Slashdot Mirror
iTunes Indie Meeting Notes
BWJones writes "The CD baby! site contains notes taken from the indie music meeting recently held at Apple. Interesting statistics revealed were that there are about 500k songs/week being downloaded from the iTunes Music store and that 45% of songs are being purchased as albums. Other interesting items of note are that Apple is treating everyone as equvalents in that all labels receive equal treatment with the same deal, the same agreements and you work with the same team of people. What's more is that Apple cuts a check EVERY MONTH which is huge for the smaller labels." Wired has another story about iTunes which notes that what Jobs taketh away, the community is bringing back.
The details were pulled from the first link, before there's even one post. ya'rg! Anyone happen to have visited before he pulled the info?
I don't know which was faster, the information about the iTunes store on the CDBaby site being pulled or the obligatory post about how slow it is to copy files on an 8600/300.
First off, I don't have a mac. And yes, Macs used to suck. But they don't now. They are good now. The new ones are good. Still too expensive though.
Here
Perhaps the record labels had a problem with the streaming, and so Apple pulled it - expecting that someone would just hack their code to bring it back.
What with all the fuss about internet radio and royalty fees, it's not too far fetched that the record companies didn't like people legitimately streaming the songs they had legitimately purchased.
IIRC, Tivo & others have similar hidden features that the masses are unaware of that would probably annoy the TV companies if it were publicised.
I saw a similar story yesterday on a popular community-driven geek news website.
You should check it out sometime!
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
All the details have been pulled and the following remark inserted:
"And yes, sorry, there used to be more details here. I didn't realize yesterday's presentation was supposed to be confidential. When I found out, I pulled the details. Honest mistake."
Religion and science are both 90% crap..but that doesn't negate the other 10%.
I think that Apple's setting itself up as an honest broker of web services in order to try to stay out of Apple Record's crosshairs. If Apple starts preferring one store above another, one label above another, it can be more realistically be claimed to be in the business and thus afoul of its previous corporate commitments. If what they're doing is just providing a deal for the labels to have their content distributed on Apple's web services platform, it's much more arguable that they're in the music business at all.
They say that 45% of the songs are purchased as albums as if itâ(TM)s a great accomplishment, but doesnâ(TM)t that mean that very few transactions are actually albums? For example, if there were about 10 songs per CD, then doesnâ(TM)t that mean that about 5% of all transactions are for an album. Or, in other words, only one out of every 20 purchases is for an album? Personally, I donâ(TM)t find this surprising, but I donâ(TM)t think that itâ(TM)s anything to be too excited over.
But the above post describes a machine that could never run OS X.
OS9 and below sucked - They had an ancient core, I'm not surprised you had multitasking issues. OS X is lightyears ahead. OSX is one good reason that some people might choose a Mac.
And this article isn't about their hardware, it's about Apple's iTunes Music Store service. Which is currently Mac-only, and is enough to push some people "over the edge" and get a Mac. I know I've been VERY tempted to buy a used Mac just to be able to use the ITMS. (I'm currently a PC user myself, and going to stay that way unless Apple caters more to DIY types - yeah right.)
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
While the CD Baby page has not been taken down, its been neutered - all relevant info has been removed and I think its obvious why.
Apple only gets about 6-12 months to have their innovations be innovations before someone else copies them.. putting out the info now, instead of in the 90ish days when the details will all be public, only gives MS and Real a head-start on their idea copying.
I'm perfectly willing to wait and see.... tho other sources have already noted that Apple has mentioned a iTMS Compression tool to allow Indie's the ability to compress their own music on their own machines to make their music ready for sale on the iTMS.
and if that's true.. that kicks fscking ass.
Go Apple, you guys r0x0r.(note: i'm not bashing their copying of Apple's ideas, i'm only stating fact)
guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
I've checked the Google cache too, NOT THERE
Religion and science are both 90% crap..but that doesn't negate the other 10%.
One interesting note I remember from reading it: No independant artists. You have to come in through one of the independant labels. Apple pays the label. The label pays you.
Boom Shanka
I got an invitation to go to Apple's office for a presentation/meeting today (June 5, 2003) about how to get independent artists into the iTunes Music Store. There were about 150 people there, representatives from the best independent record labels and music services, in this invitation-only conference room. Steve Jobs came out and started a two and a half hour presentation/seminar/Q&A about iTunes and the benefits of independent labels making their music available there. I type fast and had my laptop, so I wrote down all the major points of their presentation as they went.
NOTE: I've skipped the super-basic introduction to iTunes and what it does, because that can be found so many other places. This is the stuff that I felt was most important to musicians:
The basics
* The basics of iTunes Music Store are covered in many places, so if you haven't used iTunes Music store yet, read these links first:
* Apple's iTunes Music Store website.
* Great video showing the service.
* NOTE: iTunes is not a website! It can only be accessed from the iTunes software run on Mac OS X (now) and Windows (by the end of the year.)
* I highly suggest trying it for yourself. If you don't have a Mac, use a friend's. Enter your credit card info and actually buy a song. Tell it to store your info for future purchases. Buy a few more songs with the one-click system. I'm serious. You should try it yourself to really experience how amazingly cool it is.
* They're using a DRM called Fairplay to make sure you can't put these songs on the internet and have them play on another player.
Current Stats:
* There are 6-7 million copies of iTunes in use.
* 3.5 million songs sold so far. Selling about 500,000 songs a week now.
* More than 75% of songs have sold at least once. There is a wide breadth in purchasing. This is not only fueled by hits.
* 45% of all songs have been bought as an album. In other words: don't worry about the death of the album format. 45% of people prefer to buy as an album anyway, even though they always have the option to only buy per-song.
* 90% of sales are 1-click downloads. (1-click is where customer has credit card stored on file, so that as soon as they click a song title, it starts downloading and their credit card is automatically charged.)
* 10 previews (free 30 second listen) for every purchase. Meaning: 10 listens per buy.
Price of music on iTunes
* Songs must be 99 cents each.
* Full albums are recommended to be $9.99 or lower.
* Album price must be less than or equal to the sum of their tracks. So if you have a 5-song album, it can't be more than $4.95 to buy the full-length album.
* Apple strongly recommends going even lower than $9.99. They'd like to see that price drop to make the full-album purchase even more desirable.
* Only exception: if a song is over 7 minutes long, they won't offer it as a separate download. It will be available as part of the album only.
* There is no cost to put your music on iTunes.
* There will be no up-front advance from Apple.
* Details on the wholesale price to the label will be mailed to us, later.
Sales report to SoundScan
* Apple is reporting all iTunes sales to SoundScan!
* SoundScan measures per-song not per-album.
* So if someone buys your whole album, each track on the album is reported as a song sale.
* SoundScan requested to do it that way. It was their idea, not Apple's.
About positioning and getting attention on iTunes
* Apple has hired an editorial staff with backgrounds in music to decide what gets featured.
* Editorial team makes decisions every day as to what goes where.
* Big labels don't get preferential treatment.
* "We pick music we like, and we think everyone else is going to like."
* "We've had a lot of people offer money", but A
shame on us / for all we have done / and all we ever were / just zeroes and ones
Cd Baby reports on itunes meeting re: indy music.
Posted by leflaw on June 6, 2003 at 7:44 AM EDT
Apple iTunes + independent music
I got an invitation to go to Apple's office for a presentation/meeting today (June 5, 2003) about how to get independent artists into the iTunes Music Store. There were about 150 people there, representatives from the best independent record labels and music services, in this invitation-only conference room. Steve Jobs came out and started a two and a half hour presentation/seminar/Q&A about iTunes and the benefits of independent labels making their music available there. I type fast and had my laptop, so I wrote down all the major points of their presentation as they went.
