Slashdot Mirror
Free iTunes Over a Browser
Ade writes "One may now listen and search for Apple iTunes music via this front end or any webserver running the perl script called iTMS-4-ALL, which was written by Jason Rohrer, programmer of the secure filesharing system MUTE who hopes the script 'helps revive everyone's ITMS interfaces.' Music activists Downhill Battle, who organised the Grey Tuesday protests for disseminating censored music, run a copy of the script and say 'this is a cute tool, but it has the potential to become a powerful weapon to fight the major record label monopoly' in the ways they outline. Playing the music requires QuickTime for the ~600kb downloadable MP4 snippets to be heard." Update: 04/19 01:41 GMT by H : Thanks to Aaron at Punboy for sending us a link to a faster server.
Misleading title. This front end merely lets you listen to the samples, not actually download/listen to the actual purchased songs.
And the masses cried out, "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0!"
why didn't apple make itunes work with any browser to begin with?
This doesn't help you steal music. RTFA RTFA RTFA kthx.
Look at some of the suggested uses for this... Constantly downloading free previews? Using them for P2P? What makes you think Apple will allow their service to be abused like this? They control both the server and the only client that they want to be accessing it, it would be trivial for them to break this without affecting anyone using iTunes at all.
It's this zero-tolerance attitude that will cement hardware DRM's inevitability. Apple tried to meet customers halfway and they still get attacked.
RTFA, this is nothing about illegally downloading copies of the iTunes songs.
you can use vlc instead of quicktime if you use an OSS system. Now the ITMS itself is going to be slashdotted, whoops...
Having a P2P service pulling album covers and other metadata from Apple's pay service is as likely to be considered stealing as pulling copyrighted music without paying for it. Even checking their database from a non-iTunes application may raise hackles. It's a cute hack, but why risk upsetting Apple when they're already providing the fairest online music store to date?
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
Is it sane to think of basing any sort of client on apple's metadata, surely they will mess with any clients trying to do it. So while this software works, now, will it work for long? Maybe if someone builds a second compatible database of the metadata ...
Never underestimate the dark side of the Source
I think that anyone interested in this project should send a letter to Apple (email or snail-mail) saying thanks, and spend a few dollars at their store. Perhaps if they see that non-Windows and non-Mac users are interested and willing to pay for music on their service, they'll keep the protocol the same, and even release an official client for it.
Disconnect and self-destruct, one bullet at a time.
would be to port iTunes to Linux. I can't think of any reason how that could hurt Apple.
Linux/BSD users already can listen to and download music shared over iTunes using TunesBrowser. The project is rather young, so a do-it-yourself compile is necessary, but it does present a very nice, clean GUI interface to iTunes shares.
(Incidentally, if you'd RTFA, your would notice that this project actually allows you to browse samples from the iTMS store, and has nothing to do with network song sharing.)
Anonymous Luddite: "What do you think of the dehumanizing effects of the Internet?"
Andy Grove: "Not Much."
There is at least one well-known way to do it.
mplayer and faad seem to play em just fine (tm)
/. won't let me, junk characters my ass.
I tried to paste the output but
I think the point here is that now u can make and use any frontend u like for iTunes. The actual script doesnt seem to be too useful (though it shows that it can be done).
.... well lets see what happens.
The site claims that but it has the potential to become a powerful weapon to fight the major record label monopoly
> This doesn't help you steal music. RTFA RTFA RTFA kthx.
:-P
Of course it does. It makes it simple to preview the music you're going to STEAL, so you don't waste anytime STEALING the crap stuff (which would make you just frustrated and quit STEALING). Now there's a simple way to preview the music and just STEAL all the quality stuff. Geddit?
It would cost them a great deal of money to port iTunes to Linux, and it is not immediately clear that such a port would provide them with any tangible financial benefit. duh.
"He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
I'd like to thank the jilted, bitter, preachy musicians who created the Downhillbattle.org website and are hosting this script. The search engine is actually more responsive than iTunes, so I can find the songs I want to buy from iTunes even faster!
Please, guys. Get off your high horse and work on finding a new way to do things rather than just trying to take the old system down. When you find a better way, the rest will work itself out.
