Microsoft, OD2 Start European Music Service

useosx writes "Reuters is reporting that 'Microsoft Corp. announced on Thursday a pact with Europe's biggest digital music outfit, OD2, to form the continent's first major a la carte online download service. ... The move marks the first time European consumers can purchase song downloads off the Internet for under one euro ($1.13), and without requiring a monthly subscription, bringing the fee in line with the popular Apple Computer iTunes service, which is not yet available in Europe.'" Other stories: the Guardian, BBC.

Comments

Huh?

[tds67]

Fans can copy tracks, burn them to CDs and transfer them to other devices as much as they want "within reason", he added.

And what, pray tell, would be "unreasonable"?

Re:Huh?

[gerf]

Fans can copy tracks, burn them to CDs and transfer them to other devices as much as they want "within reason", he added.

Obviosly, "within reason" is as little as they can get you to agree to, without damaging sales a heckuva lot.

They really don't specify about restrictions in these articles. Which is unfortunate, because that's what people really need to look at. Isn't it the big companies (MS, *AAs, SCO) that are telling us more and more to watch what we're doing with copywrights, to stay 'legal?' More info needed please!

Oh, and i hope this doesn't work, as i don't seeing Media Player having some property that implies to the general populace that it is better in some proprietary way.

I hate to say it..

[grub]

I think they'll make buckets of money; it requires Windows Media Player 9 which has a much larger user base than that of the Mac and the Apple player which is getting half a million song downloads a week.

Re:I hate to say it..

[Hawthorne01]

Sure, they'll use it, just like Buy Music does. And more than likely, they'll re-create Buymusic's spectacular LACK of success, too.

It's not enough to beat consumers into legal downloads with a stick. Unless there are positive reasons to switch to legal downloads, people won't do it.

Re:I hate to say it..

[Hawthorne01]

and there wasn't any BS DRM making them unusable

And there is the fundamental difference between iTMS and all other major label efforts to date. Simple, consistent, non-invasive DRM. I strongly doubt that the creators of Palladium have the same DRM in mind that Apple uses.

Still nothing for non-MS Europeans then...

[Alkarismi]

British FreeBSD & Linux user here.
Even though we Europeans seem to be pulling ahead in Open Source deployments we still can't get a music store that doesn't lock people further into Windows... shame!

No more albums only singles

[capt.Hij]

With this new emphasis on singles I wonder if artists will be motivated to put together whole albums. Many of my favorite songs are the the ones that did not get much air play but were found on albums that had a hit or two on them. I hope that artists do not become driven to work on "hits" and ignore the practice of making the songs that they themselves enjoy. The practice of producing collections may become rare which would be bad for music.

Re:No more albums only singles

[hackstraw]

This is a reaction to the market. I havn't really seen singles for sale since the early 80s or so, the only way to recently get singles was in mp3 format. Look at ppls mp3 collections (that they download, not rip from their own collections), I doubt that they have more than 1 complete album.

Also, I'm pleased that you used the word "album". Many people (read marketing ppl) mistake the word "album" for "CD". A CD is a piece of plastic and aluminum, an album is a collection of songs, much like a photo album is a collection of pictures.

Re:No more albums only singles

[cheesekeeper]

For the Clearchannel slave bands, I don't see any change. They are already incredibly hit-driven. Without a hit, they don't get Clearchannel airtime, they don't get an MTV TRL video, and they don't go double-plus-platinum with their CD sales. I would argue that for these mass market pop groups, one of the chief reasons they actually bother to make an entire album is because no one would pay $18 for a CD with four tracks. Even if the other ten tracks are filler, it makes it an easier sell.

By-track sales may reduce album creation by these bands. Good riddance, I say.

Re:No more albums only singles

[Pendersempai]

I hope that artists do not become driven to work on "hits" and ignore the practice of making the songs that they themselves enjoy.

One alternate view: With the rise of singles and the fall of the album, I can be completely sure that I enjoy every single track I purchase. I couldn't give two hoots what the artist likes; it's my money.

I'd say this is the more egalitarian, meritocratic method of economic survival of the fittest.

Whoa Microsoft is copying Apple...

