Slashdot Mirror


Apple Sells A Million Songs in Debut Week

Scrameustache writes "According to an Apple press release, the iTunes Music Store sold over one million songs during its first week. Over half of the songs were purchased as albums, and over half of the 200,000 songs offered on the iTunes Music Store were purchased at least once. Those new iPods are selling like hotcakes too..."

51 of 774 comments (clear)

  1. Hooray by cookiej · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think the model may work. Let's hope it torpedoes the RIAA completely.

    1. Re:Hooray by bludstone · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unfortunatly, these sales trends wont continue unless Apple can get more music contracts. No torpedo-ing will happen unless this occurs...

      Even then, does Apple's model adequatly compensate the artist? Does it allow entry for independant artists? Does it even have the potential to work against the RIAA, or will it simply strengthen its grip?

      --

      no .sig
    2. Re:Hooray by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 5, Funny

      I THINK you'll find that the more the RIAA tightens it's grip, the more potential music buyers will slip through its fingers.

      Or something.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    3. Re:Hooray by Panix · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I think that you are mistaken here. Apple doesn't need any more contracts, since it already has contracts with all five of the major labels, and the independent labels are reportedly itching to get in on it as well! The model has succeeded already, by giving us a way to purchase current music legally and easily electronically. This is a good thing.

      Now, as far as the RIAA is concerned, and your comments about artist compensation, a lot remains to be seen. I envision independent artists and smaller labels being able to distribute music much easier through the iTunes Music Store, and offering them potential for success. They could release a few "singles" for free on the Music Store, and then hope that people buy more songs, or the whole album. And since they aren't producing any CDs, they have less overhead, and can get more of the profits. Just a thought on how the future could be bright.

    4. Re:Hooray by Golias · · Score: 5, Informative
      I think the model may work. Let's hope it torpedoes the RIAA completely.

      That comment is so amazingly ill-informed, everybody here is a little dumber for having read it.

      The RIAA != the record labels. Yes, they have spent a lot of their resources fighingting Napster, Kazaa, etc., on behalf of the labels, but it also represents almost everybody else in the music recording industry, including artists. In addition to enforcing copyrights, they help establish industry standards (such as that little pre-amp that goes into turntables... okay, younger /.ers might need to ask their fathers what a turntable is.) Saying that this will hurt them is like saying that putting a dent in Sony's hardware sales will somehow hurt the IEEE.

      Furthermore, all of the music sold on the iTunes Music Store is licensed, and those license fees are managed by... guess who? That's right, the RIAA.

      If this takes off, it might kill your local record store (if Best Buy had not done so already) but it will not make the RIAA go away.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    5. Re:Hooray by Graspee_Leemoor · · Score: 5, Funny

      You had to look that up? I thought this was a geek site! If you can't quote the original trilogy from memory then what are you doing here? ;)

      graspee

  2. Cheap, too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
  3. And in other news by Hagakure · · Score: 4, Funny

    Offerings on P2P networks have almost tripled!

    --


    If this is Heaven I'm bailin out! I cant tolerate this ol tin-tub, so fulla trash and rats...
  4. Finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Apple has found something to make it profitable. Quick sell the hardware side of the business.

    1. Re:Finally by Draoi · · Score: 4, Informative
      Nonsense. All US G4 machines (servers, Xserve, etc) are built in Sacramento by Apple. I used to work there. All Euro/African/Middle Eastern G4 desktop/servers are built in Ireland by Apple. Don't believe me - check the serial tag. Furthermore, almost all H/W R&D is done within Apple, as well as boatloads of the support infrastructure for manufacturing.

      'nuff said!

      --
      Alison

      "It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." - Albert Einstein

    2. Re:Finally by joshsisk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The worst of all this is why are people stupid enough to pay for music.

      Maybe because people over the age of 16 understand that it takes work, time and money to make music, and would be happy to pay a fair price for a product delivered in a manner that they like?

    3. Re:Finally by Draoi · · Score: 5, Informative
      Apple closed its Ireland production unit last year, IIRC

      Really?? Then why am I sitting in the building right now, working away?

      Apple's G4 desktop/server manufacturing in Cork is still running along. In fact, I was out on the production floor 5 minutes ago .. :-)

      BTW - guess where the European support centre is? Cork, Ireland.