NOTE: I've skipped the super-basic introduction to iTunes and what it does, because that can be found so many other places. This is the stuff that I felt was most important to musicians:
The basics
* The basics of iTunes Music Store are covered in many places, so if you haven't used iTunes Music store yet, read these links first:
* Apple's iTunes Music Store website.
* Great video showing the service.
* NOTE: iTunes is not a website! It can only be accessed from the iTunes software run on Mac OS X (now) and Windows (by the end of the year.)
* I highly suggest trying it for yourself. If you don't have a Mac, use a friend's. Enter your credit card info and actually buy a song. Tell it to store your info for future purchases. Buy a few more songs with the one-click system. I'm serious. You should try it yourself to really experience how amazingly cool it is.
* They're using a DRM called Fairplay to make sure you can't put these songs on the internet and have them play on another player.
Current Stats:
* There are 6-7 million copies of iTunes in use.
* 3.5 million songs sold so far. Selling about 500,000 songs a week now.
* More than 75% of songs have sold at least once. There is a wide breadth in purchasing. This is not only fueled by hits.
* 45% of all songs have been bought as an album. In other words: don't worry about the death of the album format. 45% of people prefer to buy as an album anyway, even though they always have the option to only buy per-song.
* 90% of sales are 1-click downloads. (1-click is where customer has credit card stored on file, so that as soon as they click a song title, it starts downloading and their credit card is automatically charged.)
* 10 previews (free 30 second listen) for every purchase. Meaning: 10 listens per buy.
Price of music on iTunes
* Songs must be 99 cents each.
* Full albums are recommended to be $9.99 or lower.
* Album price must be less than or equal to the sum of their tracks. So if you have a 5-song album, it can't be more than $4.95 to buy the full-length album.
* Apple strongly recommends going even lower than $9.99. They'd like to see that price drop to make the full-album purchase even more desirable.
* Only exception: if a song is over 7 minutes long, they won't offer it as a separate download. It will be available as part of the album only.
* There is no cost to put your music on iTunes.
* There will be no up-front advance from Apple.
* Details on the wholesale price to the label will be mailed to us, later.
Sales report to SoundScan
* Apple is reporting all iTunes sales to SoundScan!
* SoundScan measures per-song not per-album.
* So if someone buys your whole album, each track on the album is reported as a song sale.
* SoundScan requested to do it that way. It was their idea, not Apple's.
About positioning and getting attention on iTunes
* Apple has hired an editorial staff with backgrounds in music to decide what gets featured.
* Editorial team makes decisions every day as to what goes where.
* Big labels don't get preferential treatment.
* "We pick music we like, and we think everyone else is going to like."
* "We've had a lot of people offer money", but Apple refuses money, and has no plan to ev
Man, I hope CD Baby works out a licensing deal where CD's from CD Baby's catalog are also sold on iTMS. I plan on selling an album through them this summer and I would love for it to be available in iTunes as well.
(a little OT)
Thanks to companies like Apple, the smaller labels will really reap the benefits of getting their music out there without heavy tampering to 'prevent' piracy.
I work for a music publication, and it's interesting to see which companies ignore the 'threat' of piracy, and which ones try to fight it.
For example, the new Cradle of Filth arrived with a hand-signed number on the CD, and a b/w CD case with a skull and cross bones on it, warning me (the music critic) that "this disc is watermark protected" whatever that means.
Meanwhile, the new Type O Negative arrived with a 10 second commericial attached (i.e. spliced into) each song ("Your listening to the new Type O Negative, in stores next month"). This CD will NOT get press in our publication, since it's hard to get into a CD when every 3-4 minutes some recorded message comes on; nice job, record executives. Way to prevent piracy!
One of the things I've been wondering is, if an indie label wants to make their own songs available without DRM, will Apple let them do so on the iTunes Music Store, or is DRM absolutely required? What if the band wants to sell unrestricted AAC files? What about MP3?
Of course I expect most of them to want the DRM, but some may not.
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
I second that. There's already enough confusion in the language without having to decipher things like "Check checked checks" using this spelling of the word "cheque".
Gosh, I am a dope. Now it will be interesting to see if I get modded down for correcting my *own* spelling.
Boom Shanka
I'm actually a little suprised at the heavy handedness Apple has shown with preventing the LAN streaming of mp3's all together. Apple has always been one to promote innovation, well usually unless they think its a threat. But the issue with preventing the iTunes streaming may have something to do with these new deals with the music labels, Apple may have it's hands tied and has pressure on it by the labels, who knows.
Interesting that they pulled the "details" because they seem to have been reminded that they were confidential (see note at bottom of page). Do we see the shadow of the Long Arm of Apple or a case of sudden recall?
As for the sales figures mentioned in the intro above, they're just a rehash of the oft quoted "million a month / mostly albums" company line. No scoop there. Next time, perhaps we'll see it expressed as "33,000 per day."
I can't imagine that Apple would have divulged much (if any) proprietary info to that auditorium full of mavericks anyway, so I reckon we're not missing much.
Next.
"...all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness..." yada yada
I mean really, who could have realistically predicted this would happen a year ago? Apple, snobby uppity en vogue computer company who makes shiny, sexy, expensive computers..... now stands to build a new empire built on selling music online. I mean really. I never saw it coming! Mac user 4 ever :)
So lets get the theories out in the open. How long until I can post a song I've made and sell it on apple's service at $0.99 a piece (with apple of cource getting a portion of the proceedes)?
- tristan
[Pauses to put on troll feeding gloves]
Man, that is a slow computer - you were transfering that same file on that same computer a week ago when you posted. And then a week before that!
That's AMAZINGLY slow... or maybe you are... I dunno but I wish I could get paid "freelance" for sitting and constantly transfering a 17MB file back and forth - regardless of how long it might take...
HA! Like you have a job!
What was that one
There are much better programs to use, and more reliable.
Middle English chek, from Middle French eschec
Seems to suggest that "check" is the correct modern spelling and that people writing "cheque" are just weird, or "chiefly British."
Besides, incorrect spelling is one of the cornerstones of Slashdot, like incorrect grammer. (How many people will catch that, I wonder?) Complaining about it is so passé.
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
Why is it wrong? There are no rules to spelling. Correct spelling determined by understanding and social acceptance. If one society spells it differently then fine but you can not say it is wrong.
Check is the correct spelling in American English. Just like color. It really is that simple. If you don't like it, bitch at Benjamin Franklin, he de-moronized the King's English.
What is it with people wanting to make a good thing unavailable? The streaming capability of iTunes seemed pretty sweet to me. But, of course, some jackasses had to figure out the way to use that capability to further steal music. Why? What the fuck is your problem? Are you a kleptomaniac? An anarchist? You just hate other people and don't want them to enjoy things? You're not cool. You're a retard. You are the reason that good things get taken away. Dude, cut it the fuck out. You're no different than the jackass that first took a hair dryer into a shower.
Go ahead, flame away. Mod me down. I have the karma to burn.
-
According to a post in the MacRumors forums from CDBaby the details were pulled and here's why:
--------------
It wasn't wrath or lawyers that asked me to pull it. It was a friend of mine that works there.
I sincerely didn't know yesterday's presentation was supposed to be confidential. In fact I thought it was like an indie-music press conference.
Nobody's mad, though. Honest mistake.
Sorry guys!
--
Derek Sivers, CD Baby
http://www.cdbaby.com
--------------
But.... here it is anyhow...
I got an invitation to go to Apple's office for a presentation/meeting today (June 5, 2003) about how to get independent artists into the iTunes Music Store. There were about 150 people there, representatives from the best independent record labels and music services, in this invitation-only conference room. Steve Jobs came out and started a two and a half hour presentation/seminar/Q&A about iTunes and the benefits of independent labels making their music available there. I type fast and had my laptop, so I wrote down all the major points of their presentation as they went.