Anyone want to make a bet on how long it will take for Apple to issue a Cease & Desist order against this one? Reverse engineering has got to be against their TOS... It's not illegal, but it removes the iTunes interface that Apple has been working so hard to promote.
Domain name registration for $8.79 per year
879domains.co
....the first step in allowing us linux and BSD users to listen to iTunes shared music. While we can share music (and its well documented) we cannot, to the best of my knowledge, listen to others music without using iTunes. Perhaps if this is doable, somebody can make a hack to allow us to listen to shared music?
It's already been done. Personally, I don't know how well it works, but it sounds promising. IIRC, the Rhythmbox (iTunes clone for GNOME) guys are planning on including it when it's "ready".
(The hack in this article is unrelated to iTunes' sharing.)
Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
If that is your intention then there is nothing stopping you from just using iTunes itself for this purpose.
http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares
They claim that this is great because you don't have to use the iTunes interface. But the interface to this perl script is horrible. It reminds me how perfect Apple got it the first time.
From what I gathered from looking at packet traces a while ago was that iTunes authentication was done through HTTP using SSL.
Why recomend quicktime? How about VLC, or MPlayer? Both play the files just fine. If you're going to go the closed-source route, just run iTunes in the first place.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
No, try and keep your scope proper next time you post. iTunes is, and always has been, entirely free to download. The Apple Music Store meanwhile is also free to use, although the actual purchasing of music costs money as the definition of 'purchase' requires.
"Stumble before you crawl"
It seems slashdot readers "get" the idea of free software, why is it hard to understand that the same ideas exist in the music community?
Instead, I'd like to see some productive discussions of those artists that allow their music to be freely traded.
Linkage: (there just has to be some music you can enjoy at one of the following)
Live Music Archive
Furthurnet Band List
Etree BitTorrent Downloads
Let's face it, neither side will ever back down from this fight. And why should they? Nobody's really losing. Except for some people being inconvenienced by some DRM (that is broken as quickly as it's made). The thing is, in large groups, people are sheep. If they're inconvenienced by the threat of lawsuits or a levy imposed on blank media, they'll just wait for someone else to act. And if they see someone else copy music, they'll do it too.
The people will do what's easiest and cheapest, and the corporations will do what's most profitable. Do you see the masses changing to independent music? Switching to college radio? Trashing their beloved personal players? Nah, they're sheep, they'll copy the same songs, listen to the same radio, and buy the same CDs as always. All nicely packaged by the corporations for easy consumption.
RIAA will introduce more laws, tighter DRMs. Whoopee. Both will be broken. Rinse, repeat. And then one day, 3/4 Americans will be criminals, and 3/4 the price of a blank Canadian CD will be levies. We'll then reset everything back to zero and start over again. As long as noone dies eh? At least noone well-publicized on TV-for-the-masses...
Do you know why? Human nature.
Look, apple isn't doing anything heroic. They're not offering anything special.
I buy completely legit, DRM free, albums...any album you can name for $7 each, brand new (shipped to your door for that price). That comes out to about $.50 a song, and I can resell the CD's when I'm done.
CD's are only expensive for the impatient. The "oh, I can't wait 5 days, I must have that song NOW!" crowd. But if you can wait 5 days. FIVE days. Then you can get great deals.
Or there are used CD's.
But I don't get why Apple is "magic" but KMart offereing essentially the same thing is "evil".
Look. I'm typing this on a powerbook. I own 6 apple computers, I have 2 iPods. But I don't think iTMS is magic. its not special. I don't think Apple has done anything special except convince certain people that iTMS is something revolutionary.
Is isn't.
Paying $10/CD for 128kb DRM encrusted music may be your idea of fantastic. But I think I'll pass on that kind of generosity.
Haven't looked at the script, but I know that some iTunes pages are HTTP/SSL encrypted with a fixed AES key. If this script requires those pages, it must be "circumventing" that encryption, hence DMCA problems. Of course, it's possible that they're not using encrypted pages...
"This is an amusing distraction that Apple will (and should) shut down. Fast."
Wow. People like you exist.
Okay.
1) Why do you think you need to "defend" apple against something that doesn't harm them?
2) What do you care if apple shuts this down? It must be tough for people to be around you with your misplace "I think I know what I'm talking about" attitude.