      --
      Alison

      "It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." - Albert Einstein

  5. Keeping their promise on adding stuff, too by phillymjs · · Score: 5, Informative

    Today I found a "New Music Tuesday" mailing in my inbox, from Apple, highlighting almost 20 recent (complete album) additions to the Music Store that are available as of today.

    If they do that many every week, that is seriously gonna bolster their catalog.

    ~Philly

    1. Re:Keeping their promise on adding stuff, too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Tuesday is new music Tuesday for every record store.

      That's when new releases come out.

    2. Re:Keeping their promise on adding stuff, too by DeRobeHer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      For some reason, I don't think the holdup for getting music into the iTunes Music Store is the digitizing part. It's probably the legal wrangling with the companies that actually own the music.

      --
      Donald Roeber
      Generating 2048 Bits of Randomness...
    3. Re:Keeping their promise on adding stuff, too by Huogo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I highly doubt that they have problems ripping things at decent speed, its a problem of getting the music labels to allow them to put the songs up. This is still a new technology, and I would think that the labels are still uneasy about allowing their music go to up in this format.

    4. Re:Keeping their promise on adding stuff, too by slagdogg · · Score: 4, Informative

      My company did some of the encoding for this -- the labels themselves were each responsible for delivering the digitized content to Apple (could also explain the sound variation mentioned in the article). Different labels will take different routes, but most will outsource this portion. Our company specializes in such digital media encoding. Amazon.com and company deal with the same issues, just for samples of songs instead of full songs.

      --
      (Score:-1, Wrong)
  6. About what I thought by Agarwaen+The+Tired · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most people aren't thieves. The merely want their content delivered the way they want it. It should be simple for a company to offer a better downloading experience then a decentralized p2p. I'd be willing to pay if the offer me more value then p2p programs. By that I mean easier searchs, high quality files, ability to find related music, and better availibility. RIAA has really been doing nothing but shooting itself it's foot and watching it bleed.

    1. Re:About what I thought by DeanT · · Score: 5, Informative
      At $1/song, if you consider the average CD to contain around 15 songs, that still $15.
      Geez. I hear this a lot. It is, fortunately incorrect. Here's some information from someone that has actually used iTMS.

      The price of most albums is $9.99, unless there are fewer than 10 tracks. In that case, the total for the album is adjusted down. The remaining case is for "double CDs" which typically cost 2*$9.99

      Now, please quit with the "N_songs * $1 > cost_of_album" foolishness.

      There is room for improvement with the selection. That having been said, the experience is very pleasant and purchases are smooth and easy.

      The REAL accomplishment is that Apple has apparently figured out how to do Credit Card Micropayments.

      DeanT

    2. Re:About what I thought by sammy+baby · · Score: 4, Funny

      Seriously! Where the fuck do you people get off listening to your fancy shmancy music? You should take the Avril Lavigne and Shakira we give you and be grateful for it, you elitist bastard!

  7. they'd have sold a LOT more by RalfM · · Score: 5, Insightful


    If they weren't restricting to credit cards with a US billing address. Like VISA isn't the same globally?

    Ralf

    --
    The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.
    -Bertrand Russel
    1. Re:they'd have sold a LOT more by DLG · · Score: 4, Informative

      My understanding on this is that it has more to do with licensing of the music. It is a different matter to get US distribution rights than worldwide. I do not doubt that Apple is working to extend their rights, as the European market is significant to Apple's hardware sales, but you can't really blame them for not waiting. A big part of their leverage to get better worldwide rights as well as an increased catalog will be the success of their first steps.

      Obviously they aren't having a bad start of it, and they have recieved really great press. I know people who are considering buying macs and ipods based on this.

    2. Re:they'd have sold a LOT more by hafree · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If they weren't restricting to credit cards with a US billing address. Like VISA isn't the same globally?

      The problem is fraud prevention. Who's to say you couldn't go on a shopping spree and accumulate 1000 new songs overnight with someone else's credit card? As can be seen from the current RIAA vs. Verizon case, the ISP won't likely help identify the thief in a civil suit, and most credit card companies could care less about fraud prevention in a criminal suit so long as they get their money. And that's just in the US - credit card fraud overseas is much more difficult to trace and prosecute. For now, it's probably just a case of cover-your-ass...

  8. Proof of brand importance? by taeric · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How much of this success is due to this being a truly significant advance in implementations versus Apple simply having a heavy presence in the market?

    I'm not trying to sideline the significance of the success, I'm just questioning why it is really successful. From what I have heard, this is not all that much different than approaches that others took earlier (Didn't eMusic, the popular word among those that don't like iTunes, originally sell per song?).