NOTE: I've skipped the super-basic introduction to iTunes and what it does, because that can be found so many other places. This is the stuff that I felt was most important to musicians:
The basics
* The basics of iTunes Music Store are covered in many places, so if you haven't used iTunes Music store yet, read these links first:
* Apple's iTunes Music Store website.
* Great video showing the service.
* NOTE: iTunes is not a website! It can only be accessed from the iTunes software run on Mac OS X (now) and Windows (by the end of the year.)
* I highly suggest trying it for yourself. If you don't have a Mac, use a friend's. Enter your credit card info and actually buy a song. Tell it to store your info for future purchases. Buy a few more songs with the one-click system. I'm serious. You should try it yourself to really experience how amazingly cool it is.
* They're using a DRM called Fairplay to make sure you can't put these songs on the internet and have them play on another player.
Current Stats:
* There are 6-7 million copies of iTunes in use.
* 3.5 million songs sold so far. Selling about 500,000 songs a week now.
* More than 75% of songs have sold at least once. There is a wide breadth in purchasing. This is not only fueled by hits.
* 45% of all songs have been bought as an album. In other words: don't worry about the death of the album format. 45% of people prefer to buy as an album anyway, even though they always have the option to only buy per-song.
* 90% of sales are 1-click downloads. (1-click is where customer has credit card stored on file, so that as soon as they click a song title, it starts downloading and their credit card is automatically charged.)
* 10 previews (free 30 second listen) for every purchase. Meaning: 10 listens per buy.
Price of music on iTunes
* Songs must be 99 cents each.
* Full albums are recommended to be $9.99 or lower.
* Album price must be less than or equal to the sum of their tracks. So if you have a 5-song album, it can't be more than $4.95 to buy the full-length album.
* Apple strongly recommends going even lower than $9.99. They'd like to see that price drop to make the full-album purchase even more desirable.
* Only exception: if a song is over 7 minutes long, they won't offer it as a separate download. It will be available as part of the album only.
* There is no cost to put your music on iTunes.
* There will be no up-front advance from Apple.
* Details on the wholesale price to the label will be mailed to us, later.
Sales report to SoundScan
* Apple is reporting all iTunes sales to SoundScan!
* SoundScan measures per-song not per-album.
* So if someone buys your whole album, each track on the album is reported as a song sale.
* SoundScan requested to do it that way. It was their idea
Found this on the macnn boards:
Sorry - I took the details down from that page. It wasn't wrath or lawyers that asked me to pull it. It was a friend of mine that works there. I sincerely didn't know yesterday's presentation was supposed to be confidential. In fact I thought it was like an indie-music press conference. Nobody's mad, though. Honest mistake. Sorry guys!
-- Derek Sivers, CD Baby http://www.cdbaby.com
but the article said that in 20 years Apple has never sold an icon to a desktop in their operating system. This may be true but if you install OS X you will be asked to sign up for an Earthlink account. To me that sounds like advertising sold to Earthlink to place their company ahead of others. Just a thought.
___ Shout Central - Crushes your nuts!
The "What Jobs taketh away.." article refers to Andromeda, a $35 web-based file streaming program.
There is a free GPL'd alternative, ZINA (Zina Is Not Andromeda) as well as other solutions. A search of freshmeat.net for "jukebox" will reveal even more...
W
-------------------
This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
All the independent labels, you mean?
This clearly isn't true for the big labels. Some "hits" can only be bought if you take the whole album -- they won't sell Don MacLean's "American Pie" for $0.99 -- and exceptionally long tracks (>7 mins) often have the same restriction. Some albums also stick to the $0.99-per rule past the $9.95-per-original-disk rule. That's only fair when a classical or jazz track might be ten minutes long, but it ain't the universal deal we're supposedly talking about.
Not that I'm po'ed about this. Basically Apple had to compromise to get some of the deals with big companies. Seems like they're trying to address the very thing /. spent the first week going over and over -- smaller labels, less well-known artists -- without killing anyone on either end.
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
Okay I take the bait:
You are running an OS that was written 13 years before you bought your Mac and was updated with more and more features, meaning in many cases unoptimized bloat. I am guessing you are running MacOS 9, and this does not have many of the low-level features of a modern OS. The multi-tasking used by the OS is cooperative, so if one process hogs the CPU no other app gets a chance. Other things to take into account is that the OS has virtual memory (the OS doesn't differentiate between what is real and what isn't, when allocating memory) and not swap space, so this can also affect performance if you are trying to do a lot at once.
Windows NT on the other hand had a lot of new code and was essentially a new OS and was written with many of the modern features you would expect from an OS. I am not so sure Windows 95/98 would be performing as well on this machine. One thing you don't say is how much memory you have on that PC, since memory make a LOT of differnce.
MacOS X is the Apple's new OS and has plenty of modern facilities, which should make it fly. The problem is the eye candy and all the other GUI stuff which adds an extra load to the CPU. The OS is improving and is getting faster. In theory if MacOS X had the same GUI as MacOS 9 (in other words one which requires less processing), I am sure that you find it running fast ion the 8600.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
Fuck off. Or don't. Whatever.
Cheque is a British spelling. The American spelling is check. It is no more wrong than color, meter, or analyze is. Face the fact that British and American have two different orthographies, and that sometimes it is American that is more conservative, and sometimes it is British that is more conservative. (For instance, -ize is more conservative than -ise, because it comes from the Greek -izo).
The difference between check and cheque is the same between color and colour, humor and humour, authorize and authorise. The spelling is different especially on differnt sides of the Atlantic. If the person writing the article is American, it's not wrong.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
It's my prediction that they'll start seeing album sales drop rapidly as people finish "switching" their music collection to the new format. Once you've got all your old vinyl in AAC, you'll probably not want to risk the $10 on a new, untested album.
DataSquid.net, a little about me.
The problem is with the HFS file system. It uses B-trees which were optimized for small drives. Past 500 MB, every offset requires multiple multiplications (the PPC doesn't have native multiplication instruction). Furthermore, the new file has to be allocated block-by-block --- no preallocation like in windows 2k, or even win95.
I just don't see how Apple is having millions of downloads and sales every month from software that isn't on _that_ many computers. It doesn't seem to make any sense. Are these numbers legit or is Apple cooking the books?
You also need to be older than sixteen. Sorry, sonny.
But with previewing before buying it won't be a new untested album.... that's part of the beauty of it
was "Plus Steve Jobs reminded us they have $41 billion in the bank and are not in debt. They're not desparate(sic) for cash."
I knew they had money, but sheesh. Though I'm leaning towards it being a typo, and it should read "4.1 billion", as that would be more in line with what I last heard.
Still, they are clearly on solid ground for a computer maker these days. Or for any product manufacturer, for that matter.
I wonder if that's enough to buy SCO....
R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
So -- the TypeO album doesn't get any response simply because they go to the trouble of appending something to the song so that when you rip it and get it uploaded to some fileserver the kiddies will know who it is?
Thats a little juvenile, eh?
10 seconds of commercial is not too much to worry about nor should it effect your judgements of the music. Being from a music pub, you've probably been to one of any number of junkets put out by these guys...music critics come out and listen to this stuff...sometimes they are given a cd to take back with them, other times the music you've heard at the party is all they you get until release day (and they have been known to wand ya to make sure ya ain't bringing in a recorder)...there will be someone talking a good portion of the time that this is playing, yet the music still seems to get reviewed -- or at least pre-reviewed until they can get their hands on the full release).
I'd rather have music have a short advertisment at the end of the song than a watermarking -- marks are expensive (ie., each disc has to be encoded specifically for that person and burned for them -- I have set up a process that does this for a friends company that sells sound libraries -- then again for $1k a disc, they don't mind that it takes them a half hour to get the cd out the door).
