then re-rip it. So quit yer whinin'!
But if even this does not satisfy you, then by all means stick to Kazaa. I'll probably still use P2P services for those odd Pogues, Coil, or Webb Wilder tracks that I cannot get from the iStore. But if they ever get around to adding them, I'll pay for them.
There they were, sitting in the van with all those dials, and the cat was dead. -V. Marchetti, CIA
Remember their first computer was $666.00. Now an album from them costs $9.99. See the relation?
Who says Apple can't remove the iTunes-mandated DRM from their files, or start offering MP3's with their service? Apple is playing a good middle ground. They're trying to make a popular service without opening themselves up for litigation.
As much as we hate it, the DMCA pretty much requires Apple to actively move to protect the labels' interests, or risk lawsuits for 'contributing to piracy'. If we assume that MP3's are right out, I can't imagine that they'd even want to deal with the legal hassle of providing music to Linux or Windows users at all -- the only real DRM formats (WMA, RM) belong to their competition and would require them to basically duplicate their entire library in addition to paying royalties. And let's face it, they're not going to get anyone on board for MP3.
RIAA: "Apple, by providing unencrypted, easily copied MP3 files to Personal Computers, a known bastion of music theft, has materially damaged our business model and violated our agreement."
Apple: "But it's what the consumers wanted."
RIAA: "So what? You are on the way to destruction. For great justice, All your base are belong to us."
True science means that when you re-evaluate the evidence, you re-evaluate your faith.
Look at Apple's pricing again. I've said it twice already, but here it is again.
Apple charges $.99 per song or $9.99 for the entire album, whichever is cheaper. For a 10 song album, they charge $9.90. For more songs, it pegs at $9.99.
If you eliminate one of the parties to the contract, the price per song goes down to $.66. Using the same pricing scheme for albums, that's $.66 per song or $6.66, whichever is lower.
Therefore, the price of most albums would work out to $6.66.
And another thing...
If you're the kind of person who finds any DRM scheme offensive. no matter how non-restricting or easily removed, then you're probably not interested in paying for music anyway. So who cares?
There they were, sitting in the van with all those dials, and the cat was dead. -V. Marchetti, CIA
ignore this as well
Perhaps we might eventually see this sort of self-serve stuff at regular retail outlets?
Not until they can figure out how to make the user interface tell you about all the great features of the optional product protection plan that can be yours for such a low low price, because you know the %device_purchased% you have selected is known to have a %random_negative_adjective% %random_part_name% which tends to go bad in %random_time_interval% and if you don't purchase one of our completely optional (no obligation to buy but I'll continue to drone on and on until you buy one or make me stop) product protection plans then you'll have to send it off to one of their repair sites located in %random_third_world_country% and it usually takes %random_long_length_of_time% and costs %price_times_two% so you're really better off paying the small amount, only %price_over_3% now because you'll save money in the long run.
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
>I'd like to see the stats on what songs were downloaded.
you can see that in iTunes:
Top Song Downloads
1) Stick in a Moment (U2)
2) Beautiful Day (U2)
3) I will Follow (U2)
4) Lose Yourself (Eminem)
5) Soak Up the Sun (Sheryl Crow)
6) Clocks (Coldplay)
7) The Way I am (Eminem)
8) Save and Sound (Sheryl Crow)
9) January Stars (Sting)
19) These Drugs (Eminem & D12)
Top Album Downloads
1) Sea Change (Beck)
2) Thankful (Kelly Clarkson)
3) C'Mon C'Mon (Sheryl Crow)
4) Away from the Sun (3 Doors Down)
5) Elvis 56 (Elvis)
6) Greatest Hits (Fleetwood Mac)
7) Eminem Show (Eminem)
8) Get Rich or Die Tr... (50 Cents)
9) All that you Can't leave behind (U2)
10) The Joshua Tree (U2)
You can see more in iTunes, but these are the two top ten lists. Pretty interesting.
May I please be the first one in line to wield the mighty cluebat? I've got quite a record, and have been in training for years for this opportunity!
You've got to be kidding me.
:(
It's WAY more convenient. I haven't bought music in ages, but the moment the ITMS becomes available to PC users, I shudder at the thought of what it'll do to my wallet.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
In the past 18 hours, 275,000 new AAC encoded songs appears on Kazaa.
But if you pick an evil number like 6.66, then the RIAA will feel obligated to be part of it...
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
Note that full albums are MOSTLY 9.99, which is cheaper than in-store CDs.
But the big thing is: These are CHEAP tracks. Keep in mind that the majority of CDs out there have 2-3 good tracks and the rest is crud.
So if the CD is $12, you're paying $4-6 per track that you actually want. The other tracks are irrelevant in many cases. For example, I really like "Big Yellow Taxi" by Counting Crows, but I'm wary of buying the CD because I haven't heard anything else on it.
If I had ITMS access, I would've bought that track days ago.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
...and neither does Apple. You want to burn 1000 CDs of your new track? You can. You may have to make a slight alteration to your playlist every 10 burns, but you can do it.
You want to copy your new file to 1000 computers? You can do it. Just burn it to a CD, then rip it off as an MP3, OGG, or unprotected ACC. The loss in quality is absolutely negligable. And you can then even more easily burn it to 1000 CDs.
This DRM scheme amounts to little more than a gentle, one-time reminder that you shouldn't do those things. But it by no means prevents you from doing it. What more do you want?! Oh, yeah- free music.
There they were, sitting in the van with all those dials, and the cat was dead. -V. Marchetti, CIA
Regardless, the credit card companies would get the same amount... (3% of .99) times X number of songs is the same as 3% (.99 times X number of songs). It's more or less a "per charge" amount than a "per amount" charge. In either case it ends up the same.
Somebody will write a conversion program to convert AAC into MP3 or OGG and bam, back on P2P except without any DRM
It's only a matter of time. I am a pirate because I want to
The ol saying "It's not a sale lost cuz I wouldn't buy it anyway" really applies to me, I'm broke as shit
Posting useless rant since 2003.
Everyone on the "we finally get it" bus is waving goodbye to you.
My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
if I had the mod points today...
Having to learn objective-C is a little bit of a downer
You don't like java, then?
Just curious.
Incidentally, i know that there are third-party extentions that will let you write cocoa apps in perl and python, but i don't know if they're any good.
Last I checked, the mp3 license is free for decoders. Encoders have to pay. If AAC adopts a similar license, hardware makers adopt it, and PC's can use the service it will win big time, and I'll be cheering it all the way.
Without lossy compression, the song will take about 10 times the bandwidth and disk space. The powers that be at Apple have decided that lossy compression is the best way to sell reasonable quality audio without using too much resources. As far as ripping a burned cd, that wasn't intended, undoubtably, but if you do rip the burned track, you only have the lossy compression error due to ACC until you then decide to re-encode in another lossy format.
Vote for Pedro
Dude, I think the fact that you've had to explain this three times now means you were in the wrong. Big time.
Prices that end in ".99" are commonplace. Prices that end in ".66" are unheard of. That's why people don't get the joke.
You were trying to be funny, but you blew it. Admit it gracefully and move on.
Never apologize for a joke, and never, EVER explain one.
This will begin to discourage the practice of putting crappy "filler" on albums. Because the listener no longer has to pay for the crud, it just won't sell.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
"How about D) He actually likes the idea of some money going to the artists, rather than stealing the music."
Don't be a fool.
Of the $1, the RIAA gets 2/3's. Of that's 2/3's, the writer gets the mechnical royalty which is probably less than 5 cents.
So the artist is the *least* compentated in this scheme. But hey, apple and the riaa did all the hard work, right?
No, I wasn't trying to be funny. That just happened to be the price that the albums came out to.
It's not really a joke at all.
If any other company, MS, and RIAA member, or even the FSF opened a music store and choose a closed proprietary format over MP3 or of course Vorbis this /. crowd would be all over them. If this was Warner Brothers Music people would be screaming how AOL was trying to destroy open formats with DRM that restricted yadda yadda yadda.
but no, its apple, so everyone creams in their pants and begs for more. I can't understand how a company whose practices go against everything FS/OS stands for in such a drastic way is so loved by the same crowd.
Imagine what the world would be like if MS had the monopoly *and* the control apple has over its products and customers. man I'll leave the over priced/ closed / hardware-software lockin at the door thank you very much.
"....and if you act now, we'll even throw in this extra bit of plastic....WOW!... that's a $20 value for only 99 cents!!"
A large portion of the consuming public are nothing more than sheep. There is only two basic uses for sheep...fleecing and slaughter, unless of course if you're a Catholic priest then I'm sure you have a third use in mind for your flock.
After reading all of the comments about AAC vs. MP3, let me just say this: AAC is NOT MP3+DRM.
I've been an audiophile for several years, and I have good experience with MP3 and MP3 bitrates. I listen to music on what I consider high-quality gear (Bose, Sony, Pioneer, Blapunkt, Yamaha). I can NOT listen to 128kbps MP3s. The quality loss annoys me to such a degree that I cannot enjoy the song. I can hear a little degredation in 160k mp3s, but I personally encode at MP3 VBR @ 192kbps. At this setting, I cannot tell the difference between the original source and the encoded file.