    Alternatively still, maybe the market is just now ready for such a store model as this. Timing is, afterall, very important in delivery of a product to market. Too early can be as devastating as too late.

    1. Re:Proof of brand importance? by feldsteins · · Score: 5, Interesting

      How much of this success is due to this being a truly significant advance in implementations versus Apple simply having a heavy presence in the market?

      Put simply, it's both. Apple has great brand recognition, marketing muscle and a loyal customer base. But none of that should take away from the fact that this is a significant advance in implimentation.

      How? Well, basically the only games in town for legit online music downloading involved one or more of the following onerous "gotchas."

      1. Rental of music. That is, you don't pay your monthly subscription, you can't listen to "your" music anymore. At $20 per month, this starts to get pretty stupid. No mystery why this never took off.

      2. Over-zealous DRM after downloading. Once the file is on your computer you can't burn a CD. Or you can, but only certain tracks. Or only if you pay an additional fee. Only one CD, please. Etc., etc., etc. Transferring the file to another machine? Hassle. Quibbles about Apple's "Fairplay" DRM technologies notwithstanding, they're lightyears ahead of what came before.

      Apple hasn't gotten it 100% right, but they clearly are hitting the 95% mark and one expects the model to be refined further still. Other services have been consistently below the 50% if you ask me. Not that it was their fault! The RIAA basically either owned these downloading services or at the very least severely restricted the terms of the music licenses. That is to say, the RIAA killed those other services before they were born.

      One of the greatest achievements of the iTMS isn't the fact that clever Apple engineers came up with a great idea first - hell, everyone knew the basics of what was needed for online music downloading business to be sucessful. But the RIAA wouldn't allow such a model! No, cleverness aside, the great achievement is the fact that the Big Steve managed to convince the record companies that his model was a good idea for them. Obviously they had rejected such liberal, consumer-friendly models countless times before. I'm recalling a quote from the top guy at Sony that said (paraphrasing here!) "I think it was about fifteen seconds after Steve started talking that I decided to license our entire library to him."

      "Reality Distortion Field"? Maybe. However he did it, he managed to get the RIAA to swallow a viable music downloading business model. Viable because it contains enough rights for customers for them to put down their hard earned cash and enough controls for content providers to put up their wares.

      --
      You like your Macintosh better than me, don't you Dave? Dave? Can you hear me Dave?
  9. Re:Me thinks CmdrTaco gets an Ipod Free.. by johnpaul191 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    well if you read the articles you will see that Apple's music store sold more songs in a week than the others have in months. Ignore the little Apple icon if you must and see it as *somebody* has possibly finally figured out a way to sell music downloads that people like. The question is how will the sales be in a few months. The Apple policy is a lot more reasonable than anyone else. None of the other services let you put the songs on a portable MP3 player, let alone burning it to an audio CD (which strips the DRM).

  10. 3. Profit? by Cereal+Box · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm still not sure how this service is going to make a lot of money. While a million tracks may sound impressive, you need to keep in mind that it's quite unlikely that they can keep that rate up for very long.

    If the tracks were all sold as singles (they weren't) and if Apple kept all the money from the sale (they don't) AND if they could keep up their one million songs per week rate (doubtful), then by the end of a year they've made $52 million. Take out administration costs (I have no idea what they are, but I'm guessing they must be fairly significant) and the RIAA's big cut, and I'm guessing Apple would be left with somewhere in the neighborhood of $30 million after a year, and that's ONLY if they keep up the sales rate they had in their initial week every week of the year. Sure, $30 million in revenue is nothing to sneeze at, but it's not going to convince anyone that online music sales are worthwhile.

    Remember, $30-50 million is equal to the revenue from a couple platinum albums, and isn't enough to finance nearly as many artists as the current model can (keep in mind that every "flop" gets subsidized by hit records). I would expect that if the recording industry were to switch to this model that MORE over-produced pop garbage would be pushed since the dramatically lower revenues would keep the companies from taking many risks with "alternative" artists. And you thought it was bad now...

    1. Re:3. Profit? by FullCircle · · Score: 4, Informative

      Selling a million of any new service in this short period of anything is impressive. What other service has had similar success?

      So far, this is marketed to a group of people:

      Who own a Mac
      AND Who own iPods
      AND live in North America

      What is that, 1% of Apples 2% market share?