What do I know. You are an anonycow that reviews for publications while I'm just a music tech that works for the pros and has to hear them bitch at me constantly about their music being stolen while I sit and explain how this stuff works and try to explain how they can try to stop it OR try to figure out ways to subvert this activity so that it ends up helping them out without alienating their core audience.
clif
Syria.
It's truely amazing how Apple has managed to hit the nail on the head while the RIAA keeps swinging away futily. The RIAA keeps trying the closed fist approach to stoping mp3 piracy. Shut down as many services as possible. Sue everyone. Badmouth music fans. Unfortunately, any scholar of the internet can tell you that the more somebody tries to force out a popular service, the more the community will fight back with new sites, programs, hacks, etc.
So Apple has come along with the open hand approach. They aren't insulting the music fans. They aren't insulting the technologically advanced community. They're co-existing. Download what you want. Hell, burn it if you want. Get the entire CD cheaper than it will cost you at any store. You can still love your music, download what you want, keep it, and support the musicians. And hell, now they're even saying they aren't playing favorites. IF you're telling me that the RIAA aligned groups get the same cashflow program as small indie labels, then I'm buying.
We've been waiting awhile for a new "music delivery model" that pundits have been pushing for. I'm not saying Apple has the whole thing nailed down. But they're soooo close. They figured out the key of existing without being a slap in the face to the people they want to use their service. And now the RIAA has their tail tucked between their legs, trying to figure out why a bunch of hippies at Apple figured out something their teams of lawyers and PR consultants couldn't: Don't insult your customer.
It's not stupid. It's advanced.
If only it did. Sadly, the iTunes store isn't available outside the U.S, so us Brits can't cheque it out.
I don't think (m)any people are "switching" their music collection to AAC files they've bought at the Apple Music store. The article said itself that the most popular (profitable) tracks are new releases and exclusive tracks, not available on CD (and I'm assuming not on vinyl either). The Apple Music Store is NOT the economical way of getting music you already own into a new format. I don't think we're going to see any rapid drop off sales anytime soon, especially before they get the windows version of iTunes out.
That's to keep you as a reviewer from leaking the album. An album being out on the internet when it's also available in stores is one thing, but if an album's out on the net months before people can buy it in stores there's a good chance they'll be tired of it before they can even make a decision about whether to legally buy it or not.
I do agree with you that the recorded message in the middle of the songs is going way too far, but if a band wants to watermark their review copies so they can know which one got leaked, I can't really fault them.
Ogg Vorbis has its benefits, but with so many other formats out there, there's no dying reason for people to switch to it when other formats give similar quality, and are a hell of a lot easier to use. Please tell me why on earth would the record industry, which has been doing everything in its power to prevent anyone from copying anything, switch to an open source format?!? Does this sound like a good idea to anyone else?
...whoever comes along with a 35 cent version of a similar service using another format [vorbis.com] and a better bitrate?
Going broke on the difference between the 35 cent retail and the 65 cents label royalty per track is a fairly predictable first consequence, one would think
I posted this as part of a thread but here it is again. This is post by Derek at the MacRumors forum: sorry - took the details down It wasn't wrath or lawyers that asked me to pull it. It was a friend of mine that works there. I sincerely didn't know yesterday's presentation was supposed to be confidential. In fact I thought it was like an indie-music press conference. Nobody's mad, though. Honest mistake. Sorry guys! -- Derek Sivers, CD Baby http://www.cdbaby.com
Please learn the difference between "your" and "you're" -- they are different words. Thank you.
Hmmm, actually chek refers more to the word's use as a verb, as in chess, or hockey.
My guess is that cheque may have been che-queue, which is writ-in-line. Hence, you'd place a writ in the queue at the bank, and they'd hand you currancy after it had been processed.
Of course, since this is slashdot, it's appropriate for me not the post any valid reosources for this wild theory (which means, I'm too lazy to go look it up).
This CD will NOT get press in our publication, since it's hard to get into a CD when every 3-4 minutes some recorded message comes on; nice job, record executives. Way to prevent piracy!
it should get in your magazine.. mention it that you threw it in the trash because of that and if they want you to actually review it then send you something that is listen-able.
you actually have the power to get these nut-heads attention... but being silent is not the way to do it.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Why is it wrong? There are no rules to spelling.
Boy is that ever wrong.
Here's the rule: if you spell it in a way that's different from what the average person expects, it's wrong.
Spelling check "cheque" is different from what the average person expects. It is, therefore, wrong.
Vorbis will never be used in one of these services, at least not without major changes. The record companies will never let someone distribute their music in a format that has no copyright protection. I know that some may use WMA, are there any other formats that support copyright protection? (I assume there are, but I haven't looked) Aaron
From the article: * Every album needs to have a UPC Barcode!
Buuuuut... CD Baby doesn't require a barcode and doesn't get one for you so I see some problems with CD Baby being able to supply Apple with all the required stuff.
This sig will make it clear that ANYONE can use this post for ANY purpose WITHOUT the written consent of the NFL.
I wonder how the math works for the music industry. Are they afraid that they're going to start losing money from individual songs sold direct at .99 each, or would they prefer to sell a full album at 9.99 each, full of filler that most people don't want? It could be a whole new market for them, or at least restoring the old market that was lost when people stopped buying 45 RPMs. There never was a successor to that format that caught on, although clearly there is a demand for being able to purchase the 'hit singles'.
the PPC doesn't have native multiplication instruction
What exactly are you talking about? PPC has 4 mulitplication instructions. Here's one of them. If you're really intrested the basic instruction list can be found here
Gee, that's a simple problem to solve - rip, cut the first 10 seconds out, make a new CD, and listen. This is not that tough.
"Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
Why did they do this? They're just going to piss off classical music and techno/trance fans. I have many songs I love that are well over 7 minutes.
yes,it's pretty crazy innit...just do the math. in vague estimation,abt 1/3 of apple users have access to itms.whom only constitute just about 2% of the computer market can buy 500000 songs a week.that in a time where p2p programs like kazaa are still around. that is pretty crazy if you ask me,pretty dubious figures. however if it is true then just imagine how much we are looking at if and when itms reaches the windows platform?
eventually, once this is in place the big labels may once again band together and totally erase any form of p2p sharing eg kazaa and itunes may become the only online music download site around.
the labels get like 65% of each track, so this could be a masterplan.....imagine the future...where there are no more cds sold in record stores and itms is the only retail medium for music?
*wakes up*
"damn, all this cold sweat is soaking the sheets"
...Like getting the record companies to stop releasing album-length Compact Discs with just a few good songs and everything else on the album being horrible.
Does anyone remember back in the early 1980's? Back then, many albums were full of great songs; a great example of this is Michael Jackson's Thriller, which had most of its songs hit the Top Ten on the Billboard Singles chart.
With the ability the iTunes Music Store to pick and choose the songs you want, you get the best songs and skip out on the crappy stuff. This might even encourage musicians to write good songs for a change on a consistent basis. =)
Ummm, the PowerPC certainly has a hardware multiply instruction (plus a multiply high instruction for doing the upper part of a 32x32->64 bit multiply). It also has a division instruction.
I don't even no where to begin.
Wait, how do you measure music? By number of purchases, or number of tracks? I think that number of tracks is a more appropriate measure of music, in which case 45% is the right number. If you're talking about x% of purchases were albums, then the ~4.5% is correct.
The argument goes that Apple is roughly 5% of the **home** personal computer market. That as a **home** computer vendor they are roughly the same size as Dell, Gateway, HP/Compaq, etc. That the odds of finding a Mac in a house is roughly the same as finding a Dell brand, Gateway brand, HP/Compaq brand, etc. Apple is only dwarfed when you gather up all the major PC vendors and the local clone shops into a mishmash called IBM PC compatibles, especially when you do not differentiate between home and business sales. And of course these business sales are not all that relevant to any music store. Such purchases are far more likely to be made on a personal not a company system.
etymology is the word you meant to use. Entomology is the study of insects.