I downloaded 13 songs from the iTunes service last night, and burned them to CD. I then took it with me in my car (where the sound system rivals the actual car in cost) and drove around for a while.
I can say, for a fact, that 128k AAC rivals 192Kbps MP3s. I could not hear *ANY* artifacts or degredation in the songs I downloaded. NOTHING. They were *perfect*.
From now on, i'm encoding in 128k AAC, and saving myself the hard drive space. I don't care if I can only use it on my Mac/iPod, but I'm sure as hell not using MP3 if I can use AAC.
From This Time Magazine interview with Steve Jobs TIME: What about independent labels? Will they follow suit? Jobs: Yes. They've already been calling us like crazy. We've had to put most of them off until after launch just because the big five have most of the music, and we only had so many hours in the day. But now we're really going to have time to focus on a lot of the independents and that will be really great.
They're still making money off of these sales.
But they'll lose in the long term - Next stop for ITMS - Independent labels/artists.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
I wouldn't even think about trying to download a song off of kazaa or wherever if I could just go down to the store and get a CD for $10.00. and that IS what they are worth. with CD's getting close to $20.00 it's fricking nuts and I find more and more people not only getting the music off of the net but 3 people buying a CD and then making copies for the other two.
every study points to one major thing... music get's shared like crazy because it is horribly overpriced.
Besides, a chap in my town has a server that has mp3's that are recorded off of the radio of live events or rare stuff that doesn't get released (like limp-bizzkit singing "I'm a little teapot" acepella.... Ok, I'm joking on that one)
Myself? I've found that there is a lot better music available foom indie artists than the utter crap available from the major labels. I havent bought a RIAA backed CD for almost a year now (but I will soon as they re-released all the uncle tupleo early cd's this month!)
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
I've read a bunch of comments complaining that this service is "Apple-Only". Well, as a Windows user, you are entitled to the entire software aisle at WalMart, where you will find almost no Mac software. You don't hear us Mac users bitching that we can't use PrintMess for Dipshits 3.0... After years of hearing Windows people brag about all of the software available for their platform of choice, I can't help but get off just a little bit watching you turn a little green. Relax, Apple is porting the whole thing to Windows. Having used iTunes since its release, and the store since it launched, I can honestly say it is a great service. As more music is added, particularly more indie releases, it's only going to get better. I think anyone who hasn't used iTunes or an iPod is going to be very pleased when they do. You can argue all day long about Mac hardware, but the software, for the most part, is elegant and very functional. All I can say to anyone who has not used it yet is be objective about it and welcome aboard. In the meantime, everyone should respect Apple for finding a compromise in this whole RIAA nightmare. Sure, it would be great if we could just have it all for free, but let's be real for a minute... If they get no money for a song that you download, they will fight you tooth and nail to stop you from doing it. If they make something on it, maybe they'll shut up. I also think that the stats from which songs/artists/albums are being downloaded can help domonstrate what music should be promoted. IIRC, many album and single charts are, in part, driven and manipulated by units shipped from distributors to stores... Not by how many albums actually make it into the hands of consumers. Not to mention ClearChannel and all of its shenanigans. This would be real empirical data that demonstrates the will of the listener. Granted, that same info can be used for evil marketing purposes... I remain hopelessly optimistic that the labels will have their ears a bit closer to the consumer now and use that info wisely. In the meantime, Windows users, enjoy the wait...
Someday a real rain is gonna come...
Yeah! I bought a new CD and it doesn't work in my tape-deck car stereo! I bought the music, I should be able to play it on anything I want, without having to rip it, and record it to cassette. Not to mention loss of quality!
Yeesh! Give me a break! I agree DRM is rather lame. But as SOOO many people have said, if you don't like it, don't buy it. Personally, I'm unaffected by this, since my new iPod plays what I want, and can wirelessly (Belkin TuneCast) transmit to my FM stereo in my car.
There are SO many solutions to convert formats. But I see no reason why the format that your player happens to support should be what is used. I'm annoyed that stuff I buy (especially as an early adopter often times) ends up not being useful because of the trend/direction industries go. Oh well! Part of the risk of working on the near-bleeding edge of technology.
-Alex
Does Amazon's 1-click patent actually apply here? It doesn't seem like it would, Amazon's 1-click patent was if I rememeber right a very specific thing having to do with Cookies, and in the amazon implmentation a system where like you'd just buy stuff and after an hour or so it would automatically ring up whatever you haven't cancelled, charge it to your credit card and ship it.
I know Apple did license amazon's patent for their online store, but i suspect that was as much as anything so people would look at the little 1-click banner on apple's page and go "ooh! amazon! shiny!".
Apple seems to be on more of an ordianary, direct system where just the program stores your account information and when the server gets a click, it charges your credit card and starts sending data right away. I don't see where Amazon's patent applies. (Which isn't to say it doesn't, somewhere, or Apple is pretending it does.) Does it?
The patent Philips held for the CD has expired, now you only need licensing for the CD Digital Audio log. And even that has not proven to be very effective...with bad copy-protected so-called CDs hitting the shelves with the logo on them...
Ah, but once people realize that it IS easy to steal, thent the problem will only get worse.
The more I learn about science, the more my faith in God increases.
Apple's AAC (m4p) format uses security to protect the track from being played on more than 3 computers. Yet, you can copy the AAC file to as many iPod's as you desire. Do the iPods have a global key, or is the data in the AAC not encrypted and the iPod simply ignores the security feature? Has anyone dug around on their iPod to see how the songs are stored on the iPod disk once copied to the iPod from iTunes? I need to do that when I go home today. Hmmmmm, seems like that could be a possible loop hole in the security, which makes the tracks vulnerable to showing up on Kaaza for the world to copy.
-Master Switch, one more element in the machine
I, for one, definately fall victim to the impulse buy. I can't help it when I find these tunes that I really want and the are as low as $5.94 for a whole album (McCoy Tyner, Inception).
Furthermore, I think iTunes for Windows is a great idea. It is by far the best mp3 player I've used and it is a great marketing ploy to get a little bit of mac ease of use into the windows environment and leave them starving for more. Quicktime is not impressive enough.
Could Jesus microwave a burrito so hot that he himself cou
$275,000 is the gross. After paying the record companies they clear $100,000. That is not "NETTED", the is still more to cover like the bandwidth, the servers, rent, support staff, for the day. 275,000 songs is approximately 805 GB of bandwidth. That is a sustained bandwidth of about 100Mbit/sec. If they clear $10,000 for the day, they will be lucky. Plus this is the opening day. On average a grand opening well marketed does about 5x then an average day. So if Apple breaks even on this they will be lucky.
Notice that you can't get Don MacLean's classic American Pie (all 8+ minutes of it) without it's album. Guess that's the limit of selling a single track.
"I think you forget that you're free to not listen to music if you don't like the way it's priced or sold."
I think you forget you're free to take alternate transportation if the back of the bus isn't suitable for you.
They sent letters to the subscribers that were "downloading too much." Not to people that were trading on P2P. In the end they sent letters to about 70% of the subscriber base. They want your money but don't want you to actually use the service.
Ahh, another Webb Wilder fan! I saw him (and the various incarnations of his band) play live over the years many times. It's a shame that labels can't/won't release the catalogs of artists like this electronically. Historically, the argument raised by labels for NOT re-issuing old material is the relatively high costs of reproduction and distribution for "marginal" stuff that probably won't sell many copies in any one retail location. Maybe they'll see that making 99 cents per track beats letting the masters rot in a vault somewhere.
Apple computers cost more... not for an equivalent machine, but because they don't have low end machines. This results in price senstive customers going elsewhere (BTW: I moved my office to OS X, I don't think that the machines are overpriced).
As a result, Apple, with 4% of sales (and probably 6%-8% of the online market, as Apple machines tend to stay deployed longer), Apple has a thriving Shareware market, and now an online music market. While Apple is a SMALL piece of the desktop computer market, the users are more interested in purchasing things.
This results in that 4%-8% of the PC market POSSIBLY being anywhere from 10%-50% of the potential online music buying crowd. The iPod, clearly the "best" if not expensive MP3 player, is 50%-50% Mac-Windows sales. So while the iPod is special (Mac users tend to actually LIKE Apple), music may be similar.
I LOVE iTunes 4. A bunch of us upgraded at the office, and we can play each other's music which is cool. I bought a few tracks of songs that I find catchy but don't like (nice background music when zoning or at the gym). I won't rerip my existing CDs, but new CDs are going to be AAC encoded.
iTunes 4 is a great program, almost makes a Mac worthwhile. There are other little apps like that that make the Mac a nice platform.
Alex
Gee, I can download the latest 50 cent (awful) or Lisa Marie Pressley.
What a great service for 12 year olds!
The phish concert was probably recorded at the source as 128kb MP3.
And earbuds. Might as well take a stick and jam it in your ears.
Look toots, you enjoy your low-bitrate songs. That's fine. But clearly, you enjoy songs that would sound the same if they were played over an AM radio or the finest stereo. You have questionable ears and there's no question about your taste in music.
Its a free country, but don't extrapolate for everyone else based on your limited skill set for music.
ANY DRM scheme is a problem in the current legal framework. In case you haven't been paying attention, it's ILLEGAL to distribute cracking tools now.
"ease of removal" is simply a red herring at this point.