      Once it hits PC's with other players, it could become huge overnight.

      Even if the company "only" makes $30 million...
      What has happened to the world when making "only" $30 million is a bad thing?

      Besides the service only just started last week, normally sales of a new service start out slow and grow as people test the waters and if it's safe, others jump in. There is little word-of-mouth advertising yet. And up till now, who needed an overpriced iPod? Now it seems like a better investment.

      If the price of entry for unsigned artists is is the cost of studio time, plus paying Apple for server space there could be MORE alternative artists in the mix. This is assuming the labels haven't locked out the independents.

      There is much more good potential in the service than you give it credit for.

      --
      If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. - James Madison
    2. Re:3. Profit? by binaryDigit · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm still not sure how this service is going to make a lot of money.

      Well obviously $30mil in profit is nothing to sneeze at. Plus for Apple we're talking about an adjunct to their primary business. I know some others are talking about "replacing" the current model, but Apple would be more than happy to have a reliable $30mil coming in every year.

      But one aspect you're missing is, how many more ipods are being sold because of this? How many more Mac "switchers"/converts are being created now? This is just another way for Apple to create market share for themselves by adding value to computers, taking them beyond just generic tools and making them useful for more people (other than surfing of course). Plus, it gets them in bed with the entertainment industry even more. With Steve's association with Pixar and therefore Disney, the next obvious step would be some type of video distribution. I'm not talking general purpose VOD, nope, I'm talking things like kids shows and cartoons, where the demand for high resolutions (and therefore bandwidth) isn't nearly as much as more adult fare.

      So overall you can't look at this as a thing upon itself. It is merely part of the bigger picture that Apple to drawing to keep itself significant in the market. Kudos to them.

  11. Why did it work? by ArsSineArtificio · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How much of this success is due to this being a truly significant advance in implementations versus Apple simply having a heavy presence in the market?

    The secret is in the direct tie to iTunes. It's difficult to overstate how convenient it is to be able to shop for music within your music player as opposed to fiddling with some web-based download service.

    This is the kind of thing which Apple's control over hardware, software, and consumer applications together permits it to excel at. What is astonishing is that Microsoft has proved so poor at this kind of coordination.

    ASA

    --
    All employees must wash hands before seeking equitable relief.
    1. Re:Why did it work? by Brento · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is the kind of thing which Apple's control over hardware, software, and consumer applications together permits it to excel at. What is astonishing is that Microsoft has proved so poor at this kind of coordination.

      Then why do people always protest Microsoft's bundling of browsers, media players, etc with the OS?

      If Apple is "good" for bundling applications and not giving consumers the choice (for example, the music purchasing ONLY works with iTunes), then why is Microsoft "bad" for including IE and Windows Media Player with the OS? And can you imagine the outcry if Microsoft began selling music inside Windows Media Player? Slashdot would be screaming about the monopoly.

      --
      What's your damage, Heather?
    2. Re:Why did it work? by lunenburg · · Score: 4, Informative

      Then why do people always protest Microsoft's bundling of browsers, media players, etc with the OS?

      If Apple is "good" for bundling applications and not giving consumers the choice (for example, the music purchasing ONLY works with iTunes), then why is Microsoft "bad" for including IE and Windows Media Player with the OS? And can you imagine the outcry if Microsoft began selling music inside Windows Media Player? Slashdot would be screaming about the monopoly.


      The difference is that one company is an illegal monopoly, convicted of antitrust violations, and has a history of using its monopoly power to eliminate all competition in areas it enters with new products, whereas the other company is a small niche competitor that poses no threat to dominate the personal computer market and stifle innovation.

      It may not be an ideal world, but them's the breaks.

    3. Re:Why did it work? by lunenburg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You make it sound like Apple is just bursting with posies in its niceness. I've yet to meet any credible people who believe that given half the chance Apple wouldn't have turned out just like Microsoft, or even worse. You only have to look at their history of using lawyers as weapons to suddenly start appreciating the lack of lawsuit-happiness over at Redmond.

      The simple fact of the matter is that most Slashdot posters wouldn't know consistancy of opinion if it slapped them round the face with a wet kipper. It's fashionable to like Apple, it's fashionable to dislike Microsoft. The fact that they are just two sides of the same coin is something most would apparently rather ignore.


      Reading for comprehension can be fun, in six quick and easy steps!

      If you'll go back and actually read what I wrote before the Redmond side of your brain kicked into overdrive, you'll see that I made no judgements one way or the other of the relative "niceness" of either company, or as to what Apple would do if they had 90% of the marketshare in home PCs.

      So, just for you, I'll hit the salient points again:

      1) Microsoft has been convicted of having an illegal monopoly in the PC market, and using that monopoly to crush competition in that and other markets. Apple has about 5% marketshare, and thus isn't going to be able to use iTunes to bully anyone but themselves into releasing Mac-exclusive products.

      2) Microsoft has the power to use an integrated music service to dictate the future of digital music provided over the internet. Apple, as a niche player, does not.

      3) It's logical to be concerned with potential anticompetitive results from pretty much anything Microsoft does, based on their market share, market power, and past history. It's not logical to be concerned with anticompetitive results from Apple, as they don't have anywhere near enough power to influence competitors or control a market.

  12. Putting 1 million songs into perspective... by klubar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    1 million songs at $0.99 is about $1 millions/week. Assuming that the demand stays constant--which is unlikely as there was probably pent-up demand, as well as let's give it a try users in the first week--the total revenue for the year will be about $52 million. Although this sounds like an astounding success, it is less than 0.2 percent of Dell's revenue (FY03 revenue $35.4 billion), and less than 0.02% of Walmart's revenue ($218 billion). And it will only account for 1% of Apple's revenue.

    1. Re:Putting 1 million songs into perspective... by ArsSineArtificio · · Score: 4, Informative

      1 million songs at $0.99 is about $1 millions/week. Assuming that the demand stays constant?which is unlikely as there was probably pent-up demand, as well as let?s give it a try users in the first week?the total revenue for the year will be about $52 million. Although this sounds like an astounding success, it is less than 0.2 percent of Dell?s revenue (FY03 revenue $35.4 billion), and less than 0.02% of Walmart?s revenue ($218 billion). And it will only account for 1% of Apple?s revenue.

      Note also that Apple doesn't keep the entire $0.99 - about $0.65 of it goes to the record label.

      It's important however that this is very high-margin revenue. Apple's cost of sales here is recouping the cost of developing the service, plus the bandwidth, plus the credit card processing fees, plus the cost of having developers maintain the service. This has got to be pretty low compared to pressing CDs to put into cardboard boxes - let alone manufacturing computing machinery.

      And Apple plans to roll it out to Windows users later this year - which should increase the revenue stream considerably.

      ASA

      --
      All employees must wash hands before seeking equitable relief.
  13. Re:Was I misled? by johnpaul191 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There are DRM protections on the songs, but the Apple version is more laid back than anyone elses.... off the top of my head you can upload the songs to an unlimited number of iPods, 3 computers AT A TIME (you can switch that too), you can burn unlimited audio CDs "for personal use". Burning to audio CD strips off the DRM.

    if you only have the songs on one machine and the machine burned up... i don't know how that works out. I guess like anything else you just have to back it up. It might not sound ideal, but if somebody breaks into your car and steals your CDs (or your house burns down) i don't think Old Man Geffen will ship you replacements for free.

  14. I hope this doesn't rescue the recording industry. by Schlemphfer · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I was given an iPod about six months or so, and it's the best toy I've ever owned. There's nothing like flying coast to coast, and having 5000 songs to choose from. And it made my recent cross-country road trip a joy...the only thing that could have made it more perfect for road trips is if the unit included a laser jammer to keep me from getting nailed at that speed trap in Cleveland.

    It blows my mind that Apple has been able to improve on the iPod. As if the original's form factor was too thick (not quite as thick as a deck of cards), they still somehow cut it almost in half.

    I played around with the new music service this week. Super impressively done. Having said that, I don't think I'll order any music from it. The record companies have shown themselves to be complete bastards for decades now, in how they screw over the public and the artists. I hate to think that Apple's now riding to this industry's rescue, perhaps only a year or two before the entire industry would go down the crapper. If there was only some way I could use this service with the bulk of the money going straight to the artist, I'd be incredibly enthusiastic about this whole thing.

    I'm always thrilled to see Apple succeed at something, since I think they tend to make beautifully designed products. I just hope that this success isn't the event that keeps the parasitic recording industry form withering away.