Easy mnemonic: Entomology, think ants. Works for me anyway.
Where will they be after we don't find them there, either? Iran? How about after that?
Heh, if your Mac has been copying that file for all the months you've been posting this particular troll, maybe you should consider plugging it in!
I'm beginning to wonder if someone out there set up a daemon to post this every time an Apple topic shows up on Slashdot...
"Check" (the noun) in this instance is an incorrect spelling of the word that has become so ubiquitous it is now considered an alternate spelling. For Americans, it is becoming the only recognized correct spelling.
"Seems to suggest that "check" is the correct modern spelling and that people writing "cheque" are just weird, or "chiefly British"
Case in point (your link to Merriam-Webster is an American dictionary). Along with the weird "cheifly British" folk you can also include Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders, Indians, South Africans, etc... almost the entire English-speaking world outside the US.
The iTunes Music Store requires: * A Macintosh computer (iBook, PowerBook, iMac, eMac or Power Mac) * Mac OS X 10.1.5 or later. (version 10.2.5 or later recommended) * iTunes 4 must be installed * Internet connection (DSL, Cable or LAN connection recommended) * Apple ID or .Mac account. If you donâ(TM)t have one, itâ(TM)s easy to sign-up.
* The iTunes Music Store is only available in the U.S.
John Susek
Actually, I have a number of albums (yes, vinyl) that I haven't replaced with the CD version. When iTMS was up, those were the first I looked for. I've taken "ripped" some of the vinyl to mp3 or ogg but considering what my time is worth iTMS is much cheaper.
Most of my vinyl is available as CD but now I doubt that I'll ever buy it as that. I can buy the AAC's from iTMS and then burn a CD from my playlist (which I have done). The sound -- while admittedly not CD quality -- is better than my ears are and I have yet to find any sonic imperfections. And, it's better than the quality of my albums no matter what. (Yes, I took very good care of my albums but you pick up hiss and scratches no matter how careful you are!)
I've also purchased new music that I have neither the CD or album for. It was a quick, simple, and inexpensive way to get the music and I got to sample it first. I doubt I'll buy many more pre-recorded CDs now that I have this option.
My point is, yes it is an economical solution for replacing pre-owned music in some formats. For people like me, it's an easy way to "switch" my music collection to a digital format.
"There is no spoon." - Neo
"Spoooon!" - The Tick
Does anyone know if Apple is pushing for an exclusive right to distribute/sell these tunes online or if they're content being one of many distributors? This is the sort of things that worries me when the really big guys start playing in this field, locking up the market.
I'm a huge fan of EMusic, another online service for downloading licensed (and DRM free!) music. Unlimited (with reason) downloads for $10/$15 a month is a better deal for me than $.99 a song. They have a great catalog even if they don't carry the 'major' labels, but I'd hate to see their catalog decrease if labels had to drop them to distribute via iTunes.
But you see, they only have to take a loss long enough to drive Apple out of the business.
So what about those albums that consist of songs that all over 7 minutes longer? You can't sell the songs seperately because they're over 7 minutes. But according to the rules, you can't just sell an album. What overrides what? And what about pricing. Example time:
Band has 3 song album that clocks in at 75 minutes. These do exist, I own several.
According to AppleRules, they can't sell the songs seperatelym since each song is over 7 minutes. However one of the other AppleRules:
So does this 3 song album cost $2.97 to buy? That's a whole lot of bang for the buck. Why can't they just offer
I'm trying to figure out what the big deal is.
Apple makes a freely available "QuickTime Streaming Server". Download it, install it. And stream your music through it. Its not that hard. Anyone with quicktime can then connect and listen to the music stream. Its not like apple really "forced fed anyone shit."
They just made it slightly harder for the RIAA to hold them accountable.
They still won't match my collection of Cassingles! (Apologies to The Onion)
"Why is it wrong? There are no rules to spelling. [...] If one society spells it differently then fine but you can not say it is wrong."
Gr8! Then i cun shpell any w4y i want! i'll d3finately te11 that to mai teechur NeXT time she gifs me un "F" for riting like a l33t h4x0r!
The music companies and Microsoft are pretty much unwilling to let go of DRM. Microsoft builds DRM they way they do because that's what music companies thin they want. And then the music companies use that DRM because it's there.
And meanwhile Apple cleans up on all of the online music business because they are the only ones trying to build something the customer will want to use instead of the music companies. So even though another company could come along and undercut Apple (like RealMedia is trying to do) they always present some aspect to their system that screws things up and makes the service unappealing to consumers.
Also, the secret spice in Apple's store is that it's not web based and uses a custom interface. So you get not only easy searching and purchasing, but management of your songs all at once. Kind of the way IE came into being as the dominant web browser, it was just there with the OS... and the player you use for music has more music waiting to be bought and enjoyed right there.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Hahahaha Good one...
So BMG, or another one of the major labels, who a few years ago, raised CD prices by $3 or so, and then complained that sales fell off, are going to undercut Apple to 35 cents? And use a no-DRM solution like Ogg Vorbis to boot?
By reading this sig, you agree to the terms of my sig license.
Visit a music mag sometime. It's not a bunch of people in three-piece suits sipping Earl Grey while they listen to new music on $350 headphones in sound-proof chambers.
New discs come in with the day's mail and pile up somewhere. Certain people (you know who you are) go through and pick out the good ones and hoard them in their desk drawers. Then people put remaining discs that look promising on the stereo (almost invariably a cheap one-piece with broken buttons sitting on top of a file cabinet with at least one drawer that nobody has the key to any longer), and if the rest of the room thinks it's crap, people start yelling to change the CD.
In a climate like that, something with spoken-word commercials every few minutes is going to piss off people who are trying to read and write. So it won't get played, and unless it's someone's favorite band, it will find its way to the bottom of the pile and won't get reviewed. Eventually someone's girlfriend will take it home and play it once and then lose it under the couch.
Insulting the people who are in the best position to convince the core audience to buy the music seems like a fantastic idea. With that kind of lateral thinking, it's a wonder you're not running a record company already.
"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
This does NOT mean that 45% of the music purchased from iTunes are albums.
Uh. That's exactly what it means.
Let's assume the fundamental unit of music measurement is the song, okay? Let's just ignore the fact that songs come in all different lengths, and just deal with songs as atomic units.
Apple sells 500,000 songs a week, on average. 275,000 of those songs are purchased individually, as singles. You click "Buy Song," and you get the song.
225,000 of those songs are downloaded as part of an album purchase. You click "Buy Album," and you download some number of songs, N, all as part of the same transaction.
Let's assume that N is 10, just for sake of illustrating the point. If N is 10, then each album has 10 songs on it. Since 225,000 songs are being sold as part of album purchases, that comes out to 22,500 albums sold per week.
Since N is not 10, the math doesn't work out so simply, but that's how it would work out if all albums had ten songs on them.
So yes, 45% of all music sold through ITMS, as measured by the song, is sold as part of an album.
The only person lying with numbers here is you, moosesocks.
Except here in the state of hockey, where a check is something you give someone when you really want the puck. Major difference between cheque and check.
blog |
Good rebut but it *was* bait. That guy posts the same thing on every Mac article.
As long as we keep giving the tyrants months and months of advance notice to keep moving their stockpiles across the border into the closest neighboring terrorist-sponsoring autocratic state, yes. They'll be in Lebanon or Iran or North Korea or wherever evil is allowed to run rampant.
Think about it. I say to you, "I know you've got stuff you're not supposed to have. I'm coming to get you. In, oh, I don't know, three to six months." What would you do? Hang on to the shit until I show up at your house?
Don't forget Canada, we spell the British way as well.