[chrisgeleven]

...oh whoops, the DRM is only 100 times more restrictive and whoops, the WMA quality is worse then AAC. Kind of reminds me of the difference between OS X and Windows XP.

Once again - good enough

[Dark Paladin]

Let's not kid ourselves: for all of Microsoft's talk of "innovation", the one thing they're really good at is seeing another idea that works, making their own version of it, then making it "good enough" that their desktop monopoly can make money off of it.

So, let's take a look at their new music service:

Media Type: Windows Media Audio 9.

The Good: No big surprise, and depending on who you ask, it sounds better than MP3's at the same format. Anybody with either a new computer or someone who upgrades to Windows Media Player 9 should have it work just fine.

The Bad: Nobody but a Windows user can use it. But since the other big competitor Apple only lets it work with Macs, that means that a 4% user base is now hitting against a 90% user base - so it's all balanced in the end, I guess. Apple should have their service in Windows at the end of this year, and Windows Media Player 9 should be available "someday" for OS X, so then we can compare apples to apples (no pun intended).

Depending on who you ask, Apple's use of AAC isn't really a full open standard, since they've got the security hooks inside - but it's a far more open standard than WMA (Windows Media Audio). Any chance we'll see either one on Linux? Anyone? Guys?

The License:

The Good: No subscription fee, which I think is the #1 draw of the new music formats. Most of the songs are around 0.99 euros, which comes out to be $1.15 or so per track. And you can copy some to your portable players or burn CD tracks with them.

The Bad: So far, this is where Apple's service is kicking the other two's services right in the Jimmy. Apple's system is cut and dried: Every song, up to 3 computers, unlimited iPods, unlimited CD burns.

With Buymusic.com and Microsoft's service - it depends on the song. Maybe you can put it in a portable, maybe not. Maybe you can burn it, maybe not. So that means before you buy each song you'll have to either say "Well, I will only play these songs on this computer forever!", or say "Hm - let's see what the license is before I make my Ultimate Dance Track for the Anime Pool Party this Saturday.".

It's something the "average joe" won't care about - until one day, they go to do something, and don't understand why Song A can be copied/burned, but Song B can not. Will Apple use this in their marketing? Who knows - and odds are, people won't think enough to care.

The Selection:

The Good: 200,000 songs to start off with.

The Bad: No clue - I haven't seen the line up.

Final score:

Undecided. Microsoft's new music service looks more like BuyMusic.com's, only it's in Europe. Same media format, same licensing structure - only it's going to be inside the Windows Media Player and not just a web page for downloading.

Odds are, Apple's service will still be better with the "one license for every track" rule. But as history has shown, Micorosoft does not necessarily have to be "better" than the competition - usually "good enough" will do to make them money.

Either way, if Apple wants to get the bucks before competitor #1 eats the market, it needs to get its ass moving on its Windows service and those deals in Europe.

European investigation into Media Player

[Lochin Rabbar]

Anyone still wondering why MS is under investigation in Europe for using Media Player to extend their monopoly now has their answer. The recording cartel and the OS monopolists have got together to tie up the market for downloadable singles. The result overpriced tracks, low quality, DRM and no choice.

But I don't think they'll have the same success...

[Kjella]

I think they'll make buckets of money; it requires Windows Media Player 9 which has a much larger user base than that of the Mac and the Apple player which is getting half a million song downloads a week.

Apple has good karma when it comes to music, like their "Rip, Mix, Burn" slogan, and people in some sense trust them not to be unreasonable. With Windows, I don't know of anyone that has the same attitude.

Another point is that Apple users very often have the Apple Ipod, while Windows users have pretty much everything, much of which probably doesn't support the DRM too well, if WMA at all.

I'll definately consider the Apple iTMS when it comes to Windows. But this service? Sorry, but I don't feel like having Microsoft control my digital rights (after the purchase, oh wait, the licencing), I don't trust them to. Isn't that what this "Trusted computing" is all about? Trust them? Ain't going to happen.

Kjella

Re:Apple zealots won't use it

[noewun]

As for iTMS on Windows, why Apple would do it?

To make obscene amounts of money.

Apple has announced a Windows version of iTunes, and thus the iTMS, will be available by the end of the year. I believe someone even posted the ad seeking programmers for the project here.