I mean, somebody writes a front-end to iTMS, doesn't hurt anything, its a cool hack. And you think apple should sue.
You're one of those people who think iTMS is a special gift that keeps the forces of evil at bay. You hold up iTMS like a magic totem that protects you against...I don't know... being such an asshole.
No really, get a life. Let apple worry about apple. You seem more worried about it than Apple themselves.
Whudda you care?
I mean, you seem more concerned with this than Apple. I don't see that it hurts apple in the least.
No wonder we have bad copyright laws and the DMCA. People like you think multi-billion dollar corporations need special help against a kid and a perl script.
You're like a little Mr. Helper here for apple, aren't you?
One useful application of this would be to set up a way to monitor the "Just added" list at iTMS, looking for artists you're interested in.
Another useful one, if possible, would be to divide the "just added" list by genre, so users could get a list with all the oldies taken out, or with all the audiobooks excluded, etc.
As it is, the list provided by iTMS just gets too long.
What do you care? You don't run the server.
What's the consensus for someone who links directly to a popular legal resource/file from some other site? Whatever it is, this script is doing a similar function.
These people are going backwards. To fight the music oppression, anonymous file sharing and breaking DRM after paying for it Are Not the answers. Boycott or fight in court are the answers. Either boycott or fight the law through civil disobedience. Being anonymous to avoid the consequences Is Not civil disobedience.
Boycott is Costless, Saves Money, and the Easiest thing anyone can do. Why keep feeding the beast, and whine how it's treating you?
What do you care about Apple and their interface. If you like it, then fine. Use it. If you don't, then don't. But you seem waaaay too concerned about making sure Apple's iTMS marketing pitch is accepted blindly.
This hack doesn't steal anything; it lets you shop, but doesn't allow you to break any copyrights.
Besides, how do you know the people who reversed engineered the protocol agreed to any TOS? Oh right. I forgot. You're talking out of your ass.
Except the fact that itunes may not run on your platform.
Right now this is a cute tool, but it has the potential to become a powerful weapon to fight the major record label monopoly.
Give me a fecking break. The people at Downhill Battle have a history of vastly overstating the importance and relevance of their "accomplishments", and this is no different. Being able to browse iTunes over the Internet (something that won't last long once Apple hears about this) will do nothing to defeat the record companies. The amount of self-delusion that must go into a thought like that is startling.
While I'm on a rant, let me talk about something else that's been bothering me. Just what is it that Downhill Battle hopes to accomplish? One of their projects is showcased here. So, you guys buy a digital camera from Wal-Mart and then document yourselves vandalizing CDs, in-store displays, and music preview hardware (which, incidentally, has led me on more than one occasion to purchase indie-label music that I would not have found without the machines), and then fraudulently returned the camera. And this accomplished.... what? Far as I can tell, nothing beyond proving just how immature these guys are. Does Downhill Battle do anything of value, or is it all just lame anti-RIAA posturing?
It says this is a powerful weapon to fight the major record label monopoly, but it doesn't fight major record labels any more than it does minor record labels.
All encryption is worthless in mine eyes.... mwuahahahahahaha
"nothing beyond proving just how immature these guys are"
Have you ever noticed no one over the age of 20 actually says people are "immature". Its basically a schoolyard taunt used by one 9 year old against another 9 year old.
Have you ever noticed that?
This is rubbish, the script doesn't even work well anyway. What a waste of time.
For a both anonymous and secure filesharing system take a look on GNUnet.
Mind Booster Noori
Not to mention the business deals with the music cartels.
Great, I'm thinking of a script that lets me listen to an endless stream of 30sec previews. Who wants to put more effort than that in music anyway.
What? You still talking about that?
I think, therefore I am...I think.
the iTMS store
the iTunes Music Store store?
The RIAA doesn't have to do anything special to screw with p2p. The music being made now *is* 30 second long clips repeated over and over.
The problem for the music industry is now people can hear this before they shell out $$ for a CD.
The other day I was trying to find out what audiobooks are available from iTunes. To my horror I couldn't browse the catalogue, I wasn't looking for clips just a plain old list of authors and titles, maybe even a list by category.