Do recall that during and before the 1700's, there were widely accepted (some alternate, some quasi-correct, some flat incorrect) and various spellings for MANY words. The US broke from British custom centuries before the rest of the "British speaking" world you cite.
If anything, it's just a case of divergent evolution from a commonly accepted and relatively, but not completely, modern ancestor of the currently accepted "English" language. See also colo(u)r, t(i|y)re, jail/gaol, curb/kerb, maneuver/manouevre, and many others. As I recall, years ago, most of the discrepancies had reasonably accepted alternate spellings.
Usually, the American spelling is more phonetic. Optimists might say this is an example of typical American efficiency. Pundits might say it's typical American illiteracy. I claim it's typical American obstinance, but hell, it could be all three.
See, having a slightly different language is the price we Americans pay for throwing off the shackles of British hegemony centuries before the British grew weary of their Empire. ;)
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
I remember having a version of Quicken back in the early '90's. At the end of the manaul, there were several appendices, one was entitled "Notes for Canadian Users". Most of it was concerned with differences in interest calucations (360 vs 365 day years etc.) but they close by saying "Also, you will notice this the only page in the manual on which the word "cheque" is spelled corectly."
So what's your point? At least Apple users get laid by somebody. And that's more than most Linux users (and any BSD users) can hope for.
Hey freaks: now you're ju
They're offering a deal to indie lables. The text doesn't say much new about the tech. What it talks about is the deal. This gives two groups time to react before the deal is signed. The big 5 can complain and try to improve their deals (they don't want competion, their power will be seen in the banner ads.) Competitors (MS, Real) can try to out-bid them for "Exclusive" deals. i.e. MS will pay them more if they don't sell on iTMS.
90 days would have all the indies onboard with the offers set. Now they might lose a few labels.
This is not a political statement. This is not legal advice. It's a frick'n Slasdot post. However: I'm Running For
I have visited these places and I've actually helped produce some of the listening parties for these sorts of people. I know what its like.
:-) Most reviewers are failed musicians with vendettas to prove they are right even though the public has said they weren't. Most of the reviewers I have enjoyed were actual playing musicians that understood the business and understood some of the bullshit that others have to put up with...they might have been annoyed by something like this, BUT they would have realized the uncertanty their breathern have in the new market and realize that unlike some folks giving you broken and unlistenable mixes (ie., its a trend to give away sealed walkman with the headphone glued into the thing and have return authorization postage given so these guys can send them back in a week or two -- most of the time, they don't make it back from what I understand and it ends up being a waste because the guys that are honest are screwed and the ones that aren't don't care).
:-)
As for insulting them...lets just say I'm on the other side of the glass
The point is, folks are trying to protect their interest. If someone wants to be petty about it and not review this because they are this petty, they would have had a very critical review anyways -- not critical in a good way, critical in a I'm Smarter Than The Band Actually Getting Played And Smarter Than You Piddly Bastards Reading This...thats the kinda reviewer I'm happy not to see recieve any of my friends recordings
clif
I've seen several albums where you can only buy the whole album, not individual songs. I've also seen albums for 12,13, even 15 dollars. So why can't the indies do that? Seems like a "you're all equal, but the majors are more equal" (w/apologies to Orwell)
"Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
One of the things that MS has going against it is that such deals are predicated on trust. The labels have to trust the technology vendor not going to screw them. Putting aside the jihad of whether or not it is deserved, MS has a well established reputation for shady and illegal business practices. Why would you ever do business with a company like that if you don't have to?
There's a great value added benefit to dealing with a technology company that is headed by an entertainment company CEO (Steve Jobs, of course, runs his own movie studio called Pixar). As long as Steve continues in his post, Apple will continue to be able to extract a few pennies extra in profit versus any deal MS will be able to make.
Are you Richard Simmons?
What's so bad about being lazy? What if there was a war and nobody showed up?
Da Blog
This clearly isn't true for the big labels. Some "hits" can only be bought if you take the whole album -- they won't sell Don MacLean's "American Pie" for $0.99
Sorry, no, Don McLean's American Pie is 8 minutes 35 seconds, and as such is not an exception to the rule they are giving the indies.
Some albums also stick to the $0.99-per rule past the $9.95-per-original-disk rule
that is acceptable according to the rules apple is giving the indies, too. from the article:
Full albums are recommended to be $9.99 or lower
Spelling check "cheque" is different from what the average person expects. It is, therefore, wrong.
Simple rule: "Check" is a verb. "Cheque" is a noun referring to a bank note used for transferring currenecy to another person or corporation.
It's correct in every English speaking country outside the USA, and is therefore correct. Check is wrong here.
God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
As for the paradox, the quote from the article says that you can't insist that your album be sold album-only. However, I assume that in the case of an album with over-7-minute songs only, it would be sold as album-only.
This is a good thing, though, when you think about it... We're all pissed at the big labels for their game of one or two singles and tons of filler and then insisting we buy the whole album. Steve stepped up and said no, you can not make an album to be sold album-only (although, you could simply make all the songs really long... but the labels aren't going to do that - they still want radio airplay, which means shorter songs). The no-album-only sales simply prevents 'filler' albums.
-T
Tell that to they guys at Canadian Tyre, so that when you shoplift there, and put the stuff you stole in the boot of your car, you don't go to gaol.
Sorry, but we mix and match where we see fit. I generally refer to the English used in Parliament, which is not British, nor is it American.
God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
This is insightful?! Ok, so he was right up to the "too expensive part". But those of you who think that Apple's are too expensive, should go check out the price of iBooks. Starting at $999 for a loaded packge including DVD/CD Burner combo, firewire, a *really* nice keyboard, OSX, a high powered 3D card, and of course iTunes itself.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
-T
I find it hard to believe that mike oldfield's amarok will cost .99c (it has only one 60minute track)... the 7 minute limit will probably allow albums like that to sell for the "normal" price.
(it's a great album btw, one of my all time favs!)
THIS SHIT IS FUNNY! MOD UP!!
I know. I'm getting one if I can sell my current Windows laptop for >$800, or close to it.
Ebay's only going up to $400, though, and I JUST got it 6 months ago.
I made a boneheaded mistake.
The alternative explanation being that Mac users are honest people who will pay a fair price for music.
Call me an optimist (or an idiot), but I'm guessing the same is true for most PC users.
Sorry - I took the details down from that page.
It wasn't wrath or lawyers that asked me to pull it. It was a friend of mine that works there.
I sincerely didn't know yesterday's presentation was supposed to be confidential. In fact I thought it was like an indie-music press conference.
Nobody's mad, though. Honest mistake.
Sorry guys!
--
Derek Sivers, CD Baby
http://www.cdbaby.com
lol why do you even read the comments? to chase down post/comment'ers (ohno, my spl!) and judge them based on a spelling error? Don't you have anything else to do?
Probably one of those people who watches 'Cops' and yells things at the tv, like "See! That's why I hate minoritys! They all commit crimes!"
--Pat / zippy@cs.brandeis.edu
"Check" may be the "preferred" spelling for many Americans, but can be considered the "correct modern spelling" only if you:
(a) don't get out much;
(b) are a modern American (see (a), above); or
(c) subscribe to such vacuuous notions as "American exceptionalism" (see (b), above).
My theory is that American Express continues to offer Travellers Cheques (not "Checks," and not in a 2-cent denomination that would value your comments appropriately) as a quaint reminder of the fact that only did the British invent the language (along with the banking system), but that Americans have yet to reconcile themselves to their own "chiefly British" heritage.
Also, to best of my knowledge, I've never seen the word grammar spelled with an "e," though it's occasionally pronounced as though it did if:
(a) you're a resident of Texas;
(b) you never learned English (see (a), above); or
(c) believe that English is spoken only by the English.
I wonder how many Americans haven't cringed when watching a press conference that included both George Bush and Tony Blair at the same podium discussing some important issue and secretly hoped that Dubbya would just shut up and let Blair do all the talking, thinking "It sounds more intelligent when he says it."