If consumers had a clear "right to use/backup/transform", your point would have some relevance.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Well, I bought 3 tracks on the first day, and after looking at my budget numbers, I can afford to buy 5-10 more tonight, which I probably will. There's some great blues on there (old B.B. King and some newer Alvin Youngblood Hart) that I'm thinking would be great additions to my playlist.
Thus far, I'm really happy with the service, and can see myself spending $30-40 a month in it. And as for quality, the AACs Apple's offering sound a lot better than comparable bit-rate MP3s.
blog |
...that means that if they can keep up this pace, they will be profitable in 10 days.
Now the rub here is the fact that Apple will be making more money off of this than the labels. The labels could have made that money but they chose to act like a bunch of accountants.
Gotta spend money to make money. If you are too afraid of your own shadow to take any risks you end up missing out on ventures like STARWARS.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Hmmm, I guess it's not coming through or something.
Regardless of what happens (and someone can spout off about Super-DCMA or whatever flavour of craziness is hot this week), traditional music revenues are going to plummet. With MP3's, Oggs, a CDRW in every machine on the planet and portable players under $40US, the ~$20 CD @ Best Buy model isn't cutting it and the producers (and the hundred middlemen) aren't going to make the same amount of cash. Pure and simple. RIAA can't put the genie back in the bottle, no matter how much they demand reality to shape itself to their wailings. If your business model depends on the genie being in the bottle, then you need to convince the genie to move in to new digs. Apple started their little online music store at 99 cents a song in a not-as-hostile-as-everyone-else's format (but let's be honest here, still not good enough), and the genie took a microstep to his new bottle. He more leaned in the direction of it that anything else. But it's a start.
RIAA better give a shit, too. The new bottle the genie needs to move in to will not say "Property of RIAA" on the bottom of it like our parents generation's did.
And finally, while the same amount of cash may flow, per unit prices won't be the same, I guarantee it. I really think the days of the CD in a plastic case with some folded up cover art to look at while you listen to your one good track + 65 more minutes of filler are at a close. I don't want to pay $20 for that, and I'm not going to. To borrow a few of Eminem's words, there's a million people just like me, who listen to music just like me, who download just like me. Ironic, considering his Baghdad Bob approach to the reality of digital music downloads.
Then again good luck to apple bouncing back
Rus
Cheap UK and US VPS
OT: How well does that Belkin work? I have been toying with the idea myself to get rid of a cassette adapter.
seSales, Point of Sale software for OS X.
You can do that now. Depending on the song, it can be okay or shitty. There is no way to improve on this.
Acording to jobs keynote (on the web at macsurfer.com). I can't say it they're all true:
+Some of the tracks sound better than the cds because they were taken from source matterial.
+The previews are the same quality as the full lenghth track.
I don't get what you are bitching about, it is still a music player and supports more then one music format.
Yet another "I see no use for it, it sucks!" comment. I bet you also think 640k is enough for anything.
"As much as we hate it, the DMCA pretty much requires Apple to actively move to protect the labels' interests,"
No it doesn't! That's dumb-talk.
The DMCA simply lets copyright owners control how the end-consumer uses their product.
The argument you could make is the RIAA members wouldn't allow apple to sell their products without DRM, but there's no legal obligation to provide that.
You seem so smart in what you write, but your basic point is wrong.
CD's don't have DRM, but yet they're sold. Despite the DMCA. So the DMCA doesn't mandate DRM at all; it simply makes it against the law to circumvent DRM.
Do you get the difference? You seem smart, so I'm sure you see it.
Sounds like you're an audiophile, and therefore a great candidate for the more bitchin' standards the industry has been trying to get us to agree to. Also sounds like you wouldn't like any of the existing consumer-level standards in audio files. Probably Apple's Store is not for you. But:
I suppose ultimately I'll have to spend $0.99 and see for myself what happens.
You just spent a dollar in effort typing your post. Go ahead and find out for yourself. Knock yourself out.
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
Sorry, which connection problems? I don't seem to recall any. Nor does anyone else I talked to who used it on the first day it came out and continued using it through now. Seems to work fine for me. Largely because the content is hosted on Akamai. Of course, if you're on a 56k dialup line and your ISP doesn't have an Akamai box deployed, then, well, you probably did notice connection problems. But you'd notice those for any content served via Akamai.
Just once, I'd like to see an Apple article on Slashdot that doesn't include some flippant remark about how Apple sucks.
There is no sig, there is only Zuul.
You may not be able to get it at Best Buy, though. Go to Club Mac and avoid sales tax.
"Form should follow function...unless it's just plain ugly."
These are a bunch of crap albums. I mean absolute bin-fillers.
Kelly Clarkson? Does anybody care about that no-talent c-word?
M&M.... [rolling eyes]. He appeals to 12 year olds for god's sake.
You could go on and on. You thought Disco was bad. this stuff is worse.
If the format has the option delete the songs, or change what you can do with it if the music industry feels that when this gets enought supporters they can start pulling this stuff.
I don't understand why anyone would pay $.99 to download a track when they could subscribe to Rhapsody for $10 a month, have a larger song catalog (i think, might be wrong), and unlimited listening. Am I the only one that thinks that streaming is going to be the way of the future and the ultimate model that the music industry settles on once wireless becomes more mature? Right now I listen to Rhapsody on my PC while I work as well as on my stereo at home (laptop hooked up)... but they offer 3G Wireless service which I have not tried. Although it's early, this is the closest I can think of to Qwest's bullshit ads about being able to watch any movie ever made any time... as their song catalog grows, they will be one of the first to deliver that kind of quantity on demand.
And no, don't work for em... just very happy with the service and the more people join, the more money they get, and the more songs I can listen to! http://www.listen.com
I as actually at a CD store (J&R here in NYC) last Thursday and decided to wait till Monday to buy something from AMS (at that point still a rumor).
I not go every morning to see what is new, to maybe buy a few tracks.
I can't wait till they get new stuff or when artists decide just to release via AMS (probably a year or so off).
I love my 500 CDs, but there is something so instantly cool about hearing a song, buying it and being on your way to work listening to it some more.
They got this one right and when iTunes for windows is bundled with the next iPod right before X-mas, you can bet they will fly off the shelves.
BZ
According to Jobs, Macs are a better value than PC's. So apparently, the guy lies all the time.
Actually, that's not true.
Labels bill their artists for production and marketing. In the end, the labels don't really pay for anything. They're just banks with monopoly control over distribution channels.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
There's no guarantee that the master -> CD downsample is superior to a master -> AAC downsample, you do know that, right?
Now a master -> CD is definitely going to be higher fidelity than master -> CD -> AAC, but there's no guarantee it is *superior*, it only means there are less compression and aliasing errors.
So you should, at the least, try this:
Buy an AAC from Apple.
Compare to an AAC you ripped from the CD you own
Compare to the CD itself
Luckily, with an iPod, you can play all three (m4p, m4a, and aiff) and do a local comparison.
GPL Deconstructed
My hope is that the Music Store makes it easier for artists of all flavours to put their work out to the public [said someone on macslash...]
It's just the start. Everybody's lining up now, the buyers, the vendors,... The model THIS MODEL in a moment's time [thank'ye, ya buyers] has been proven {!!!!!}. I've got phone calls, now. Phone calls! [ I do a small label in cahoots with a quality biggie Co.] and They want The Catalogue. HEEHEEheheheh... I like it.
I'll be happy. You'll be happy. Especially my kids will be happy. You have no idea what you're actually doing for their music when you do it this way. I'm giddy....
[Slashdot addendum]:
youse rippers tend to forget that even those of use who are doing the musicbiz for pennys-per-diem are still doing it for money, as well as Music; now we have the Music, our integrity intact, and mucho pennies per day (as makes dollars, as the hours tally) and NO TOWER RECORDS ET AL. [y'ever such sour dick? it's like that) -- we is, we'll say for now, quite happy, indeed, yessir.
What we needed was a model that worked for the biggies as well as for us AT THE SAME TIME and this does. DOES. Will. And will. Umm, Apples...
AAC is closed.
... and requires licenses for creating decoders and encoders, as opposed to MPEG Layer 3, which doesn't require licenses for decoders.
The world will end in 5 minutes. Please log out.
Playing the iPod on my car stereo (actually a CD player) was my biggest hold-out for getting an iPod. Then Apple listed the Belkin thing on their main page, I clicked for info, and was cursing my computer because I knew I wouldn't make it through the day being $450 poorer.
It's real simple. You plug it in to the audio jack, and tune your stereo to one of 4 low frequency channels. Belkin has more info on it than Apple does. It's not really iPod specific, but very handy (not to mention the look of it) for iPod. I think it runs on 2 AAA batteries.
Here's Belkin's page on that product.
-Alex
That just happened to be the price that the albums came out to.
Uh. That's not the price the albums came out to. The price the albums came out to, as has been ably pointed out by my colleagues time and again, is $6.60. Not $6.66.
You would have been closer to right if you'd said $6.99. Still wrong, but closer to right.
That Great White is playing again?
http://www.billboard.com/bb/daily/article_displ
I bet the tickets sell like wildfire!