    --
    I'm generally "Interesting," "Insightful," and even "Funny" here. What the hell happens to me at parties?
  15. Re:Me thinks CmdrTaco gets an Ipod Free.. by sh00z · · Score: 5, Informative
    None of the other services let you put the songs on a portable MP3 player, let alone burning it to an audio CD
    Not so. You should try eMusic. Their selection isn't as broad as Apple's, but I've bought full albums from They Might Be Giants, Bis, Apples in Stereo, Ted Hawkins and Bauhaus.
  16. Re:Me thinks CmdrTaco gets an Ipod Free.. by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think it might be closer to: somebody has possibly finally figured out that making products and services AVAILABLE to people who are proven to actually have the means and the inclination to ACTUALLY PAY FOR STUFF that they find valuable. Windows users buy their machines on price first, features second (and steal half their software from work third...), Linux users have moral objections to paying for stuff that's already been sold a million times, whereas Apple users understand that time pretty much equals money and would rather pay to take the hassle out of life and get on with the rest of theirs.

    --
    That was classic intercourse!
  17. Visa would be quite happy by goldcd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    but I suspect it's due to licensing arrangements. Often the same artist is represented by different labels in different territories - he might have been signed in the UK by a small Indie, but needs big-muscle distribution to break the states etc. Big distributer sells in the US, indie still sells in UK.
    This causes problems online though as customers and territories are now now no longer tied together - you could buy from whichever territory offered the cheapest identical product. One big free market.....nope, couldn't have that, could we? so that's why you need a US Visa.

  18. What Am I Missing? by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 5, Insightful

    People wanted to be able to download a wide variety of "good" music, load it onto an MP3 player and burn their own CD from their purchase. By all accounts (except perhaps those of some vocal sixteen year olds who think the world owes them a record collection) Apple has delivered this, They did the research, developed the tech, made the difficult deals, took the risks, generated the buzz, and now I hope they profit handsomely from it.

    The RIAA reps the companies that get the music into the download -- engineers, producers, designers, and, yes, lawyers -- all of whom need to be paid, and will get their slice. The size of that slice is spelled out in a contract which both parties sign. Is the size of that slice "fair?" I dunno. What percentage of the price of that soda finds its way back to the chemists and bottlers? How many pennies on the cigar dollar get back to the guy rolling the leaves? How many nickels on the Big Mac pricetag work their way back to the cattlerancher? Do we stop consuming these products (and a million others) until we "ger answers?"

    Say I'm a small-town chemist who just developed a new flavor -- how do I get my soda bottled and onto the shelves at the 7-11? You mean -- it's not easy?? I can't just pull my truck up to the back of ths store and stock the shelves myself? I have to make a [shudder] DEAL?! Oh, the Injustice!

    Is this new venture going to change the world, overthrow evil, and bring about a Glorious Workers' Revolution? No, silly, it's gonna let you download music easily and legally onto your computers and disks. No more or less than it was designed to do.

    I've never had a use for Apple, Macs, or Steve Jobs, but my hat is off to them on this.

    1. Re:What Am I Missing? by theWrkncacnter · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Good call.

      This isn't going to hurt the RIAA and bring their downfall. Its going to allow the RIAA to shift their focus by providing a testbed for buying music online in this manner, and its going to show them that it works. In effect, this is only molding the RIAA into something that we all might be able to deal with. But hell, if I can buy my music in this way for all the time to come, I really could care less if the RIAA has a hand in it.

      --
      -1 (Troll) is antihammer
  19. Re:One thing I find suprising by b-baggins · · Score: 4, Informative

    AAC is not a proprietary format. It's the audio component of the MPEG-4 standard.

    --
    You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
  20. With apologies to Billy Joel by LaughingElk · · Score: 5, Funny

    iTunes Man
    To the tune of "Piano Man" by Billy Joel
    Filk by Scott Taylor

    It's nine o' clock at the iTunes store,
    A phenomenal crowd's logging on,
    There's an old man on AOL
    Finding music from ages bygone.

    He says, "Steve can you play me a memory?"
    "I'm not really sure how it goes"
    "But I typed in a track and got album names back!"
    "And I'm not even wearing my clothes!"

    Oh la da da diddy da da, la da diddy da da da.
    Sell us a song, you're the iTunes man,
    Sell us a song tonight.
    Well, we're all in the mood for a melody,
    And you've got the pricing just right.

    Now Claude at Vivendi's a friend of mine
    And his business is selling CDs.
    And knows the solution for store distribution,
    But he's worried about MP3s.
    He says "Steve I believe this is killing us"
    "All these pirates don't pay us a dime."
    "Well I'm sure that you could be a billionaire"
    "If you could sell music online."

    Oh la da da diddy da da, la da diddy da da da.
    Sell us a song, you're the iTunes man,
    Sell us a song tonight.
    Well, we're all in the mood for a melody,
    And you've got the pricing just right.

    Now Paul is an iPod enthusiast
    Who listens to Jazz with his wife
    And he's chatting with Maxine, who's still in the rap scene
    And probably will be for life.
    And the waitress is downloading Dixie Chicks
    As the dial-up man slowly gets Stones
    Yes they're sharing the bandwidth from Akamai
    But it's better than P2P clones.

    Sell us a song, you're the iTunes man,
    Sell us a song tonight.
    Well, we're all in the mood for a melody,
    And you've got the pricing just right.

    Its a pretty good crowd for just Macintosh
    And the PC guys give me a smile
    Cause they know that iTunes will be Windows-bound soon
    If they just can hold out for a while.

    And the AAC sounds like originals
    And rights management isn't a pain,
    And they sit at the screens of their iTunes machines
    And say "Man, this is worse than cocaine!"

    Sell us a song, you're the iTunes man,
    Sell us a song tonight.
    Well, we're all in the mood for a melody,
    And you've got the pricing just right.

  21. Use strings {aacfile} | grep. Or just Get Info! by kriegsman · · Score: 5, Informative
    Try this:
    strings -10 SongIJustBought.m4p | grep '^[a-zA-Z0-9@. ]*$'
    I tried this just now on one of the AAC (.m4p) files I've purchased and found, among other things:
    • my name
    • my e-mail address
    • "com.apple.iTunes"
    • the artists name, the album name, etc.

    There's a less invasive way to demonstrate that the m4p file contains the name/address of the purchaser: buy a song and e-mail the file to a friend who also has a Mac and iTunes4. When they double-click it open, they will be prompted to "authorize" their computer to play this song -- and the text of the prompt includes the e-mail address of the original purchaser, and prompts for their password. That the files contain the identity of the purchaser is not really a secret, especially given that it displays it prominently in the password challenge dialog box when m4p files are moved to a new computer. I found this the first time when my wife mailed me some songs she had bought, and I had to ask her to come over to my computer and enter her password.

    But the easiest way to see that the songs contain the purchaser's name is this: open iTunes, click on a song you've purchased, and choose Get Info... and there's your name!

    -Mark
  22. Re:$.99 for low quality DRM files?????? by foniksonik · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Have you listened to an AAC at 128 bitrate? Albums of 20 songs only cost $9.99 A ten minute classical song costs only 0.99.

    You can burn them to CD in straight audio format (aiff), no DRM included. After that you can do what you want, straight to mp3 and Kazaa if you feel the need... nearly as many times as you want (playlist has to change every ten burns). Every had your CD chewed up by a dog? scratched while moving? ever get a refund? isn't that what backups are all about?

    Yes you are missing almost everything... you got the 0.99 a song part correct, everything else was just FUD. Insightful my arse.

    --
    A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
  23. Re:I salute you by grub · · Score: 5, Funny


    Grub, my man, you must be the Slashdot master of one-liners. Your Karma-to-Words-Typed Ratio must be very impressive.

    Yes it is. :)
    (Watch this skyrocket to +5 [Funny|Informative|goatse.cx])

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  24. PUTTING THIS IN CONTEXT: 1 million sales is.... by goombah99 · · Score: 5, Informative
    according to wired news all of last year there were only half a million online sales of downloadable music from ALL sources combined!!! in one week apple trippled the annual sales of online downloadable music. And The real profit made last week is coming from the 110,000 ipods they sold last week. the profit margin on those is much higher than the million records.

    an that is just to apple user and no one else. imagine if this had been world wide.

    On the otherhand 1 million sales is a tiny drop in the record sales bucket. if there are 1 million songs sold that's less than 100,000 albums sold. which means over the course of a year that will mean about a million album sold if they can sustain this pace. that's trivial. how many times a year does a artist release an album that goes "platinum"? seems to me they are many every year, some from each record label. thus if apple sustains this pace it will only contribute a single platinum album. Of course there may be a large multiplier effect if the profit margins on this are higher/lower than normal album sales.

    What this really shows is how utterly insignificant all of the the other on line music sales were prior to this. they didn't even register: a single mega-record store in NY city could outsell all of the annual online music in a good day prior to apple's involvment. likewise selling CDs by mail also vastly exceeded this market.

    heck AOL sent out more of their free trial disks than that!

    on the otherhand, once this hits the rest of the world and once this hits the windows world. now were talking a large dent in the sales of music online. again remeber their may b eprofit margin mulitpiers too. this will be true in places that yearn for "pop" music but dont have such good access to music stores as in the US. likewise, world artists will be able to crack the US market if apple lets in lables that lack US distribution systems.

    now lets talk about how intrusive the DRM is. its not bad compared to all previous efforts. you can keep your music on a CD so insome sense you own it. but re-ripping it is supposed to be not so good, and thus since digital music is the only way you will be using music in the future having an unrippable high quality CD is not as good as it seems. Apple's tech knowledge base warns you to deauthenticate your mac before you reformat the disk or sell it. its not clear but it seems to imply that you could lose one of your 3 authentications if you dont.

    Apple warns you they are free to change how they authenticate your music when you install it on a new mac any time they wish.

    This lack of clarity over the authentication protool has me worried but not hyperventilating.

    legitmate questions include:

    1)how do I authenticate my music on future macs or ipods if mac sells its music store to someone who either goes out of bussiness or starts charging fees to authenticate. (dont laugh mac switched its bussiness model from free to pay for mac.com and claris works)

    2) Someday i'll want to keep my music on my phone, credit- card computer, ring, implant, etc....will future itunes allow me to move music to non-mac music players?

    3) if my computer is lost, the mother board dies, my hard disk crashes, or a virus eats it, or my employer seizes it before deauthenticate have I lost one of my authentications?

    4) what if I go bankrupt and cant get a visa card. how do I maintain a music store account so I can authenticate?

    5) in the future, will legacy macs that cant run the latest OS also not be able to de-authenticate?

    As I said I'm not hyperventilating, and like 8-tracks and vinyl I dont have the unreasonable expectation that I wont want to replace my music media in the future. but I dont want to be forced to because say apple goes out of the music bussniess.

    and yes I realize I can make an audio CD but its not the same as having bought a CD in the store since the store bought CD will rip to higher audio quality for use in digital players (and I predict in the future all useful players are going to be digital-- there wont be many CD players except as ripping devices)

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  25. Here's the deal... by YllabianBitPipe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There are three types of people posting on this thread.

    1: The cheap bastards who at no price except for free, will music be cheap enough. These people are impossible to satisfy with a realistic business model.

    2: The vast majority, who just care about price. DRM is acceptable as long as it's wussy and if the price is cheap enough, who cares. A little bit of inconvenience due to DRM is no big deal if the price is low enough (and mind you, the DRM on these AAC files is pretty wussy).

    3: A loud minority for whom a purchase from the iTunes store is a political one, that feel supporting any DRM is supporting the powers that be, the music industry, the RIAA, etc. These are the types of people for whom any purchase can be a political statement. The types of people who berate you for shopping at WalMart or eating a hamburger because it supports the corrupt meat-packing industry. They have a point, but they are in the minority ... most people don't sit and go through a checklist trying to figure out which product is doing the most harm to which people before they go out to the grocery store and shop.

    The money is at #2. #1 will never be satisfied and #3 will never shut up. Go get the money, Apple.

  26. Re:I hope this doesn't rescue the recording indust by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Anything which encourages people to purchase music directly by cutting out the retail link can only help artists in the long run.

    This doesn't cut out the retail link though. It simple eliminates your local record store and replaces it with Apple.

    If people get used to this kind of thing, they're much more likely to purchase music from independent artists someday - because independent artists will probably never be able to afford to get their CDs into record stores, but it won't be too much trouble for them to get onto download services.

    Sure, assuming Apple don't end up with a near monopoly. This kind of thing suffers a classic network effect - can you see people joining 20 or 30 different download services to get their music? No, they'll use the ones that are most convenient - ie the ones that are integrated with their computers. I don't know for sure but I'd bet a lot that Apple won't be allowing eMusic to plug into iTunes anytime soon.

    Right now the price Apple charges for getting a track onto this service is about 30-40 US cents, something around that figure. If they become a dominant middle man, who's to say that Apple won't start putting on the squeeze to up the margins just like the big bad old record companies did? They are all shareholder owned at the end of the day.

  27. Imagine an Apple and Priceline joint venture by pjgeer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Name your own price for songs. I wonder which tunes would command the highest prices?