Literacy has been passe for decades, I'll agree. About the same length of time that students have been entering high school unable to read. Or write.
--
non-chiefly-British American
Simple rule: "Check" is a verb.
True. It's also a noun. It's also an adjective, describing a pattern of alternating squares.
"Cheque" is a noun referring to a bank note used for transferring currenecy to another person or corporation.
Wrong. "Check" is the word you're looking for there.
It's correct in every English speaking country outside the USA, and is therefore correct.
No, "cheque" is wrong outside the USA, too.
Let f = fraction of purchases that are albums and Y be the total number of purchases. The total songs sold are TS = 10 fY + 1 (1-f)Y. The fraction of songs sold as parts of albums is (10 fY)/TS. Setting this latter fraction to .45 yields an f of 0.07563, or 7.563%.
.4500.
For 100,000 purchases, 7,563 are albums (75,630 songs) and 92,437 are single songs. Total songs sold are 168,067. The fraction of songs sold as part of albums is 75,630/168,067 =
Ok, I'm sure others are thinking as well, what about any other digital content? I personally have been waiting for a proper system to buy from (and distribute with) games, films, videos, your DNA patterns etc...
The sad irony is how few hits the linked Google search actually brought up. Nice try, though.
Dude, you have GOT to get some new material. You keep cutting and pasting the same tired old story in apple.slashdot.org over and over. Your 1996 iron is tired and your karma is weak.
This simply is not true. I have downloaded many classical music selections from the iTunes Music Store that are well over the 7 minute size. Search the store for "Evgeny Kissin" - the result shows for example all three movements of the Rachmaninoff Piano Concerto #2 at 99 cents each. also each movement is over 11 minutes long. This is just one of many!
It's still a brand new service. So open up iTunes, go to the music store and click "Requests and Feedback" link and tell them you'd like a gift feature.
All editorial writers ever do is come down from the hill after the battle is over and shoot the wounded.
It may be just certain genres to which the 7-minute thing applies; it certainly doesn't apply to all the tracks at the iTMS. I've seen tracks over 16 minutes long there that are still available individually for 99 cents each; the thing is, as far as I can tell, they're all things like big band / swing, classical, and film score tracks (what I like to consider real alternative music ;) . Presumably the fact that the overwhelming majority of songs in popular music are just a few minutes long, while tracks from other kinds of music are frequently much longer (and hence having them available only as part of album purchases would mean a lot fewer individual tracks available in those formats), has something to do with it, but I don't know...
Most of the music you can buy from iTMS is already on the P2P networks. Given the choice between some Spyware-laden P2P software trying to hit 20 different hosts until one lets me download, then finding the song mangled or cut short, all the while having the RIAA breathing down my neck, and simply paying 99 cents for a high-quality copy, I'll gladly pay the 99 cents.
Holy shit. You work for Apple and you don't even know the difference between know and no? No wonder they've been fucking up software updates lately (like 10.2.6 which re-introduced the DNS bug that was fixed in 10.2.5). What the fuck are you guys using for software CM anyway? Some employee's iPod which he then decided to wipe when he encountered one of the many bugs in the new firmware? Jesus. I love Apple (in a gay fanboy kind of way) but this is fucking ridiculous.
Unfortunately, as much as I wish it were otherwise, a lot of the people saying "Macs are more expensive" are actually right. Yes, Apple's laptops are price-competetive, but their desktops really aren't, especially when you're looking at speed.
Case in point: it sure would be nice if I could play Unreal Tournament 2003. My 700MHz eMac will sort of attempt to run it, but at the lowest settings it's too slow to be playable. I'm told this is largely due to the video card (32MB GeForce2 MX) rather than the processor, although I don't really know.
A 1GHz eMac with a 32MB Radeon 7500 is $999.
A 1GHz iMac with a 32MB GeForce4 MX is $1799.
A 1GHz PowerMac with 64MB GeForce4 MX is $1499 (plus monitor).
A dual 1.25GHz PowerMac with a 64MB Radeon 9000 Pro is $1999 (plus monitor).
Would the $1499 PowerMac be fast enough to make me happy playing that game? Maybe, I'm not sure. I bet the $999 eMac wouldn't be. I can build a 2.4GHz Athlon system with a nice video card for a hell of a lot less than that, even if you add the cost of Windows.
Of course this has nothing to do with iTunes, which works beautifully.
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
Yes, it's sad when people have ethics and (somewhat redundant) a sense of morality. I believe strongly that you should be allowed to steal anything you want. "Nice car! Mine now!".
This shows extraordinary ignorance, and merely confirms a stereotype of Americans as insular and myopic, with no knowledge of or interest in the world outside their borders. You may check the Oxford English Dictionary for the difference between the words check and cheque.
Oh and by the way we are speaking English, which originated in a country named, er, England. American English, Irish, Pidgin etc. are variations from the English defined in the OED and as such are dialects, no more.
May I apologise for offending anyone other than the person who posted the message I am replying to.
With internet streaming, I can stream my legitimate music from home to the office, where I can listen to it. This is perfectly legitimate, no? Just because someone doesn't want you to do something legitimate, because it has POTENTIAL to be misused, doesn't mean you should shy away from it.
I don't blame Apple for yanking the feature, but don't blame legitimate users for it happening.
They should promote this *and* shut down pirates. They'll be promoting their future and protecting their rights. Go ask Dr. Seuss' widow about the Cat In The Hat. Came very close to losing the character because she/they didn't enforce copyright against the many pirates. Then you saw an explosion of the character in products, theme parks, etc... Dump the pirates and go with the smartest legit method. They may be better at this than many of us think.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Apple Computer, the newest music distribution company? Let's not forget that with Apple's newly acquired library of music they will (if they haven't already) be financially encouraged to join those who want everlasting copyright power. So, as someone should remind the /. audience who is quick to react to shiny new objects and services, don't be so quick to get warm fuzzies when you think of Apple Computer. There is a more important bargain with society that still needs to be addressed anytime we're talking about matters of copyright.
Digital Citizen
I know this is way off topic but for $799 plus tax and S&H Apple selling overstock/returned/refurbished iBooks (G3/CD/20GB/700MHz/128k) for $799. I just ordered one for my grand parents.
There are other models too - with combo drive and faster processors. Take a look at The Apple Store and click the link on the lower left bottom of the page to "Special Deals: great prices on limited offers".
It's a good way to get a Mac without blowing a lot of money and if you like it, eBay the one you bought and your Wintel/Linux box and get a more expensive new Mac.
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
No. By Syria I mean, surprise-surprise, Syria. There are no illegal weapons in Israel.
If you're talking about the fact that Israel has nuclear weapons, then yes, that's true. And you'd better be glad they do, too. Otherwise there would have been towelheads in Jerusalem and it would have been the goddamn crusades all over again.
That link is supposed to be store.apple.com
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
Lebanon??!! Lebanon is a multiparty parliamentary "democracy." Furthermore, it's constitution guarantees over-representation of Maronite Christian parties. Most of these parties are pro-Israel. The most powerful are Phalangists, a Spanish word for Fascist.
Of course, Zionism is quite compatible with Fascism. Many prominent Zionists, such as Menachim Begin and Yhitzak Shamir were openly Fascist. In a 1948 joint letter to the New York Times, Hannah Arendt, Albert Einstein and several other prominent Zionists said,
"Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our time is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the 'Freedom Party' (Tnuat HaHerut), a political party closely akin to its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine
Meanwhile, Shamir's Sternists had several years earlier sent the Nazi German government a note reading in part,
" 3. The establishment of the historic Jewish state on a national and totalitarian basis, bound by a treaty with the German Reich, would be in the interest of a maintained and strengthened future German position of power in the Near East."