Skip ------ See the latest from http://www.anArchyFortWorth.com
Actually, there is one WW album online at the Apple Music Store, believe it or not (Hybrid Vigor). But I only need one more to complete my collection, and I've not been able to find it anywhere (Town & Country). I was damn surprised to find even Hybrid Vigor there. But it was released on Island's label. Most of the others were Watermelon Records, and I don't think they're affiliated with anyone larger.
One day I'm going to get around to seeing them live. By the way, which album/song is your favorite?
There they were, sitting in the van with all those dials, and the cat was dead. -V. Marchetti, CIA
I run a house label out of chicago [Olive Records, Inc]
What would it take to get apple to pick up independant labels? Vinly sales are really low lately and it would be nice if we could get another source of rev.
I was gone in meetings all day yesterday, and failed to notice Slashdot's story on this very topic. Doofus!
Say hello to zMac.
Apple has some of the best PR people in the world. They've come up before with bombastic statements like OS 9.0 server running TCP/IP stack 4 times faster than Windows NT. Simply put: if this is coming from Apple I would check another source. Otherwise this is excelent news...if its true that is.
I've bought 30 tracks so far.
The arguement against OGG for compatibility can be used against ACC too. The only player that is compatible with the new service is the ipod, the ipod is perfectly capable of playing OGG, so there is no reason why Apple couldn't use OGG from a customer perspective. The real reason why they didn't use OGG is because it didn't have a DRM layer built in.
This is what Apple did, and there's nothing stopping someone else from doing it except cash and lack of customer base
There are a lot of us out there that aren't using Macs... how about the windows/linux/etc users. I'm sure we can fit room for a few more of these shops, particularly if they cater to the windows users as well.
However, it is ridiculous that there should be *any* loss at all; I've paid for the music, so I should be able to listen to it with any software I choose, without losing quality.
I felt the same way about my vinyl. It's ridiculous that there was a quality loss when I taped them to cassette.
Seriously, I'm not sure where this whole concept of "I am entitled to master-quality recordings that I can copy an infinite number of times" comes from. The fact that you can copy a digital version of a song with either zero or very little quality loss is actually quite new.
Relax. Not that long ago, you wouldn't have been able to copy music without a very LARGE loss of quality. Right now we are in a flux where the companies and the market are tugging back and forth.
Eventually the companies will provide what the market wants in a digital music product. This is just the first step.
What is that, a Bob Dylan song about cultivating cannabis plants? I think you probably meant to say Blowin' In The Wind.
Sorry. I'll stop being pedantic now...
Karma: Excellent Birds (mostly as a result of listening to Laurie Anderson)
Of course, this all has to happen RIGHT AFTER I ship my iBook back to Apple to get repaired, which also happened RIGHT AFTER I got my new AirPort wireless hub.
I could be gettin' me some wireless DSL-speed mp3 lovins right this very minute... BUT NO....
*sigh*
Without a Mac you can't see the iTunes Music $tore without going to your nearest Apple $tore. You won't go to the Apple Store without seeing the iTunes Music $tore!! Seriously! Go to the Apple Store this Friday night between 6-10 for the coming out party!
Most also charge a set transaction fee (say around 20 to 30 cents) so it would be wise to queue the charges up to avoid paying it each time.
"Must be possess strong skills in the areas of application design"
When I first glanced at this I thought it said "Must be possessed"! Then realized the un-professional typo in a major job posting? Spell check anyone?
I live to gib...
And I think without the success of the iPod, Apple would have never had the confidence to go ahead with iTunes.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
DRM is not sensible if ties you to one vendor or platform. You can only play purchased files on Apple computers and Apple players, unless you want to burn CD's. This is only a sensible approach if you live in a world where all your computing products and mp3 devices are made by Apple, for most of us this is not the case.
So, I've got 14K songs in my MP3-based iTunes library, replicating my CD collection. I'm a mini-van driving work-from-home 32 year old married father of two who wasn't cool in the day, and certainly am not cool now. I don't have a tattoo, ride a Vespa, or compile kernels from source.
But, to my surprise, I'm revealed to be an elitist indy music prig! To test the new service, I sorted my iTunes library by play count so I could compare the quality of my current rips with the new service's previews.
And darn it off if pretty much all the music I listen to isn't from one of the majors! In order of "play count":
Sleater-Kinney - nope
The Hives - yep (one album)
The White Stripes - nope
Husker Du - nope
Man or Astroman - no
Len - just three tracks
Rancid - no
Veruca Salt - yep (two albums)
The Clash - pretty much everything
Riverdales - no
Screeching Weasel - no
Beastie Boys - no (an on a major, I thought)
Cast of Buffy the Vampire Slayer - nope!
Fugazi - no
Renegade Soundwave - no
Gang of Four - no
Luscious Jackson - yep
Pop Will Eat Itself - just one album
Tricky - lots of stuff
X - just one album
So, of my top twenty-by-listening bands (which is surprisingly different from what i would have guessed they would be), only 4 have a substantial body of their work available among the 200,000 tracks available through iTunes.
My video compression blog
I am familiar with how the technology works but how does it sound?
seSales, Point of Sale software for OS X.
Anyone want to bet on how many days it takes before someone has reverse-engineered the MaciMusic store protocol and writen and app that masquerades as iTunes-on-a-Mac thus allowing Linux and Windows users to download the Apple's nice AAC music files through Kazaa?
You think the fact that people want what the big industry players are selling might have to do with the fact that they control this distribution and advertising channels?
Also with Rendezvous, another person's library on the same network can also appear as another accessbile library within iTunes.
Note: While you can browse and listen to other people's tunes, you cannot copy or send tracks to each other.
I have discussed this point with many people, in this is how most of us feel about buying MP3's. I would be all for it, but when you think about 99c a song, that is way to much money.
If I want the newest CD from any band I can go to the record store and buy it for $10-20. I averaged out my last 10 CD purchases and on a $/song amount it was very close (but actually slightly lower) then 99c/song. Why should I have to pay the same amount for something I can't take around with me and play anywhere? I would be all for buying MP3's if they were say, $5 for a CD's worth of music, but why pay the same I already do for a product with limitations when I can just buy a CD and rip the MP3's (I didn't say anything about distribution) and have the best of both worlds?
99c a song might not seam like a lot, but it adds up real quick if you like to purchase entire cd's worth of a bands music.
For someone who used to work for a digital music company, you seem surprisingly uninformed about how this product actually works.
The files that Apple is offering are bog-standard MPEG-4 Audio files. You can burn them to CD and play them on any machine which speaks the AAC codec. No, AAC is not yet as widely supported as MP3, but it's getting there: there are free-as-in-free implementations available. Winamp and XMMS will already both play AAC/MP4 files.
No, not too many DVD players will play them, but that has nothing to do with any DRM "padlock", it's just that not many players bundle the codec yet. Given the intense interest that every hardware manufacturer has evidenced in MPEG-4, that can safely be expected to change sooner rather than later.
Likewise, the files will play on any portable player that supports AAC decoding. That's not just the iPod and yes, you can get all-solid-stateplayers that support it. Today.
Would it have killed you to research this a little bit, rather than spouting a barely-concealed advertisement for your former employer's service?
News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters? Like hell.
considering that many mac users only wanted to try the new services. Some artists sold much more that quantity in albums copy in less than 24 hours.
Allright some one gets it. For a musician that sounds better then then the pennies they would make on a normal CD. But who would produce their music and how would they pay for that producer. Also there needs to be some kind of marketing web buisnesses that handle publicity. As a amateur musician these are questions I always ask myself and others.
Seriously.
:)
Not that it's prevented anyone here from bitching about it.
News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters? Like hell.
Apple has several products in the sub-$1000 range.
Which ones? Computers labeled $999 don't count because Apple collects sales tax in all U.S. states that have sales tax. Does Apple sell any complete computer systems in the sub-$900 range?
Will I retire or break 10K?
Not when I live within walking distance of two, and bicycling distance of many. I'm sorry you happen to be a slave to a motor vehicle. I should realize that not everyone is as lucky as me.
Hee hee hee! You sound like the guy from the Onion article who didn't own a television set.
"Are those celebrities you're discussing? I wouldn't know - I don't know who any of those people are. I don't own a television set. I'm sorry the rest of you are addicted to that sort of thing."
All employees must wash hands before seeking equitable relief.
Ah, yes. I used one of those once. Had to wait while the two women in front of me were being helped by an employee because they couldn't figure out how to use it. Sigh.
I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
" The default settings are such that you click "buy song" and it starts downloading."
Nope. The defaults ask you to enter your password, and also bring up a confirmation dialog box, both of which have 'dnot show me this again' checkboxes, to make it truly one-click. You won't accidentally buy music until you configure it that way.
That said, it is pretty damn addictive.
The good news is, for every person who's addicted, Apple gets $$. For every person who thinks DRM is shite, Apple doesn't lose any money. They can only win.
Kevin Fox
Or so I hear. Can't remember where from.
http://www.apple.com/webobjects/
If you want to sell songs, you need to put in the extra work to grab the part of the clip that is most likely to get the listener's interest.
How on earth are they supposed to do that when they have 200,000 songs? Not to mention the fact that there are going to be lots of different opinions as to what the best part of the song it.
I can imagine being the customer service rep who has the job of sifting through emails like that.