Hopefully, someone can now create a browser plugin that will enable people to browse iTunes without owning an iPod. If I knew what was available from iTunes I would be much more likely to buy an iPod Mini instead of other solid state players such as Creative's Muvo TX. If other people are thinking like this then potentially Apple could get a bit of buisness out of this.
Did that submission sound like a press release to anybody other than me?
Following the poster's link lead to this.
Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
You are absolutely correct. Whover thinks your comment is flamebait doesn't understand simple logic. Unfortunately, the guys at Downhill Battle are just punks who believe in vandalizing other people's property instead of finding real solutions. I certainly wouldn't want to count them among MY allies.
Try again. iTunes is not a Cocoa app.
All the various 3rd party ICQ/MSN/AIM/Yahoo clients have to go through the same thing to make their software work.
Reverse engineering for purposes of interoperability is generally considered okay. Remember the Lexmark printer ink-chip and the "DMCA violating" garage door openers? Judges in both cases said no laws were broken. This should't be any different.
I've been using StationRipper for a while now to rip iTunes Radio. You can use the Find Streams button to find an active iTunes radio stream (and can use MyStations after that to just connect to it). Guess iTunes uses shoutcast? Anyone know how to get a new stream on iTunes Radio? It kinda looks like some of the streams from shoutcast.com, but a a few are diff (some that used to be on shoutcast aren't listed there any more but are on iTunes now).
If I were Apple, I'd be embracing this technology - make the iTunes Music Store a ubitquitous web service like Google search. Allow users to point links to iTunes content on any page, allow them to post sound snippets and then link to download with iTunes. After all, Amazon does much the same thing with their Associates program.
Rather than a threat, I see this as an excellent way for Apple to get the iTMS even more exposure, make it easier to use, and still drive sales through iTunes - after all, there are a lot of people who won't download a new application until they see what benefits it offers.
i installed itunes just to hear previews so i could grab the songs elsewhere, purchase or download. (cause aac is not my fav)
i cstore. and whatever else they want to stick in there.
amazon is good for this, and there used to be other websites, but amazon seems to have got them all now (cdnow, musicblvd, etc)
especially because itunes is very bloated. and its understandable for a webbrowser/mediaplayer/medialibrary/cdburning/mus
Can you use this new script to purchase and download full tunes from the iTMS?
No? Then pray tell why Apple would spend the time, effort and money to make a browser front-end for those who by definition cannot spend money on their service.
As for why no iTMS for Linux or pre-2000 Windows, another poster mentioned having to port the libraries and such to Linux; and I'm sure Win98/ME not using the NT codebase from which 2000 and XP are derived was a factor as well.
The Apple-provided iTMS Link Maker has similar functionality. It's great for searching for music outside of iTunes or for linking to music you like. If they're offering this kind of stuff themselves, I'd imagine they wouldn't have a huge problem with others doing it too.
Should I feed the troll? Yes, I think I should.
The companies comprising RIAA form an oligopoly (and the RIAA itself can be considered to form a monopoly if it usually acts as a single body) simply by virtue of their dominance of the market. It doesn't matter if they provide a useful service. It doesn't matter if they charge, or don't charge, exorbirant rates. It doesn't matter if they have 10 million competitors (each with $0.12 in annual sales). As long as you have 5 firms dominating (>50%) a given market, that's oligopoly for you.
Now, is oligopoly good? Classical economics says it's not an efficient way to distribute goods. I.e. RIAA makes a killing, the consumers get ripped off, and the ripping off part actually outweighs the making a killing part. On the other hand, if I understand it right, under some circumstances oligopolies produce more research and development than a monopoly or a large number of small firms. If only that research was directed at something useful and not at turning a given random person off the street into a pop star...
I think perhaps the RIAA is more of a cartel. I don't see any way you could shoehorn the RIAA in to the definition of monopoly.
Of course, cartels are illegal in the US, so they call themselves and "industry group" instead. Same deal more or less.
Article X: The powers not delegated... by the Constitution...are reserved...to the people
Now I can listen to a 30 second preview of a song, when I could just as easily use iTunes itself! Thanks... this sure is groundbreaking and is definitely going to put the RIAA out of business!
Forgotten so soon? How long until Apple uses legal threats to takedown this project? They were quite happy to use the DMCA to take down software competing with iTunes before. Not even MS has gone this far. Call me a troll if you will, but it's the truth. I don't believe that Apple are the 'good guys' any more.