"Proceeding from these considerations, the NMO in Palestine, under the condition the above-mentioned national aspirations of the Israeli freedom movement are recognized on the side of the German Reich, offers to actively take part in the war on Germany's side."
Sharon is no prize either. His own Supreme Court finding him responsible for the summary excecution of thousands of Palestinian refugees in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps. His career as a terrorist started much earlier. His 101 Special Commandos existed for only five months before killing 70 Palestinian civilians in 1953. David Ben Gurion once said of him, "If Arik sharon could learn to tell the truth he would make a fine officer."
That's very cute, the way you think a tiny island in the northern Atlantic is still relevant to the world at large.
Ever since 1945, it's been Pax Americana, baby. Britain is a leftover, Europe's vermiform appendix.
...I say spud.
/.) is concerned.
Spelling is subjective and more than a little arbitrary, especially where the English language (and
(tig)
Ignorance and prejudice and fear
Walk hand in hand
Only WAN sharing is not allowed, you CAN stream to your local LAN. The point was always for local network sharing, just not internet sharing.
One problem I see with letting anyone post a song for download is that 1) think of all the noise that will be added to the searchs and 2) imagine all the spammers/jammers that will use it to list their songs with the same title as popular songs.
There is going to have to be some cost of entry associated with this of else it will fill up with crap.
Where outside the USA is "cheque" wrong?
God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
Lebanon??!! Lebanon is a multiparty parliamentary "democracy."
Hizzbollah. Next.
Of course, Zionism is quite compatible with Fascism.
So? So's American representative democracy.
His own Supreme Court finding him responsible for the summary excecution of thousands of Palestinian refugees in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps.
You got that backwards. The conclusion of the tribunal was that those alleged events simply never happened. You've fallen for the propaganda, my friend.
You could only hope and pray that you might someday be in the presence of a man as great as Ariel Sharon.
Everywhere. "Cheque" is an incorrect spelling. It's not right. Anywhere, ever.
The NY Times has an editorial that seems relevant to this entire discussion. Their take is that the RIAA has shot itself in the foot so many times and that Apple's iTMS is a feasible solution to the woes of the contemporary music economy. I can't agree more. Especially relevant is their pointing out that Apple's independence from the interests of the big corporations is critical. I think the policy that Apple is reportedly pursuing demonstrates their ability to be an independent, while remaining practical and responsible to all parties (artists and consumers). I would like to also add that the Slashdot community, as a community of vocal critics, needs to be careful not to jump to conclusions. Face it, corporations are here to stay. We therefore need to temper our responses to favor responsible corporations that demonstrate positive contributions to society. This means that we cannot call them 'evil' when they try to keep secrets for business purposes or cover their backs legally. The Register article that criticizes their lack of beta testing of iSync is a good example of positive criticism. However, tearing apart Apple when they modify a product such as iTunes to protect themselves from prosecution is out of line. Would we have them wait until it becomes a legal issue and the RIAA shuts down their participation in iTMS due to breach of contract? This doesn't help anyone. Instead, we should look upon the RIAA, in the case of iTMS, as being a base from which Apple can expand offerings to benefit the little guys. We should have patience and speak with the big picture in mind.
The URL for the article is http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/07/opinion/07SAT4.h tml
It requires registration, so here's the article:
__Downloading Music Over the Internet Without Feeling Like a Criminal__
By VERLYN KLINKENBORG
Hardly a week goes by without another salvo in the music wars, which have been going on now for years. And week by week the shape of the struggle seems to change.
What set it all off was the emergence in 1999 of Napster, the file-swapping brainstorm that allowed computer users to download free music files. Napster was enormously destabilizing. It undermined the economic logic of $17.99 CD's by making the physical object itself, the CD in its jewel case, irrelevant. The recording industry knew exactly what to make of Napster, calling it theft, plain and simple. Recording artists had a harder time. Many musicians agreed that file swapping was a form of theft, but many of them also argued that their recording contracts were a form of theft, too. At the very least, file swapping became the perfect industry excuse for the prolonged downturn in CD sales, whether it was the real cause or not.
Since then, there have been calls for copy-protected CD's and for government intervention. The recording industry has been fighting for its life with the zeal of desperation and ineptitude. It brought a farcical suit, since dropped, for billions of dollars against four file-swapping students, and it has sought to snoop on private computers. Reports say that it has also planned to hack its way into the machines of file swappers.
The industry knows that its future depends on somehow making music files available for purchase and downloading over the Internet. And yet every pay-per-play music downloading service the recording industry has sanctioned has been notable mainly for clumsiness, proprietary paranoia and a condescending attitude toward its customers.
It's clear what computer-literate music lovers really want: a simple, elegant interface; a broad catalog of music; quick, high-quality downloading; and an approach that doesn't treat the consumer like a criminal wearing a house-arrest shackle. The new Apple music service, the iTunes Music Store, should point the way, especially when it or similar services spread to the Windows platform.
It's ironic that Apple should have introduced the first really successful commercial Inter
One problem Apple is going to encounter with its music store model is with small electronic artists who take a lot of liberties when sampling and mixing. These artists, kid606 for example, currently release a lot of their material in countries with loose copyright law as regards music and then have their CDs sold as imports in other countries to get round such laws.
I am sure that the big labels will not allow such artists to take part in Apples store (they will demand apple take down their songs due to the amount of uncleared samples they contain). The net effect of this probably won't affect the majority of people who will use itunes but will mean that itunes will be lacking a vibrant and new scene which is seeing a lot of interesting and creative things happen within it.
A lot of recent underground electronic music samples, distorts and mixes pop, old and new with other more obscure variety's of music. Sometimes it is impossible to clear theses songs and have them released legally due to the sheer number of samples used or the fact that a sampled artist objects to his/her snippet being used in a song. Now whatever your views on sampling may be I am sure you will admit that it is a shame to see a service as promising as itunes be deprived of such an interesting musical scene.
_________________________________________________
Anyone who has the CD can rip it themselves. That is also true for vinyl, but that's a bit more work, and some folks will pay for the convenience (either that or their vinyl is already scratched).
I would think that replacing music that you've misplaced somewhere over the years is much more common.
If I'm replacing an album I rememer fondly from my youth, I already know that there are only three good tracks on it. I'll buy those tracks, not the album.
If there's a new album from an artist I like, then all of the tracks are potentially great. That is unless the 30 second clip is really bad. Beside, if I'm a fan of an artist, I want to believe that all twelve/whatever tracks will be wonderful. And it would be just terrible if I skipped the one that turned out to be the big hit.
Track buying will be prevelant when people aren't sold on the artist yet, just the song.
Apple has no reason to sign up smaller indies. This music store costs money to run - employee time being a big cost. They'll service what they can service for rational dollars and not add the extra people needed to service a gaggle of small timers. Those people will have to work a distribution deal with someone bigger.
Maybe this kind of service will drive a new distrbution system for indies.
And it's even more ridiculous to think that Apple will let some artists not use any DRM.
I'd just like to point out that Apple hasn't aquired anything except the right to sell the content (for a 3 year period according to the article). Unlike the record companies, Apple does not own the copyrights to the songs they sell. It's simply a reseller deal, they buy the songs at wholesale price and then sell them on to customers. So I really don't see any reason for Apple to care more about the "everlasting copyright power" than the music store around the corner does.
Bandwidth costs Apple around 20 cents per gigabyte of transfer. This comes to 14/100ths of a cent. Remember, trailers on apple.com/trailers regularly push 25 megs.
Bandwidth is not the reason for the 7-minute cap. More likely, it's an out for the labels, enabling them to push an album of 5 long tracks for $10 instead of $4.99.
Also, I've noticed some long songs being sold on the Apple Music Store for $1.99, so there's more to this story than a flat 7-minute exclusion.
Kevin Fox