"Dear Apple, I am very angry. My favorite song is 'Silver Squeeze' by the Banana Peppers. But you only have 'Toxic Shock Syndrome' and 'Gaetulian Iarbas' by them, and both of those are off a different and lame album! Also, they cut off 'Toxic Shock' right before the awesome vibraphone solo, and really the sample should be between 0:47 and 1:17 for the best effect. This is NOT FAIR to my favorite band. I DEMAND that you fix this IMMEDIATELY or I won't spend my $0.99 on you!!1!"
All employees must wash hands before seeking equitable relief.
$0.99USD is amazingly expensive for what you get. For Canadians, that's about $1.40. Would you pay $1.40 for one downloaded track at 128kbps? We already pay a huge levy on recordable media that goes into a huge government "antipiracy pot". Unless this service drops to $0.50USD or less, it will ONLY succeed in the U.S., and marginally at that. American dollars for music that might COME from Canada? (Alanis Morisette, Avril Lavigne, Shania Twain, Bryan Adams, April Wine, I Mother Earth, Amanda Marshall, Celine Dion, Nelly Furtado, Jann Arden, Holly Cole, Sarah McLachlan, Joni Mitchell, Big Sugar, Sum41 - to name just a few)
You said: "Who says Apple can't remove the iTunes-mandated DRM from their files, or start offering MP3's with their service? Apple is playing a good middle ground. They're trying to make a popular service without opening themselves up for litigation."
Why would Apple move to mp3 after spending R&D money on developing their AAC format? Apple's whole business strategy is providing software exclusive to the Macintosh, so that they can increase hardware sales (which they make a nice, premium markup on) and therefore increase market share. You can see the strategy in effect from this music store right on down to OS X itself.
Seems like the Apple devotees are really out in full force to defend this thing. But I don't see it being a win for fair use rights. A lot of people on here are saying that DRM is just a fact of life now, so we'd better get used to the idea. But that sounds like pure-and-simple capitulation to me, in the same way that many have capitulated about our civil liberties in the U.S. because it's "necessary" in a post-9/11 world. Well, it is easy to give up freedoms, but it usually requires a herculean struggle to get them back. It seems like many people are being wowed by Apple's "shock and awe" at the new ease-of-use and how everything is integrated so smoothly. But a gilded cage is still a cage. Apple's products are great, as long as you only want to use Apple products, and don't care if you are limited if your fair use rights are limited. Perhaps those of you who are especially lazy are willing to sacrifice those rights for ease-of-use.
As for the DMCA comment, that is just untrue. The DMCA makes no requirement for copyright protection. Only the RIAA would make such a requirement.
Sometimes you people really piss me off. Ok, it's pretty damn often.
Why would you want to convert AAC to mp3? Did you all ask for the ability to make records out of the CDs you purchased? So you've got an mp3 jukebox or one of those crappy Nike mp3 players. No one cares. Soon you'll be able to replace them with AAC-protected compatible devices.
The Music industry has always been based around the regular replacement of media! This isn't just the RIAA but everyone that makes the stereo equipment that plays the meda as well. It's time for the next upgrade! If your mp3 hardware can't be upgraded with software then it can be with your wallet.
Yeah, it's gonna be a little while before the indie stuff starts popping up, but it will. I saw no Les Claypool or Primus. No Critters Buggin, Kultur Shock, Maktub, Voivod, King Crimson, Trey Gunn, Robert Fripp or any of the stuff that I'm really into, but it will come eventually... and luckily i already own this stuff!
The indie labels are definitely going to want a piece of this action and they will get it. I can't wait to see some of my Seattle musician buddies listed in my copy of iTunes!
Pooty tweet
beat that apple.
And do what spent hours reencoding them in to digital files? If it is a mix cd, the cd signature won't register with the CDDB so I will have to manually enter the track information, plus rencoding the track will introduce the possibility for distortion and quality loss.
Why don't they just trust me to leave an appropriate amount of money for the goods that I walk out of the store with??
Interesting you should say that. Do you know how pop machines used to work back in pre-WWII times? The bottles sat in a cooler, with a box for depositing coins. You'd open the cooler, take out a bottle and drop a nickel into the money box.
There was no lock, there was no one sitting there making sure you paid. You could take all of the bottles and not pay a thing. But you know what? Most people still paid.
Something to consider.
Just one mor reason Lindows will bite the dust and blame microsoft, bad businessman at the helm- I think there has been a pretty obvious trend forming with this CEOs actions.
Price has little to do with this.
P2P, even with busy hosts, corrupt files and everything else, is easier then buying CDs.
Guess what? The iTunes Store doesn't have busy hosts or corrupt files. (Well, the latter depends of how forgiving you are about the half-hearted attempt at DRM.)
that this is only from Mac users, who are >5% of the total PC market. $100k in less than 18 hours from less than 5% of the market.
Supposedly, Apple is already working on iTunes for Windows. Just imagine what that number is going to be when they roll the Windows version out.
Still waiting for it to be delivered (should arrive today). A friend of mine (who works as a sound engineer at CalArts) says they work well. He said, it's not like having the CD in your car directly, but for the purpose of listening in your car, with wind, engine, and street sounds already degrading quality of experience, it's pretty good.
:)
I will have to check and see. Oh! Just got a call from the receptionist. My package is here.
-Alex
Da Blog
We'll Apple is trying to sell it's hardware and not Linux hardware. I suppose they have that right. Can't you burn that to an audio CD with Apple hardware and then enjoy how you like after that?
Yep. One great thing about digital distribution is that an album can sell 500 copies and still be profitable! In the long term, this will be good for niches,
For another example, check out CustomFlix, who does on-demand DVD replication and distibution. I've made a tidy bundle selling the DVD-R supplement for my book through them. It hasn't sold anywhere near the 500 copy minimum that a mass-market duplication would have required, but I started netting a profit from them after selling the first SIX copies.
http://www.customflix.com
My video compression blog
And I'll just guess that there'a no Hank III either...
All right. For the last time, Apple's pricing scheme is as follows:
$.99 per song
$9.99 per album or $.99 per track in the album, whichever is cheaper
If you eliminate a third of the price that should normally go to the producers, advertisers, and everyone else, then you get the following:
$.66 per song
$6.66 per album or $.66 per track in the album, whichever is cheaper
Therefore, the cost of an 11 or more song album is $6.66, and not $6.60. Only a 10 song album costs $6.60.
Those figures all follow Apple's pricing scheme for this service. I was able to use it enough to see the pricing, but I didn't really have a chance to do anything else with it.
For anyone wondering how to request artists and such look up Knowledge Base Article number 93048.
But... they do...
In any WHSmith in a large station in London (UK), you can pick up with your purchase and walk out and put your payment in a plywood box.
Most ppl use this for papers, or occasionally papers and a drink. But there is no mechanical dispatch mechanism, just honesty.
The point being... the tradeoff against theft is less than the benefit of getting fast efficient customer service from honest customers. I think it took a lot of guts from management to accept this, but it works, and has been in place 3 years plus.
So, if record companies (or RIAA, etc) were able to monitor purchases and downloads (as the security guard at WHSmith does at some low sample rate) at the same time, I expect most consumers would be honest. This would mean hosting their own download service and monitoring it, as well as purchases.
Maybe an ideal solution, but an interesting one, that could be further extended with people leaving papers on trains etc.
When the movie Battlefield Earth came out the Co$ ordered its members to rush to the theaters on opening weekend and view the movie multiple times.
Co$ has a huge influence in Hollywood and in the music industry. So pardon me for being skeptical but the red flag that goes up in my brain is did the music industry artificially inflate these numbers by directing their employees and affiliates to rush out and buy 50 songs from this service...
Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
18 hours nets $100,000, after a year that's around $46 million (US).
Of course it probably won't stay at that rate, but it's even money if it goes up or down.
I'd call that a big success, and a big bullet in the back of the head of the argument "people won't download music and pay for it".
Screw you RIAA. Get going on your server farm, we're waiting to DL from you too.
I think that there are much deeper cultural psychological reasons for this than mere "convenience." You can pay $2.25 and go anywhere within Toronto, sure. But with our society's emphasis on independence and "freedom," depending so heavily on the system is often an abhorrent concept. Do most people really need the four-wheel drive options that they have on their SUVs? Of course not, when all they do is drive on city streets and highways. But it's the notion that they /can/ drive anywhere that gives them that heady feeling of freedom. And people will pay for that.
Any chance it will be offered on Linux.
I bet you right now that M Robertson will try
and do his own version of this on his Lindows
distro and failing that try and be the first one
to offer iTunes for Linux.
To ensure the marketshare you have now stays where it is and to attract more, do the following:
- Create a Community - One thing companies are only now learning is that their fanbase/community is an invaluable marketing tool. Before lawyers of TV shows sued websites for having pictures of the actors on them, now they encourage it. Amazon is a classic success story in community. If you have a community, they'll become loyal customers. So, what kind of Community am I talking about?
Allow users to create their own "Albums" by picking tracks from the database. Then allow them to feature their Albums throughout the site. People should be able to "Rate" and comment on those custom albums. Then have a page where the top 50 or so are featured. Let the creators of that album get some of that revanue, maybe 5-15%.