It lets you dig into the iTunes metadata and see what label owns a given song, so you could write a perl script to weed out RIAA-affiliated songs.
-Rich
So you're saying that Linux is to OS X (is to Windows) as Nader is to Kerry (is to Bush)?
:D
-Rich
I really notice the speed difference -- I know this online script is really basic gui-wise, but it's very very very noticeably faster than the regular iTMS.
I'm not normally an irrational zealous dickhead, but I figure "When in Rome..."
I listen to pretty mainstream music, but BMG Music Club run so many specials that I find that CD's cost about $7-8 even with their outrageous $2.50 or so shipping.
Admittedly, they're a little short with Jazz, and its not really for classical music lovers.
But for most mainstream pop I get my CD's well under $10. For $7, I just pay for really good quality.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
Apple made a music service. If you dont like it, dont use it.
Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see.
If your really digging Perl now, I would also suggest you have a look at Python. It's my fav language.
The DVD people couldn't be bothered to produce a DVD player app for Linux for free or a reasonable price. Some outfit kept promising one every few months "real soon now" but never delivered.
Result: a few frustrated teenagers crack CSS to write their own DVD player. In the process, they release DeCSS, which leads both to DVD players for Linux and to DVD X Copy (and similar utilities).
Now, you may argue that DVD X Copy and its ilk aren't really going to affect DVD sales, etc. But we're not talking about reality; we're talking about the belief system of the people who control these things. By their actions, they have demonstrated that they can be persuaded by this logic.
IOW, a free/low-cost iTunes player for Linux removes an incentive for bright teenagers to hack your DRM. How much is that worth to the iTunes people? To the RIAA?
It's probably a lot more than the cost to make the player. But we'll see, I suppose. I'm sure the MPAA would look back on the DVD situation and conclude that the Linux effort would have been time well spent. Will Apple do the same in a few years?
The major record labels certainly provide some useful services. Some of these can also be provided by small labels (producing the physical product, selecting promising artists and giving them an advance so they can pay for equipment, etc.) and others can only be provided by the major labels (large scale promotion, getting the cds into every music store in the country and beyond, etc.).
So are the major labels useless middlemen? Definitely not. Are they severly overpaid middlemen, who get away with it because they can offer something that others cannot? Yup, that they are.
The same thing is free from the iTunes interface, and the Apple version works much better. You know which one I'll use.
Daapd works very, very well. I use it on a linux machine and have never had a problem with iTunes compatibility. Drawbacks include having to restart the server when new music is added (though I'm open to the possibility that this is just a case of me not being diligent enough with the docs), and lack of support for AAC files.
OS X is closed source. This means that it is the work of the devil - its purpose is to make the end users eat babies.
Linux is the only free OS. Yes the BSD lincenses may appear more free, but as they have no restrictions, they are actually less free than the GPL. You see, restricting the end user more actually makes them more free than not putting restrictions on them. You must be a dumb luser for not understanding this.
And you obviously dont have a real job. A real job involves being a student or professional academic. You see, academics are the ones who know all about productivity - if you work for a commercial organisation you obviously do not know anything about computers. Usability is stupid. Whats wrong with the command line? If you cant use the command line then you shouldnt be using a computer. vi should be the standard word processor - you are such a luser if you want to use Word. Installing software should have to involve recompiling the kernel of the OS. If you dont know how to do this, you are a stupid luser who should RTFM. Or go to a Linux irc channel or newsgroup. After all, they are soooo friendly. If you dont know how the latest 2.6 kernel scheduling algorithm works then they will tell you to stop wasting their time, but they really are quite supportive.
Oh, and M$ is just as evil as Apple. Take LookOUT for instance. You could just as easily use Eudora. Who needs groupware anyway, a simple email client should be all we use (thats all we use as academics, why cant businesses be any different).
And trend setters - Linux is the trend setter. It may appear KDE is a ripoff from XP, but thats because M$ stole the KDE code. We all know they have GPL'ed code hidden in there somewhere (but not the things that dont work, only the things that work could possibly have GPL'ed code in it).
And Apple is the suxor because they charge people for their product. We all know that its a much better business model to give all your products away for free. If you charge for anything, then you are allied with M$ and will burn in hell.
It's kind of a nice thing to be able to use this script to check Apple's iTunes services out, and see what they actually have on offer.
For instance, I had no problem finding popular artists that I like, such as Tori Amos and Peter Gabriel. But a search for Boards of Canada turned up nothing.
If iTunes doesn't offer a wider selection of music than I can obtain elsewhere, why would I want to use their service at 0.99 per track? On the other hand, if they had hard-to-find music that I couldn't easily buy elsewhere, I'd consider using the service, heck, even buying an iPod to play them.
But they don't, so I won't. Thanks to the downhillbattle folks for making it possible for me to find out!
Peace and love, y'all
"Once we make this script developers can integrate it into filesharing clients, and we'll always know what we should and shouldn't pay for."
Heres a concept.. how about paying for what you listen to? Or is the concept beyond these people?
... and, so began, the legend of the Five-point Atkins Exploding Heart Technique!
Not sure if anybody has said it, but the downloaded previews are playable with the VLC media player ( i.e. videolan's media player, which is open source, btw )
Link
The player will also play just about any media file since it seems to rely on its own internal codecs insted of those installed on your system.
Frankly, this isn't really interesting at all.
Anyone with five minutes and a copy of ethereal could learn that iTMS uses HTTP. If you fake the user-agent you can load a URL. It's an XML file for heavens sake.
no the automatic teller machine machine :D
The previews do not work in Safari. I guess I will just use iTunes.
Gorkman
troll
All that has changed is that the potential number of users has been increased because you no longer need to[...]run the official iTunes client.
How in betsy's name is that an attack? This is free publicity for iTunes Music Store on more platforms than Apple can officially support. This guy is basically increasing the market for Apple.
First, consider that this script affords this so-called "increased market" you speak of no possibility of actually purchasing this music. Rather, it simply allows anyone to leech Apple's bandwidth by downloading 30-second samples, database info, and album art--and all this with no potential for increased sales because users of this script will have no way to purchase songs!
Would you claim it was an attack on car sales if people starting P2Ping the TV commercials?
Now consider that audio tracks are a product which is easily copied, not one which customarily must be purchased (or stolen, at great risk to the thief), like cars. Your analogy is inherently flawed.
What this script is like is those people who spend three hours with a salesperson of the local computer shop learning about what they should get in their computer, and then they go home and order it from Dell. Wasting their resources with no intention to purchase.
I doubt Apple cares about music sales very much, since it's basically a loss leader. What I think they do care about is iPod sales. Now let's think about this:
The people who make use of this script, unable to purchase from the iTMS, will, by necessity, either:
- use P2P to infringe copyright on the tracks that interest them,
- go buy the CD, or
- use one of the 10,000 WMA music stores to download the track.*
Now let's consider: The users is likely going to then end up with, let's say, VLC, and a bunch of MP3s or WMAs. Which will play on the 10,000 WMA players out there, but (if WMA) not on the iPod. In addition, VLC, in this example, has no integration with the iPod, so it provides none of the impetus iTunes does to "upgrade" your experience by adding an iPod. Which is the main goal of the iTMS. Get that through your heads. Repeat after me. Apple is not a record label. It's a hardware company.What the script author and most of the Slashdot audience is advocating is that Apple should:
- provide unlimited use of the store's resources to persons who cannot and will not ever make a purchase from it
- facilitate one or more of the following activities:
- copyright infringement over P2P networks
- further domination of the Windows Media format and non-Apple music players
This is where you explain to me how this is beneficial to Apple (besides getting the blessing of ~20% of Linux users who would be happy if Apple did facilitate this kind of thing. The rest would still bitch and moan about Apple's "proprietary" this and "closed" that).Basically, this reminds me of a Mac OS X shareware app that would download album art for you using a backend interface provided by Amazon.com. Amazon blocked that program because it was leeching incredible amounts of bandwidth but contributing little to nothing in terms of sales. Apple may try the same, and they would be equally justified in my book.
---------
* Also, they could be (3) using it for CDDB or something equally daft (since there is a thing called, um, CDDB, that does it just as well--except for album art, which is a bandwidth hog.) MusicMatch does integrated CDDB and album art, though, but i guess it's not available on Linux.