Allow users to rate and comment on all Albums on the site. Feature a page of the "highest ranked/rated albums". Open up forums where users can discuss genres, artists and new releases. Create mailing lists for each artist, e-mail the users when a new release for that artist comes out. Have "Auto-Pre Release" for their new albums. Have seperate artist discography, have links to buy concert tickets (earn refferal fees) or get news on them.
- Ease up on the DRM - I'm positive Apple probably didn't want DRM-like restrictions on the files. However, it was probably neccessary to hook the labels into doing it. They've been so scared of what the RIAA has been telling them about "not allowing your customers to do whatever they want with your product" that they probably would never of considered it otherwise. Easing up on the DRM restrictions (or perhaps removing them completely) will give you a huge advantage.
- Get on Windows - I know you've been contemplating on doing this, DO IT. Microsoft has a huge marketshare, and thus a lot of money. However, more importantly, you want those Microsoft users on Apple. On your Windows client, make it less-attractive than the iTunes. Within your Windows client, give rebates/coupons for Mac products. Show them that if they like that Windows iTunes, they'd sure love a Mac.
- Improve the iPod - I know your improving the iPod, and rightly so. Work towards adding wireless Internet to the iPod so you can buy music right off of it. If you think using your mac to get music is an impulse buy, good God... think about being stranded on campus with nothing to do and with your iPod empty.
- Advertise this like hell - I say use around 20% of all profits for the first two quarters to advertise this like hell. Hire the best advertising agencies, you must act fast to water down the competition and market Apple as being the "first". I can hear the people scrambling in Redmond as I type this.
That's just a sample of what I've been thinking. *sigh* I should work for AppleDoes anyone know what hosts I need to tell Privoxy to bypass so that the song previews work?
It looks like Apple has started to reap the rewards of the Safari project(and the work of the OSS community). The iTunes Music $tore appears to be using WebCore to render the pages. I can't wait for the revamped Help system. Hopefully we will see a lot more apps taking advantage of WebCore.
I'm curious if they are using WebObjects on the backend.
... they would know anyway??
All bow to his Noodliness!! His Noodle Appendage has touched me!
lose : opposite of win or obtain.
If your harddrive crashes, you don't loose you data, you lose the data. You don't loose a soccer match, you lose a soccer match. For the love of the English language and my sanity, stop the 'loose' insanity.
Apple really should have implemented this on
mac and windows at the same time.
Ms will bring all its weight to replicate this
and crowd out Apple.
If Apple could have been first mover they would
have inertia and momentum on their side, and
any efforts by MS to thwart them would be
anti-trust violations that even the lapdog
US justice system would have to bark at.
You can use C and C++ files with Objective-C too!
We all want a chance to laugh at you!! Punk-rock wannabe? Or perhaps you're more a fan of the hammered dulcimer?
The great thing about ther service is that even if the top downloads suck in your estimation, there's a corner in there somewhere with music that you will probably like.
My last download was Johnny Cash singing an old Beatles tune. How can you not love that?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
That's why Apple has the Backup app to let you easily backup your music library to a set of CD or DVD's. If you're doing it to DVD's most people probably won't even use more than one DVD for a full backup...
.Mac subscriber to get backup. But then you could even backup your songs online and really not worry about them (if you had a good connection).
Of course, you have to be a
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The artist might see a full penny from a 99cent song, but the real value may be the marketing potential. The Amazon-like approach of "others who downloaded this song also downloaded..." is an incredible marketing tool. Personally, I prefer independent review sites. I don't trust Amazon or Apple to tell me what people are really buying. All of my mp3s are either ripped from my own CDs or downloaded for free from an independent artist's website. Fine... I'm a music lover. The Apple site will likely draw thousands of people who were afraid of file sharing into the mp3 scene. The part I don't like is that the RIAA is loving it because there is still a need for a middle-man as long as big corporate names are behind it. I think it's time for the music industry to die a quick death...and let artists make a living by playing live. Their current options aren't that great. Click the link below to see where the money goes...
http://www.negativland.com/albini.html
i noticed their music selection is quite odd (though growing very quickly) still no punk or industrial music i see. and the selection of music is quite offbeat. some bands have a discography and some have a 'b-sides collection'.
that sales figure is even more amazing considering the variety they have.
members are seeing something, your seeing an ad
Then I bought about 184 songs and albums (combo number, I think it was about 6 albums and various singles). All I've got to say is I've spent more on music since this store came into being than I have in YEARS. I don't mind the DRM nonsense. I've got nothing to hide anymore, this just adds to my big ass collection of music. I've burned a few compliation albums for my brother, but otherwise I just use my Ipod and FM transmitter for music. I think it's a great service. Personally, I'm glad I don't HAVE to steal the singles anymore from the P2P places. I dig being able to click, download and be happy real fast. Without a virus being attached (Kazaa), broken songs (all the P2Ps), wrong songs (All), etc.. They've got one happy customer here in NY peace
The result is usable, but is definitely inferior in quality to the original AAC. This isn't surprising, but I was hoping it wouldn't be so. I know this isn't a scientific test: it's only one song and it wasn't blinded. A truely useful comparison would use a variety of material, would compare the original source as well and would use A/B/X blinding.
I'm probably in the "audiophile" category, as I often hear things in audio that other's don't. However, I would call the differences between the original AAC and the hijacked MP3 substantial and not nit-picky. In my subjective test I found high percussion to be particularly objectionable. This is often what suffers in low(er) bit rit MP3 encodings.
Of course I could leave the file as the 45 mb AIFF that AudioHijack generated (which sounds great), but I don't have that kind of disk space.
Details: Song: Charm Attack (Leona Naess) 4:24. 4.2MB protected AAC @ 128kpbs. Audio Hijacked to 44.2MB AIFF. Recompressed to 3.2MB MP3 using iTunes (VBR Highest Quality 102kpbs average). Listened to on Etymotic ER-4 headphones. (I've heard people complain that the iTunes MP3 encoder is inferior. I don't hear any artifacts in VBR MP3s created from original CDs, but its certainly possible that another encoder might do a better job of recompressing.)
"If you are an idealist it doesn't matter what you do or what goes on around you, because it isn't real anyway."-R.P.W.
I'm not entirely sure $100,000 dollars for a venture like this in 18 hours is that great. Sure, compared to what you or I make, 100,000 dollars in 18 hours is incredible, but if you factor in the amount of money they've put into running and creating the store, paired with the normal profit for a large scale commercial venture, I'd be interested in seeing exactly how well it has done in the grand scheme of things.
It's been a long time.
My own mother was also asking me about the store (before I ever mentioned anything).
All it takes is a demo of how the service works and people are in love with the thing. Once more people hear about it, drop by an apple store, and see it in action... this is truly a killer app for the combination of music and PC's.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
If this sevice took off on Windows it would be
ironic that a piece of Apple Software was
the leader in its category on the Windows plafform
According to quote.yahoo.com, AAPL has $4.3 billion in cash. look here. I believe some of the cash was earned through the sale of stock (ARM) and assets (real estate at the peak of the SV real estate boom), and alot through reduction of inventory on hand. And I hardly think that their hardware is overpriced. Try getting an equivalently featured box from Dell or Sony and you'll be within 10-20% of the Apple.
Every CD I own (~500) is ripped to 320 kpbs lame mp3 with the CD serving as a backup copy. Maintain your CD's is something that the user has control of, most people have no control over their hard drive crashing. Apparently you can back up to a data CD, but for instance if I bought all my music from Apple I would have to burn 50 data CD's of m4p files to keep it backed up.
One simple question about your sound quality good or bad. What kind of speakers do you have? With what sort of wattage etc.. I listen to music on both my Altec Lansing plastic cheapo speakers and my high end Sennheiser head phones. Same CD's and Mp3's HUGE difference in sound quality. Of course a low bit rate crappy MP3 sounds bad on both.
This is very encouraging news about the number of sales at the Apple Music Store. This wouldnt happen if it wasnt filling a need. The key from now on is variety and selection should increase daily at least weekly. I can image a huge library of music where its not about what can I buy but what should I buy. How about being able to buy music as a gift and have it available for download through an e-card sent to friends, girlfriends, potential girlfriends, family!
Actually, I think you are an "elitist indy music prig" ... no offense, but since you have the Sleater-Kinney, Hives and the White Stripes on there, you do have pretty one step left of mainstream tastes.
Moderators Gone Wild!!! Order now
Sure, it's easy to imagine figuring out the protocol used for doing the purchase.
But what about playing the songs that you have purchased? They are in a protected format (m4p) and only iTunes is able to play them. Only iTunes is able to transfer them to your iPod.
So there's quite a bit of work left to do after you figure out the purchasing protocol!
A number after 48 hours is probably going to be a lot better indicator of launch success than 18 hours, simply because there were so many initial problems the first day. I couldn't even sign in correctly until several hours after the launch because of extremely high demand. And it took some people a few days (judging by the Apple discussion boards) to get their existing Apple ID accounts in order so as it log in.
I myself have purchased 4 albums and 1 single. I have another 3 singles and 6 albums sitting in my shopping cart, waiting on my decision to buy.
Plus... Not having to fight with that damn sticker on the top of the cd cover is a big plus too :p
I'm sure they will sell many times more music once iTunes for Windows comes out. Don't believe me? Go to jobs.apple.com, click Job Search, and enter job requisition number 1949938.
I made a PHP/MySQL library that prevents SQL injection & makes coding easier!
Look, look!!! We just sold 30,000 songs in less than 3 seconds. WOW!!! We are doing so great!!!
-apple
check this out from a time article
"TIME: What about independent labels? Will they follow suit?
Jobs: Yes. They've already been calling us like crazy. We've had to put most of them off until after launch just because the big five have most of the music, and we only had so many hours in the day. But now we're really going to have time to focus on a lot of the independents and that will be really great. "
here is the article.
THE ARTICLE
idiot
So far, I've bought 6 songs because I didn't want anything else on that CD. That's $6 instead of $90.
I also put several CDs on my "to-buy" list because I listened to several samples and decided I wanted the whole thing.
emusic is good just because they ain't got this mainstream crap.
It probably won't get answered since the story has been up for so long...but are these files going to lock the person into only iTunes and the ipod? Whereas if I have an MP3, I can use whatever device I want to read it--DVD player, RIO, etc. Or will the DRM added to the files prohibit that?
If I have a device that reads AAC (assuming other come out with AAC compatible players), will this work on it?
Is this the next version of Word files not working with other applications?
-C
PS I do believe I read that whatever you buy can only be used up to 3 computers (which must be connected to the net) but you can put them on as many ipods as you want.
PPS I also have a concern that if you have this proprietary/watermarked file, that only iTunes will let you convert it back to AIFF for a music CD. That concerns me because if only iTunes can do that, who is to say that someday Apple says no you can't burn to CD or you can but at a horrible loss of audio...
AMS does track what you've bought, and you can see it. After you're logged in, click your account name in the top left of the AMS window. You can then click "Purchase History" and see everything you've already bought.
Maybe I just don't get out enough to know what people are listening too these days. I had thought all three of those were pretty mainstream, cover-of-Rolling-Stone groups.
Is everyone in college off listening to Goa or something now?
My video compression blog
You can use Java with the Cocoa frameworks too.
:-)
And, more importantly, Ruby!
I haven't attempted to make frameworks and obj-c bridges and such for Project Builder, but it certainly seems easy from the output I've seen in only the past year. Hell, you can even use Perl to build OS X apps with Project Builder.
anyone who is a student, teacher, or faculty member
Unfortunately, that no longer applies. At the end of February, I just graduated from college with a B.S. in computer science, but according to the local evening paper's classified ad section, nobody in my backwoods town of 200,000 seems to want to hire me.
You can also take a look at the used market.
Most of the used Macintosh computers that I have seen in person aren't even new enough to be compatible with Mac OS X, let alone iTunes 4.
Will I retire or break 10K?
So how does paying $18 for 18 songs at 99 cents a pop differ from paying $18 for 18 songs on a music CD?
In the first case, if your hard drive crashes, you lose your music. The music is in a lower quality audio format. etc.
99 cents a pop is way too much for this format.
Try 25.
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
Look at all the postings here - over 900 already. Keep going Apple!
the only reason i haven't gone absolutely nuts with my song buying is the lack of harder stuff-- i couldn't find a single earache band. i don't think for a second that the average joe wants to listen to morbid angel or the berzerker but i'd like the opportunity to economically inspire my preferred genre via itunes. i'm hammering that "suggestions" button as fast as i can...
cheers
paul
ps. no warp records artists, either. gah.
Part of the problem is that they don't work very well at all. As soon as you scan an item, it wants you to place it inside the plastic bag that is on top of the scale. Unfortunately, many items aren't the absolute perfect shape and the machine doesn't handle that well. It will start screaming at you to place the item in the bag even though it already is in the bag. When the machines are constantly screaming at every single legitimate customer, it's not very hard for the thiefs to slip through.
Additionally, I have noticed that the machines have random periods where the items you scan don't show up in the computer. If you aren't paying enough attention when this happens, you might inadvertantly steal from the store.
If the machines would just work better, the loss rate would go down quite a bit.
As a test, I downloaded a song in AAC format from the iTunes store that I already had ripped at 192 VBR MP3.
At first comparison, I thought the AAC file was good - until I listened on my "mastering headphones" (Grado SR325s, which rock, by the way - http://www.gradolabs.com ). Lots of bizzare compression artifacts.
So there I am, thinking AAC is garbage, until I remembered something about an "Enhancer" feature in iTunes. Sure enough, I look in preferences and there it is. I turned it off, and many / most / all? of the compression artifacts I heard went away.
So, before you try to asses whether you think AAC @ 128 is better than MP3s at 192, turn this "Enhancer" feature off, then judge.
In my opinion, AAC is living up to the hype.
Spell check anyone?
No to be pedantic, but there isn't a spelling error there.......
Bzzz
Grammar check maybe???
i guess they weren't interested?
Amazon's 1-Click patent is much-maligned because it is infact fairly broad and simple. It basically covers the act of storing your credit card number so that you don't have to enter it every time you want to buy something. It is possible to literally click once and have something purchased.
You'll note that with every other online store, you have to re-enter your credit card information every time you buy, even if they store your name, address, etc.
I think the music store is what Apple had in mind when they licensed 1-Click. I mean, obviously, few people can afford to impulse-buy Apple's hardware, or a lot of the accessories they sell, but they certainly can afford $1, and it's no doubt very convenient to not have to pull out your credit card info every time you want to buy one song.
The convenience factor is definitely a big selling point, and I expect to see more convenient purchasing options built into Apple's software.
Everyone here on slashdot either has an iPod or wants one. Yeah, even if it doesn't run Linux.
It does.
Linux on iPod
Moderation Totals: Flamebait=2, Troll=1, Redundant=1, Insightful=6, Overrated=1, Underrated=1, Total=12. (not mine)
"but according to the local evening paper's classified ad section, nobody in my backwoods town of 200,000 seems to want to hire me"
You remind me of a friend. Graduated from CS back in the early 80's. Looked for a job for 2 years. "Market's tough".
I moved out of the area when I graduated, found a job. Got him a job within 30 days of starting.
The point? He was lazy...he didn't want to move.
My advice. Don't be so gotdamn lazy and look outside your little hamlet.
RIAA == The music labels
Apparently, though, the original poster was also dumb...he didn't realize that he had to spell out every detail for you.
And this coming from the guy who is now running a business that charges you for downloading GPL software!!!
The *mechanics* of this will work fine, but since anything encoded with a lossy compression method, particularly at low bit rates like 128kb, you introduce artifacts into the music.
When you re-incode you multiple the artifacts, and the resultant track is truly of bad quality.
So while this will work, it won't really work.
" If this thing takes off like it seems it will,"
Based on what? The fact that the market is limited to 4% of the computers because its Mac only?
You've been duped by Apple hype. There's no reason to believe its sucessful so far. And now you think a non-PC compatible service will "take off"?
You're either naive or dumb. I'll let you make the final decision.
"Apple's iTunes Music store sold 275,000 tracks in its first 18 hours of operation. Impressive considering the connection problems people were having."
I think that some of those connection problems might have been caused by people downloading an average of 255 songs a minute. You know...maybe.
Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
No, "loosing" your music was when you put them on the p2p network...
Liberty uber alles.
Can someone explain the technology used to deploy the DRM? That is, it is said you cannot burn more than 10 times or use on more thant 3 computers.
How is this enforced, technologically speaking?
If they are finding out all this information about playing/burning frequency, I don't see how this can be anything but Apple spying on your hard drive.
Or, does the AAC file itself somehow increment a counter on itself, maybe in a binary version of a propertylist or other metadata portion of the encoding on the file?
Thanks for any insight into this.
Please repeat after me: This is not DRM.
Your right to use the songs doesn't expire.
The audio is not encrypted.
The audio isn't tied to a single CPU.
The audio can be downloaded to your iPod.
The audio can be burned to an unlimited number of discs.
As far as I can tell, it's just straightforward, open standard AAC encoding, which is a Good Thing. (Or would you rather have a format with REAL DRM, like MS's?)
Yes, iTunes doesn't run on PCs (yet) or Linux. But anyone who can read the MPEG-4 standard can create a player, so go and do it Mr. Slashdotter.
Amidst hundreds of comments I tried to see if anyone did any "real" number crunching to see what Apple's profit is per song...based on the posted statistics that is. And instead of spending hours searching...I decided to post my calculations. I took calculus once, and have needed it since, but didn't remember it, so I didn't use it, and I certainly didn't use it here. Just simple math. Now if we actually had some real numbers (somehow I don't buy the fact that we are getting real statistics out, or ever will).
275,000 songs sold X $0.99 per song = $272,250.00 exchanged
$100,000 profit / $272,250 exchanged = $0.3673095 per song
So the other 62.26905 cents is going to...the labels and artists?
Only reply if your Math GRE score was better than mine.
Your mileage may vary, depending on your location. As for me, I'm currently debating whether to take it back (and maybe get the Belkin) or to hack an external antenna into it... or maybe a 5 Watt linear. :-)
120 character sigs suck. Make it 250.
Actually, they do care- if people are downloading just the three eminem songs they hear on the radio, then they're not buying the entire album, and the record company is not making as much money. Simple as that. Now, they have to come up with a way to get people to buy their artists in volume even without having heard the songs a dozen times on the radio.
Read jack phelps dot net
It's not a bug, it's a contractual thing. Each company has a business unit that has the right to distribute within their home country's borders. To get it in Europe, they would have to cut deals with each company's local subsidiary. Right now, they only have agreements with the U.S. units. Give it time.
Keep holding on to your Industrual Age Business models RIAA!!!
Dolemite
Save the World! Use a Quote!
I might not have passed cal 3 yet, but last time I checked 275,000 tracks x $0.99 per track does not equal $100,000.
So where is the other ~$175,000, or is the Register wrong?
my karma will be here long after I'm gone
The practice originally started in retail stores with cash registers. Clerks tended to ignore the new-fangled machines for purchases in whole numbers, so the numbers were changed to persuade the clerks to use the cash register to get the penny change. It didn't become popular in other forms of retail, such as catalog purchases, until about 50 years later.
This was pointed out by Bill Bryson in one of his books; I think it was Made in America.
i keep hearing that too. i just hope it's soon-- i might have ben reading too much into steve's comments in the brief time interview, but it sounds as if the independent labes were busting his door down.
if that really want to reform the whole biz, independents would be a good place to start-- apple should be all up in their maiboxes. but i digress.
i'm just impatient-- i want my instant gratification now!
Just because you use it, it isn't closed or proprietary? Fraunhoffer clearly owns the patents, and encoders clearly pay license fees for usage...
That's like claiming a PPC is proprietary; heck, what makes anyone think a P4 or Athlon isn't proprietary?
GPL Deconstructed
The RIAA may be stupid, but thretening people who will actually PAY for music is something that even the RIAA are not dence enough to try.
Apple, on the other hand...
nahh..
I looked into the m4p files a bit to see what the differences were. I did this by running the MPEG4IP mp4dump command on the m4p and an iTunes created m4a. Some differences were easy to spot. For example, the udta section (and specifically the meta section inside) are much larger. This, however, appears to be because of the embedded album cover art, so we can ignore it. Inside the trak section, the m4a has an stsd section which appears to contain descriptions of the bitrates and stuff. This appears to have been replaced in the m4p with a 'drms' section, which contains some personal information about the purchaser, among other things. I rather nievely tried to replace the stsd from the m4p with the sdst from the m4a, but that's not enough. It appears that the actual stream data (which you can get from either a m4p or an m4a) is altered (perhaps encrypted with a key in the drms section?). At that point (now approaching 6 AM), I gave up for the night.
Carry on, /.
... if they have created this services based on Open technologies (i.e. so any bozo could browse the shop).
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I will start my PC with Linux, if that fails I may try a borrowed WIndows machine (W98) or the one at work (either W2K or Sun workstation).
After that I will put the files in my MP3 player.
I'll let you know how it goes.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
The apple zealots talking. No news there.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
They think that because you dislike something that means you break the law.
Talk about lack of imagination.
In the meantime other people keep the fight for their freedom.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
"Burn 'em to CD re-rip as whatever freaking format you'd like"
It will work physically, but the sound will be crap. 128kb songs have encoding artifacts (all lossy compression does, its just at low bit rates, the artifacts are more frequent and severe). When you encode with mp3 (or vorbis or whatever), you introduce more artifacts on top of the existing artifacts, so it sounds significantly worse.
That's a *bad idea*.
The RIAA *is* guilty of price-fixing and "screwing me out of money" - but realize this: signing on an artist to a record deal involves a tremendous up-front investment cost on the part of the record company.
90% of artists do *not* make money for record companies, but the companies make up for that because the other 10% make SO MUCH MONEY.
Previously, however, record companies were still happy to sign on a less-than-profitable, but talented artist because they knew they could still count on revenues from CD-sales, and the promotion of *other* artists in those annoying little flyers that they bundle with CDs.
this is no longer the case.
Record companies have indeed sold far fewer CDs in recent years, of *non* top-100 artists than ever before. This is because top-100 artists continue to sell most of their CDs to radio stations, DJs, and other institutions who do not pirate music. But smaller artists' sales have been hurt by the pirating.
Now, you might ask - who cares? The artist gets promoted because of the free exchange, and who gives a damn if record companies don't profit as much...
it matters because it makes record companies much less inclined to promote lesser-known artists. What's happening is, companies are going with reliable sure-hits, like nsync, britney, etc because they do not want to incur as much risk.
So in fact, piracy might promote a small artist who already has a record deal, but it also prevents however many other artists from getting a record deal, because of the fact that piracy has made esoteric artists so unprofitable for companies.
I agree with whomever said that he feels guilty for pirating - I feel quite guilty also because of the damage it does to other artists - but up until recently, I refused to pay $17.98 just to get one song - with the advent of the Apple Music Store, I have another option.
Great job, Apple.
Yeah, the home theater at home has a decent system (the fronts could be improved). CDs are fine, Super CD/DVD-A will be nice when those formats come into their own. But if I want a cheesy pop song for at the gym or when coding, I don't need the audiophile quality...
That AC was a retard...
Alex
Really.
.mp3's, and I easily would've spent $15 on exclusive content in the first half hour alone, simply because the store is so well done and buying tracks is so temptingly simple.
:)
I have over 2,000 vinyl albums and 50+GB of
Fortunately, I reside outside the US, so I'll have to wait.
-spheric*
I don't know which store you're going to, but I count 4 albums by X, and some bonus tracks. Plus there's "Beyond and Back", the anthology which is mostly filled tracks from other albums not yet available. Also note that Jobs has publicly stated that they're now focusing on adding indie labels, but needed to concentrate on the majors to get the thing off the ground.
You'll also find that it really mangles WebDAV requests, too. So the simplest solution is to open the toggler and flip it off.
Note: This URL will only make sense if you have Privoxy installed.
My favorite was their truly indie debut, "It Came From Nashville," complete with flying saucers on the cover! My then-gf had it on cassette and I had it on CD - lost that in the divorce twelve years later! :-( The band was credited as "Webb Wilder and the Beatnecks" (there's even an spoken blurb on the record explaining that they are NOT "beatNIKS" . . . :-) I used to have the VHS of "Cornflicks" but that, too, was lost in the end of the relationship . . .
IIRC, the artists, by law, are supposed to get 8 on every sale, at minimum.
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
Slashcode doesn't like the ITMS link directly using iTunes as described here. Cut and Paste if you want, iT4 users.
blarg.
Sorry for the shout, but I'm tired of listening to all the trolls about the Apple Music Store being for people who like Britney when she IS NOT EVEN ON IT!!!! I wish people would talk about what they know, but then we would be stuck reading 10 comments.
Actually, a "Now Playing" feature is useful in well-featured jukeboxes, and also exists in iTunes, I believe. It's basically a pop stack which a variety of selectable behaviours. So say you are playing a Playlist or random set of tunes and you want to add some more items to your "Now Playing". You have a bunch of choices:
Replace
Add (to End)
Add (as Beginning)
Add (as next to play)
Add (play now)
Add (shuffle)
Add (replace)
MJ is a high-end jukebox and, as such, does take a while to explore all its features. It has dual skin modes, as well as transparency, and you can set up some sweet displays with this.
Within the "Playing Now" display field, you can also add HTML and Flash objects and take input from the ID3 tags, so you can customize your own jukebox front end.
Da Blog
I forgot to mention, I think the trouble is the double-click bit.
Try right-clicking from within the Media Library view - you will see a whole bunch of options.
Da Blog
Let's try a different one:
I think you forget you're free to take alternate transportation if you don't like the price of a car, the price of gas, or the rules of the road.
Presumably you can eventually figure out, with some trial and error, that you're NOT free to go out and steal someone's car, and siphon gas out of a tank every time you run low.
-fred
Sign #11 of Slashdot overdose: You see the phrase 'moderate Republican' and you wonder if that would be a +1 or a -1.
well in the last 6 months ALL internet music sales combined added up to less than this figure.
in one day apple users alone doubled internet sales of downladable music. that's a smashing success. imagine if this had been international plus windows users too. damn!.
wired has the figures
... and your an asshole, everyone needs one of those too, so you just might be the only one with a job in this economy.
Well, just to follow up..
It works, but it's not great quality, especially in LA. There are stations on almost all of the available frequencies and they seem to blast at maximum power.
However, it does the basic job for what I need. Although a little disappointed, it's not too bad. I mostly wanted it to listen to audio books from my iPod, while in the car. And a little static while driving isn't too distracting.
If you have a tape adapter, stick with that. You'll get better quality.
I'm wondering if the iTrip available for older iPods has better quality/power/range. It at least has full frequency range, and not just 4 channels. We'll see... next time, I'll wait for reviews.
-Alex
I hope Hillary Rosen that fat Rosie looking fucking skank lesbian bitch cunt gets raped with a hot curling iron in the ass and pussy and it gets cauterized and then the chunky brown vaginal discharges from her AIDS infected lover get shoved down her throat. That fucking whore. I hate that skank bitch. I hope Carly, Gates, Ballmer, Mundie, Jobs, Rosen, Metallica, any officer of the RIAA or MPAA, Capellas and Michael Moore are all anally cauterized. Then they have their right arms chopped off. That's the minimum punishment for their actions. They are criminals against humanity and impede progress.