I'm in Australia. I can't buy music from iTunes even if I wanted to. But they still installed iTunes on my new PowerBook (which quickly got formatted to install Linux, but that's irrelevant). So why did they enable the iTunes Store feature on my laptop? It seems they're not increasing the market by letting me and other Australians browse the iTunes Store?
Is Apple Australia trying to increase piracy through P2P? Is Apple Australia trying to undermine the iTunes Store by letting people use iTMS bandwidth even though we can't buy the music? Or perhaps Apple Australia knows something that you don't. I'm going with that theory.
4. Have one of their friends with an iTunes client buy the music for them.
5. Become so impressed with the selection that you buy a Mac/WinPC just to run iTunes (hey, it might happen).
Use your imagination.
False dichotomy. Nice try, though.
I am one of them and, in fact, am not interested to know. Thankyouverymuch. I prefer to download mp3z and burn my own CDs. No need for a proprietary IPFI-compliant protocol/service to listen to Britney Spears.
All I can say about this meaningless page of comments is, Slashdot sucks. Get a life, people.
That's where being able to buy individual songs can definitely save money over buying a full CD, even at $7.
But I actually agree with most of what you say. I don't like Apple's DRM either. It may sound like they are very generous, but they are just trying to lock you in to their software and hardware players.
As much as it pains me to give Microsoft any credit, their WMA format is, in a way, more "open" than Apple AACs, since they license their DRM to other software and hardware vendors. Just look around and you will see that almost every portable or car MP3 player out there can also play WMAs. I was thinking about starting to buy songs on ITMS, but since I have not found any portable or car players other than iPods, I nixed that idea. I can buy a car stereo that plays WMAs for $160, or a portable CD WMA player (with a car adapter too) for $40! I have no choice with AACs.
Since I don't want to contribute to Microsoft's monopoly, and thanks to Apple's greediness and lack of vision, I'm afraid I will have to buy used CDs and burn my own MP3s. If Apple ever decides to license or give their DRM to other software and hardware vendors, I will reconsider.
I think perhaps the RIAA is more of a cartel. I don't see any way you could shoehorn the RIAA in to the definition of monopoly.
The grandparent referred the RIAA as an oligopoly and not a monopoly. If you look up oligopoly up in a thesaurus, I'm almost absolutely sure you'll see cartel as a synonym. Hell, I'll do it for you. Here you go.
The grandparent did explain all this, but I can see how people might have missed that.
Little Bricklets
So what if you can browse the iTunes library thru a perl script? WHERE IS THE PURCHASE BUTTON NEXT TO EACH SONG. That's the whole point behind iTMS. And you know, actually listening to samples without having to fire-up a separate application.
*sigh*.
How about writing a useful interface to the Amazon API, which, by design, lets you search its large inventory, is all about metadata (descriptions, reviews and more), gives you direct convenient links to sample audio files for previews (unlike the iTMS links in that interface which my browser is having difficulty understanding), *AND* offers a convenient token-based interface to create a shopping cart of albums that can actually be bought. The Amazon API lays the ground work for a highly-interactive, open market place. Sure you can't buy songs individually, but you can't do that either thru the perl script.
There's absolutely no point in writing significant amounts of "client" code to reverse-engineered, non-standard server protocols, especially without the approval of the entity that runs the only current implementation of that protocol.
If anything, take what's useful from the little you've reverse-engineered, implement a better, open protocol based on that, and convince all major record labels to input their data into your system. Oh wait, that might be a bit of a challenge.
Either way, Apple gets increased mindshare.
Extraordinary Vacations. Exceptional Prices
You might as well ask, "How difficult is it to provide an app for BSD, BeOS, QNX, Plan9, AmigaDOS, NextStep..." Not hard, if you're willing to spend the money. How much? Obviously, less than they'd get back in increased customers.
Downhill Battle should definitely be questioned for their motives too. They are sleazy and quite arrogant in the way they handle "their objectives and causes" Remember, this is the same company that started Tunesrecycler - send in your Pepsi iTunes caps codes and we won't use them - thereby sending a message to Apple that artists hate iTunes DRM and prices. mmmm yeah right. I wrote a story on my website about this. I sent the link to them and got a very arrogant response.
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny