Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Opens MSN Music Store
pbranes writes "Microsoft has opened their online music store today with 1 million songs and it will be officially opened tomorrow when Windows Media Player 10 is released. Music costs $0.99 and $9.90 for albums ($0.09 less than iTunes). Also, music is at a higher quality - 160kbps VBR. You can browse the site with Mozilla, however, ActiveX is required for full functionality so IE is required to use the store. Also, Microsoft takes a hit at Apple for not licensing iPod functionality to third parties (kind of ironic when ActiveX is required to use the site).... If you are an iPod owner already and unhappy about this policy, you are welcome to send feedback to Apple requesting that they change their interoperability policy."
Will the music from MS become integrated with my OS once downloaded it can never be separated?
Active X? Are you serious? You must be joking? You want me to use WHAT?
NO SOUP FOR YOU, BILLY!
there are activex plugins for Mozilla folks..
look in the moz project directory
Don't Tread on OpenSource
These are the minimum requirements to play radio or purchase music from MSN.
HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS
Windows 98 SE, Windows 2000, or Windows XP
Internet Explorer5.01 (or later), which supports 128-bit encryption
Windows Media Player7.1 (or later), we recommend the latest version
A 233 megahertz (MHz) processor (such as an Intel Pentium II or Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) processor) or faster
64 megabytes (MB) of RAM or more
Speakers and sound capability
Payment with a valid credit card with a U.S. billing address
To enjoy high-quality audio as a Radio Plus subscriber, you will need Windows Media Player 9 Series (or later)
Appologies in advance to you Appleites out there and please be gentle :)
BUT.... How can the monopolies commission come down like a ton of bricks on Microsoft for locking people into a technology, when the only way you can legally download music for the iPod is through iTunes? Surely by not licensing their DRM technology, Apple are creating an equal monopoly for the vast number of iTunes users out there?
And I'd be interested to know if any Apple fans could answer - why does this not bother you?
Sunday you're Thinking Different, Monday you're a huge tool, paying too much and waiting to think like everyone else.
Finally, we have some real competition to Apple's monopoly of online music stores. This is what competition is all about. Microsoft is offering higher quality music, and at lower prices.
This can only be a good thing to consumers, to have another choice. And given Microsoft's reputation at playing catchup and sprinting ahead, I would not be surprised if Apple starts running scared.
Slashdot Moderation: From positive to terrible in 2 "insightful" posts.
Makes Columbia House look good. On the other hand, what the public wants, the public gets...
*whup* "Get along, little electrons. Heeyah!"
even if i just wanna browse, it keeps on redirecting me to a login page...
"Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true." - Homer Simpson
The BBC also has some info
Batman: "Slake your thirst. You'll have worse than a parched sensation when we're through with you!"
The url for the ActiveX Plugin
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
128kbps AAC is at least as good as 192 kbps mp3's. That's not just what I think. Regardless, the poster is overlooking the fact that he's comparing apple's with oranges, as it were.
I already have an iPod and I already use iTunes and I am perfectly happy with both. Plus, Apple is perceived to be "cool" (at the moment) whereas Microsoft is "uncool", so I can't see people switching. Especially whilst the iPod remains a must-have amongst the musicians and the music industry as a whole.
Were it a simple case of choosing one or the other then I could see Microsoft winning this one easily but as long as the iPod remains cool, Apple will remain the market leader here.
Troc
Troc's dubious podcast and blog: http://www.trocnet.net
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
Anyone know how 160kbps VBR Windows Media Format compares to 128 AAC?
The big worry here is...
When will they start patenting the songs?
For problems, seek only the simplest solution, complexity brings with it more problems.
I think this one will win out simply because the MSNMS acronym is easier to pronounce than iTMS. Either way, I won't be using it...
I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
comparisons.
Yes, you really want to look smart by giving the grave lesson of what happens when MS enters a market.
Please don't. Post a goatsex link. Make a BSOD joke. Anything but another inane IE/Netscape analysis.
With all of the securty holes in it. You have to be living on the bleeding edge of getting screwed. I did and got hack. That was the was the last time I used IE for anything.
Aren't the specifications of "160kbps" and "VBR" mutually exclusive?
You're at a critical junction now. Either Apple will conquer you and follow your path, or you will reign supreme and lock us into a controlled world once and for all. You'll need all the luck you can get now.
I'm a Mac user, but I'm not going to pretend that companies don't want to lock us into a DRMed world just so that they can milk us out of every last cent.
I hope MS wins. Why? Because Apple will have to continue on its quest to save the computer industry by keeping on its toes and producing great products for a long time to come. If we're going to be in a controlled world, I'd like my jail cell to be pretty at least.
What, exactly, does Microsoft have to offer in this area? WMA? Sure, it's the "standard" for all the other services--whose combined sales pale in comparison to Apple's. It's also the "standard" for the other players, whose--again, combine--sales pale in comparison to the iPod. You can bet their music service won't hold a candle to the ease of use and quality of service of the iTMS. It will also use WMA--see above. By the time MS is ready to launch it, though, it's likely that most non-iTMS music download services will be failing, and the remaining ones will be consolidating. Sorry, but in this case Apple has out-Microsofted Microsoft.
--
We are the collective Slashbot HiveMind
Mozilla ActiveX Plugin
Proudly supporting the Libertarian Party.
1. Open Online Music Store.
2. ???
3. Profit!
in the future (5-10 years) we'll all be carring a small thingy with capacity at 10000GB which will be able to hold ALL the music ever recorded so far. And that will be it. it will be called: "Musicor" or something and everybody will have the same thing (because there's no need to be selective when you have enough storage for everything).
So, why is this exciting?
You can also download the Mozilla source code and add backdoors of your own...
get a free ipod! This really works... GMail invites to the next 4 who complete this...
I don't look at having to burn a CD to bring it into my IPOD a problem. I'm going to want to back up ANYTHING I download from Microsoft anyway, especially if there's any concern that virii might be involved at some time in the future.. I can eliminate any possiblity of a virus arriving on my IPOD by pushing it to CD first. Best to keep MS's Banannas away from my Apples.
"Love is like pi - natural, irrational, and very important." (Lisa Hoffman)
Sure you're not falling for the old megahertz trap there?
Higher quality because, in independant double-blind tests, people could hear the difference? Or higher quality because this-here number is bigger'n that one?
C'mon people, this is /. not cnet. I thought after watching Intel & AMD play the numbers game for years we'd be wise to this stuff. Seems not. Seems all Microsoft has to do is publish a bigger number, and we're all ready to slap "higher quality" on it without even a cursory look at file sizes, compression standards, or those pesky things like some kind of semi-objective test.
But this one goes up to eleven....
Seems that MS can't even design a retail website without plagerizing Apple's UI.
Well didn't Apple plagiarise Windows with their OS operating system?
HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS
* Windows 98 SE, Windows 2000, or Windows XP
* Internet Explorer 5.01 (or later), which supports 128-bit encryption
* Windows Media Player 7.1 (or later), we recommend the latest version
* A 233 megahertz (MHz) processor (such as an Intel Pentium II or Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) processor) or faster
* 64 megabytes (MB) of RAM or more
* Speakers and sound capability
* Payment with a valid credit card with a U.S. billing address
* To enjoy high-quality audio as a Radio Plus subscriber, you will need Windows Media Player 9 Series (or later)
A little further down the page
Enable cookies[...]You must be an administrator on the computer in order for the ActiveX control to install properly. You need not be an admin to use the service once the control has been installed.
(All scripting options need to be enabled too)
So why would I need to enable cookies to download music, or have administrator rights, just to visit a site...
Details: HereConsidering the sheer amount of crap out there -- and, further considering the fact that rehashed mainstream tripe gets top billing -- the odds of me finding what I want there are basically nil.
From the about page:
From radio to your library: If a particular song on MSN Radio gets your attention, you can click to download it and instantly make it a part of your music library. And if you prefer plastic, we'll connect you to several online CD sellers, including Amazon.com and Barnes & Noble.com.
Amazon and B&N - those are some heavy lifters. A new Axis of Evil? =)
Interesting though, this is an area that Apple has avoided: making the connection to the hard-copy world. This could provide Microsoft with even more backing and support from some of the entrenched, big players in the music industry. Scary.
"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." - Jack Nicholson
Okay, I don't have an iPod, so I may be confused here, but I thought iPods could load mp3s, right? So all Microsoft has to do in order to load songs to an iPod is to sell you an mp3.
And hasn't Real already figured out how to properly encrypt a song to load on an iPod? So MS could use that approach, too, and sell DRM-enabled songs that would load directly to the iPod. (and don't even start me on whether that's legal or not -- it clearly is, under interoperability clauses, though it'll probably take a court ruling to get that through people's heads).
Sounds to me like MS is *choosing* not to support iPods.
Oh, wait. No, turns out I still don't care what they do, and I still want their company to fold and impoverish all their stockholders and employees.
Anyone know if this site works with anonymous web proxies? If so, then simply combine this article with yesterday's googling Visa numbers story and you can have yourself a nice new music collection...
I clicked and saw "The Women of Pop" and was hoping to be able to order some new issue of Playboy. Unfortunately, I only get to listen to them sing.
-- Who is the bigger fool? The fool or the fool who follows him? --
That picture is of a CREATIVE Mp3 player you fuckin brainwashed dildo...
Also, Microsoft takes a hit at Apple for not licensing iPod functionality to third parties (kind of ironic when ActiveX is required to use the site)....
What type of convoluted logic is that? "MS hits at Apple for not licensing their DRM. That's ironic because their site uses a plugin architecture that any Windows developer can implement."
There is absolutely no correlation between those two statements whatsoever. It's not irony, either.
Here, try this: Definition of "irony"
When MS allows their Music device to be used from a Mac, then I'll write to Apple, not before. MS is simply going to do the old embrace and extend (hallo activeX), and I'd rather not go that route.
However, I suppose MS will do their very best to try and kill iTunes and the iPod so that they can dominate the market. If they ever do kill off iTunes and the iPod, I am willing to bet that MS will make sure that 3rd paty players such as RIO etc will not have the full functionality of MS' store and player.
Those who trust MS have only themselves to blame.
Also, Microsoft takes a hit at Apple for not licensing iPod functionality to third parties
muahahahahahahahahahHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
oh man, that one is going to make me chuckle all day long... great start to the day.
What about drap & Drop the WMA file in iTunes so it will converted it into MP3?
iTunes rox.. i only miss the iPod.. :(
Unrestricted VBR mp3s for 20c/track, if you like what they've got, it's great.
If you only like music the RIAA tells you is good, don't bother...
One of the security "features" of SP2 was the insistence of choosing to automatically update your system. What is the likelihood that Media Player and the MSN Music Store will be considered "critical" and will automatically be installed? And experience has show that MS would never do such things...
I hope someone does a full listening test with a blind panel
Just as irrigation is the lifeblood of the Southwest, lifeblood is the soup of cannibals. -- Jack Handy
All this proves is that proprietary is bad regardless if its MS or Apple.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
... for the various on-line stores selling WMA-protected/encoded songs. Unless their selection's better than what MS offers, who's going to bother with them (as I can't see them undercutting on price).
Embrace and extend strikes again? Sort of like Wal-Mart with "stuff" - it's not a great selection, and it drives the better stuff away.
This is hilarious. In order to play their DRM music on your iPod, they tell you to pirate the music you've purchased from them! Lucky for them, fair use is still ok. "To transfer MSN-downloaded music to an iPod, you need to first create a CD with the music, and then you need to import that CD into iTunes."
geeks are cats who dig a certain kind of cool
Among the system requirements of the music store are these:
:-P
(from the FAQ at Microsoft)
- ActiveX controls and plug-ins -> Download signed ActiveX controls: choose "enabled" or "prompt"
- ActiveX controls and plug-ins -> Script ActiveX controls marked safe for scripting: choose "enabled"
- Scripting -> Active Scripting: choose "enabled"
- Miscellaneous -> Navigate sub Frames across different domains: choose "enabled"
You also need to install the ActiveX Control to use MSN Music with administrator rights.
Of course, if you're using an insecure configuration of IE, this is already your settings. Otherwise, you need to setup a new Internet Zone for Windows Media Player with these low security settings and cross your fingers there'll never ever be any exploits to run code in WMP 10's security zone. There's already a well-known exploit in the wild for IE that will work if Active Scripting is enabled (was that scrollbar trick recently in the news, I think).
Don't you just love the implications of IE integration with media players and all sorts of other stuff?
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Pop Quiz: What OS does it need to run under?
If they're offering 1 million songs, I'm curious who they got to do the ripping? I have visions of a room full of trained monekys, putting CDs into drives in return for food pellets.
On a similar note: Which ripping software did they use? LAME? Something home-grown?
Chip H.
They have Radiohead, that's all I care about. I've been waiting for months for it to be added to iTunes. That's what most people will be looking for anyway: does this store carry the music I want? Most people don't even know what an OS is.
Also, music is at a higher quality - 160kbps VBR
;))
no, bitrate in not equal to quality. iTMS has the far superior AAC, while Microsoft uses WMA wich comes last (or close) in most tests (except the ones Microsoft pays for
two tests here:
1
2
There's an ActiveX plugin for Mozilla
pardon my redundancy, but...
Gee, why don't I just go and install Banzai Buddy (or some such crap) and save myself the trouble?
-nova20
There's already cheaper higher quality music out there.....at emusic.com. Its 192kpbs VBR there and average at about .23 cents a song ( it's a subscription plan).
IMO the selection there is better than you will find
at any of the competitors.
- I got my free iPod and a free Nintendo DS....why not
Just browsed to a random page.
Seems that not all the songs of an album may be downloaded, thus forcing the hardcore fans to buy them twice (once online, once on CD).
Is it the same with iTunes ?
Trolling using another account since 2005.
Since I'm already an iTunes user, the way to get me interested in a competing store is to give me tracks I want that Apple doesn't have. I'm an '80s fan, for example, and can't find in iTunes a lot of tracks that were very popular back then. Yet Microsoft's store doesn't seem to have them, either.
I guess I might care more if I had a portable device, but I don't. Even if I did, it's easy to convert what I get from Apple into other formats, so I don't understand Microsoft's claims.
Get off my launchpad!
Also, music is at a higher quality - 160kbps VBR.
What he means to say is that the music is at a higher data rate. Quality is dependant upon the codec AND the data rate.
Although Apple computers and Apple iPods do not support the PC standard WindowsMedia format for music,....unfortunately Apple refuses to allow other companies to integrate with the iPod's proprietary music format.
Crap, now I'll have go re-rip all those OGGs
Or Not.
Neither MSN nor iTunes has the Beatles.
Karma: Excellent (fuck, even in the future moderation doesn't work!)
Nice to see that every new thing now has the word beta slapped on it. Do these people even know what it means?
Seems that MS can't even design a retail website without plagerizing Apple's UI.
:-)
If it aint broke, don't fix it. Steve Jobs has been Microsofts unifficial director of research and innovation for years and this has been enormously profitable for MS. Why would they fire him now?
... it's the same goddam crap you'll find no problem on any of the P2P music-stealing programs.
One of the reasons I'd gladly pay for downloading music is because it's old or obscure and I can't find it elsewhere. If I wanted Britney Spears or some crap like that, all I'd have to do is look for it on any P2P program and I'd get a billion results.
Do they think people's motivation for using pay-to-download site will just be the fact that it's legal?
One of the many things I hate. thingsihate.org
I saw this article on the BBC website. According to them there's currently somewhere around 500,000 songs available. Nowhere near the number the beta site hypes as being licensed.
/. isn't the place to ask if this will take off or not, we all know Microsoft will leverage their monopoly in some way to drive people to the site.
I suppose
Where's the Kaboom?
There's supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom.
It's not even funny how much KDE/GNOME resemble Windows, right down to the colors, look, and feel of the desktop. There's even a start menu!
It's not even funny how much Windows resembles MacOS, right down to the colors, look, and feel of the desktop. There's even a recycle bin/garbage can!
It's not even funny how much MacOS resembles the desktop interface at Xerox PARC, right down to the colors, look, and feel. There's even a mouse!
Seems that no one can even design a retail OS without plagerizing someone else's UI.
From Mossberg's review at the WSJ:
-only about 500K songs
-no audio books, gift certificates, spending limits for kids
-Microsoft runs ads on its search pages
-click the "Buy" button, it changes to read "Purchased," but that doesn't mean you have the song
- several thousand of Microsoft's songs will cost more -- some nearly $4 each
-WMP choked when tried to synchronize songs purchased in Microsoft's own format from the Musicmatch, Wal-Mart and Napster online stores, saying it was "unable to obtain license
-Overall, MSN Music is no match for iTunes -- yet.
Mossberg thinks eventually MS will catch up.
http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/ptech-20040902.html
The next pasture is always greener
Got that, NINE WHOLE CENTS!!! Wow, if I buy 100 albums I can save $9!!! I'm dropping iTunes, throwing away my iPod, buying a Nomad and signing up!!!
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
I'm sorry... iTunes is the only on-line music store?!
Quick! Someone call Real, MusicMatch, Sony Connect, Napster, et al and tell them to bring their services down because they're "fake" competition!
Check out www.allofmp3.com
$0.01 per Mbyte, you can choose between ogg/mp3/wma an mpgeg-4 aac (compatible with iPod and iTunes). Also you can choose between bitrates up to 384 bps.
Therefore an average song costs between $0.05 and $0.15 depending on the bitrate you desire.
Some CD's they have in CD-DA (uncompressed!) format for $0.02 per Mbyte (or approx $13 for a long CD)
They have a database of about 250.000 songs.
Ok so they are based in Russia, but it is legal there (royalties are paid). Don't know if it is legal in other contries to use their service.
Yes but WHICH WMA are we talking about, the reason you have to have Media Player 7 is because older versions didn't support the DRM. For the streams you need Media Player 9 because 7 doesn't have the newer DRM.
Your WMA portable player probably won't play WMA music from these stores because the DRM version keeps changing.
So sure Microsoft has its WMA formats, all of them.
Apple has yet to run into any serious competition. This is great news for consumers, because it means that prices will start moving downward and bit rates will start moving upward. I would buy a lot more music from iTunes if they would sell it uncompressed. The AAC compression clips the bass, so it's not a good value if you like songs with a lot of bass in them.
(kind of ironic when ActiveX is required to use the site)
No. Here is the definition of irony.
It is hypocritical for them to insult Apple for not licensing iPod functionality while they use ActiveX, but not ironic. It would've been ironic if they created their own portable music player and tried to license it to Real, and Real replied that they weren't interested.
Karma: Terrifying (mostly affected by atrocities you've committed)
Bullshit. I'm looking at both right now and the only similarities I'm seeing are with the album artwork being placed next to the album title and information. Call out the National Guard, storm the Redmond campus.
/. hoping to score a little karma. Congratulations, you're officially a whore.
Why not just say you think it's unfair that Apple isn't given free reign over online digital music sales and distribution and no one else, especially Microsoft, should be allowed to compete. That's what you're really thinking, but instead you pull some old and tired anti-Microsoft diatribe out of your ass and post it to
I really wish the mods would pull their heads out of their ass and determine if a comment is full of shit or not before modding it up like this. All it took was to open the MSN Music Store in a web browser, open iTunes, then switch back and forth a little. While these two UIs have some similarities, it's clear the MSN Music Store is not a blatant rip-off of the iTunes store. In fact, I happen to prefer the MSN Music Store UI to the iTunes one.
No comparing the two. This is a joke at best - anything that requires IE to work sucks IMHO. AAC sounds fine for most people - if you are worried about better sound quality just buy the CD - as that WMA file isn't the Holy Grail. In fact, all this did was make me fire up iTunes and download some songs. Go Microsoft!
That FAQ is the biggest troll I've ever seen Microsoft do as a wham-oh against Apple. That would be like expecting Windows Media Player to support Apple's iTunes purchased music and since that isn't the case that we should all be beating down Microsoft's door with flaming torches to push for such a change.
... to request that they MAINTAIN their interoperability policy until Microsoft changes theirs!
To buy a few albums from ITMS out of principle. I just bought one of the Cocteau Twins' albums last night. I just might buy the other two out of spite for Microsoft.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
Interesting how MS requires IE for this, while the rest of the world is recommending dumping IE for alternatives like Mozilla and Firefox.
A computer without Windows is like a cake without mustard.
I urge all Slashdotters to support the independent stores like BLEEP which prove there is a viable market for downloaded audio tracks without the restrictions of DRM, and avoid ITMS, MSN and the rest like the plague they are.
-- Nothing unusual happened today
You could, say, combine Internet Explorer 5 for Mac with Windows Media Player 9 for Mac OS X and you'd be all set! Of course, you could also use iTunes for Windows and be all set too. So what exactly were we bitching about again?
Tried it. Didn't work. Some characters seem out of place (upside down Y), went to purchase something and graphics wouldn't load. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. They are either the most incompetent buch of bafoons, or the most underhanded bunch of criminals. Hmmm, that description seems to fit another party getting alot of press these days.
As someone with an education I don't need to guess.
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
Can't some industry body sit all these whiny companies down and tell them we're not going to put up with this different standards crap like VHS and Beta. You guys play nice and come up with a standard that works and everyone use it. That seemed to work well for DVD.
I realize Microsoft wasn't involved then, but still, it would be beneficial to the entire industry.
Who's leg do I have to hump to get a dry martini around here?
... launching an online music service that does not support the number one portable music player on the market!
I love the, "How dare Apple stifle consumer choice by not opening up the iPod!" when in order to use their music store you have to use their OS, their browser and their media player.
Yes, Microsoft, they are all about "choice."
Do not buy the music it's all DRM ENABLED. DRM IS EVIL. Use iTunes instead and stay away from Micro$Haft. Apple is so much better than M$!!11!!11
Yours,
A blind Apple Fanboy
First, Apple invents the first major GUI but makes some dumb decisions; Microsoft rips it off and makes billions.
This happens over and over for years. Now, Apple invents the first major online music store but makes some stupid decisions (FairPlay); Microsoft rips it off, removes the 'stupid decision' part and probably makes billions. I'd swear Apple is TRYING to give MS the monopoly.
I am NOT a number! I am a - oh wait, I'm number 761710. Look! 761710!
Apple is the clear music leader. I sent a request to MS to buy licensing from apple for their DRM system rather than putting their users through the trouble of converting everything to work with iPod. Click here and send a similar message to Microsoft.
iTunes runs on more than just apple. Contrast that to MS Music which runs only one MS-Windows, and recent ones at that.
/. gets it wrong again.
ActiveX depends on Windows, not IE. There are ActiveX plugins for Mozilla running on Windows. On the other hand, IE on Mac can't use ActiveX plugins.
Of course, any reasonably knowledgeable user will have disabled ActiveX even if running IE on Windows. The ActiveX mechanism is one of the biggest security holes in Windows, and that's saying a lot.
Congratulations on your highschool equivilancy diploma!
Those tests/reviews you linked to are old (heise.de using beta release) and invalid (vorbis.com using WMA8).
The best way to know the difference is to test with the music YOU listen at. There are vast differences in perceptable quality between the diferent codecs depending on the type of music you listen to.
Do not judge something because someone else said so.
In my testing with both classical music and metal WMA9 comes out usually ahead.
Ironic, that Microsoft asks that Apple customers complain of the lack of open standards for the iPod. The same company that will not share it WMA standard among many other things (Windows, IE...)
I don't use WMA for my audio compression though, and honestly, don't know anyone that does either. My computer-literate friends and family use MP3; those that don't have now mostly switched to iTunes! I guess there must be a heap of people that just use WMP for everything though.
The name Palladium may have gone away, but the parts are still there. Better off with iTunes.
You're falling into the apple trap of claiming that megahertz isn't everything.
Well, its not everything, but its mostly everything.
The truth is that AAC sounds slightly better than MP3's. I stress "slightly" here. The truth is also that probably half the population can't properly encode stuff, so a lot of MP3's sound like shit. That's the truth. A lot of people still think if they take a 96kb/s MP3 and transcode it to 129kb/s they double the quality. So a lot of people have no idea what they're doing.
But to your point. If I take song at 128kb/s in AAC, and I take the song at 192kb/s in AAC, the 192kb/s is simply better. That's simple physics and sonics. More lossy compression is always worse. Always.
Now if you're going to make the case that a moron with a crap encoder using MP3 at 320kb/s can be worse than an expert with AAC at 128kb/s yes, you can torture the situation enough to make your point.
However, more bits==better sound. Simple physics.
Oh, and as to the CPU cycles, for many (if not most) tasks, higher CPU == faster. MPEG encoding... faster CPU is simply faster. For emulation, higher CPU == faster/better emulation. For somethings it doesn't matter.
For music, more bits == better.
The best service I've found for this kind of thing is allofmp3.com. You can encode music as at any bitrate (you can pick custom bitrates and it does on the fly encoding), in any format (mp3/wma/ogg/mpeg-4/mpc/lossless) including downloading the original cd data.
It costs $10 per GB you download and is legal (because of strange Russian copyright laws).
What might be interesting is if Codeweavers makes this work on Linux with their WINE-based CrossOver product then both iTunes and MSN Music Store would be available to Linux users. While I'm not a big fan of WINE, philosophically, I am not so against it that I can't appreciate the irony of Microsoft and Apple having made products that Linux users end up having access to, despite having been specifically excluded by the creators of those products.
Curmudgeon Gamer: Not happy
Bitrate and sound quality are not the same thing.
In fact, bitrate and sound quality are only relevant for a particular encoding scheme. For instance, I could take a 128kbps AAC (aka, "mp4" or m4a) file and compare that to a 160kbps mp3 file, and the lower bitrate AAC file usually would sound better than the mp3 (or at the very least would sound the same as the mp3). Because AAC (which, by the way, is an open standard defined by the MPEG Group) is a better encoding mechanism than mp3, you can produce a smaller file with a lower bitrate and still capture the same quality (if not higher) of an mp3.
So bringing this point to the current discussion, we know that Microsoft is offering downloads at a higher bitrate, but who says the quality is better? If it is, then it's better than what? A 128kbps Windows Media File?
I think the question is this: how does a 128kbps AAC file (like you would get from iTunes Music Store) compare in actual sound quality (not bitrate) to a 160kbps Windows Media file from Microsoft's site?
"If you are an iPod owner already and unhappy about this policy, you are welcome to send feedback to Apple requesting that they change their interoperability policy."
How about we start writing to microsoft about changing their policy about Word Document files so that they could be 100% compatible with other word editors? How about we write to microsoft about releasing the source of the Windows API so Linux users could run windows apps flawlessy without having to resort to hacks like WINE?.... I could go on and on...
Microsoft has no right to complain about closed standards when they are the biggest violators of this crime. I have never, in my life, seen a more hypocritic statement.
Apple SHOULD license it's technology to the MSN music shop so that I can use the MSN Music Shop downloads with my iPod.
Not only would it sell more iPods, but I'm sure Apple could make a few million on licensing fees to MSN. Why not??? It isn't like Apple has to license it's technology for other players.
After all, if Apple doesn't make direct $ from iTunes, why not distribute the load to other sellers?
It's disingenuous at best for them to claim that the iPod's a "closed" device. It plays MP3 AAC and WAV files just fine. No Digital Restrictions Management required.
MS and Real are both allowing export to a restriction-free format to enable use of music purchased from them in other devices (CD players) that do not support their DRM scheme. If they really wanted their music to play on the iPod they could do the same thing with no more ill effect to their business model. Why won't they do that? It must be a misguided gambit to increase market share. And that's fine. They're businesses and naturally want to increase their market share. But don't misrepresent your competition as more closed than you are when that's clearly not the case.
Feh. The iTMS is cheap, easy, and works on both my Mac and my PC. Its songs play just fine on my iPod, and I can easily burn them to CD. I am happy with the quality of its songs. It's going to take something more compelling than this to draw my attention. It doesn't even look like their music catalog is any better.
.sig: file not found
OMG, I'm locked into a good experience! I'm locked into a good deal! Microsoft, save me! Lock me into a crappy deal/experience before I start to expect better from other companies!
Seriously, some would complain about being locked into an orgasm if it was coming from Apple.
It's not surprising that MS Fanboys are so completely ignorant and unintelligent as to not know what a monopoly is, and to base specious arguments based on their lack of of knowledge and failure to grasp the facts. Netcraft confirms that MS Fanboys are idiots.
This wasn't at all directed at you, it was just a convenient place to hang my rant. I apologize if you took it any other way.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
the only way you can legally download music for the iPod is through iTunes?
There are a large number of sources from which you may legally download music for the iPod, for example here.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Considering this is licensed music, the rips would come straight from the labels, probably Sony.
[RIAA] says its concern is artists. That's true, in just the sense that a cattle rancher is concerned about its cattle.
" 128kbps AAC is at least as good as 192 kbps mp3's."
Only in an Apple-fanatic's mind.
"That's not just what I think."
Of course not. You're waiting for Apple to tell you the rest of what to think. Then you'll know exactly what to think.
Apple has something Microsoft will never have:-
:)
"The Cool Factor"
Not to mention a head start
125Million songs downloaded vs a Beta store. That's a bit of leg work for MS to catch up on.
Clearly written by a person who has never seen the Xerox PARC UI.
Or were you referring to Mac 128K circa 1984???
Cheers,
chewy
Blue Screen of Death Metal.
MHz don't matter!
KB/s dont' matter!
Both are false.
Lets agree that AAC will sound better than MP3 at 128kb/s.
I've heard people claim 160 kb/s MP3's are equal to 128kb/s AAC's. Great. Fine.
Lets compare apples to apples. 192kb/s AAC's will sound better than 128kb/s AAC's. You can't argue around that, because its inarguable. Its almost a trivial statement... day is bright, night is dark. Its in that category.
By the same token, if we make the MP3 bit rate high enough, it will sound better than an AAC at a lower bitrate. Again, inarguable. This is simply a fact.
For myself, I think a 256kb/s MP3 sounds better than any 128kb/s AAC.
Of course, I think 128kb/s is too low to encode music, but I understand a lot of you guys actually listen to music on those iPod earbuds and thus you are incapable of hearing a difference.
Perhaps its best for you to say "When I listen on my iPod earbuds, I can't hear a difference. Of course, I think FM radio sounds pretty good too, so I'm an easily satisfied person".
That would be accurate. The rest of what you say is simply, er, nonsense.
Have you actually seen the desktop interface at Xerox PARC? Now compare that to OSX. Yeah, those two match.
BZ
The DOJ succumbs to the MSFT juggernaut and gives them the "freedom to innovate" and what do they do with it? Rip off iTunes?
Look at the stuff MSFT has put out the last few years... XP, .NET, home networking hardware, yet another version of Office, the tilt mouse. All are essentially reimplementations of previous works. The point is that MSN music is more of the same. They haven't innovated since the optical mouse and I wouldn't be surprised if that came from an OEM.
This may sound strange to some, but I don't think this web site will do very well at all. As a UI designer and someone who spends a lot of his time on usability. The MSN store is horrible. It is very hard to navigate and there are design logic mistakes everywhere.
:o)
But this comes to no suprise. As many of you may have noticed over the last few months images on the microsoft site have been artifacted beyond belief, they need to fire the kid that does their graphics and web UI's; seriously. Like come on, opposing gradients? WTF!?
Anyway, here is my point, the people being targeted on this MSN project are not you and me, it's mom and dad and those out-of-the-techie-loop friends of yours. Which from a designer's perspective require a very SIMPLE UI. Not to mention, these are the people that don't understand the web security stuff or DRM and will drop this fast out of frustration. I predict a major redesign over the next few months, this service will fail simply because people won't be able to find and do what they want.
Rant rant rant....
-- Bored? Check out my Portfolio
Those ActiveX plugins for Mozilla don't embed the MS HTML control in Mozilla, do they? If so, then they're using IE, because that's all the MS HTML control is.
Quality is about reproduction, not bit rate. WMA is an insult to the ears.
Apple told me 128kb/s AAC is better than anything else in the world ever! I'm bending over now!
Duh. No drm, pick your bit rate, works GREAT. and CHEAP.
It's not even funny how much the wheels on my 88 Camry resemble the wheels on your 2004 SLK! They're both round!
Sometimes its best to acknowledge a good invention, and build on it from there.
The only blatant rip off is you repeating ideas that have no factual basis. If you're going to spout bullshit, please come up with original bullshit.
It's not even funny how much MacOS resembles the desktop interface at Xerox PARC, right down to the colors, look, and feel. There's even a mouse!
It's not a blatant rip off when you pay to use a technology.
Real history of the GUI
A walk in the Parc
Please try to gain a bit more knowledge instead of repeating nonsense that you've heard. There's this thing called the internet that you can use to check facts. Look into it.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Anyways, Walmart.com still beats all the leading music download services, only .88 cents a pop. True you have to download with the WMA protection or whatever, but if you just re-record the song and export it as mp3 or ogg or whatever that problem goes away.
This from the company:
-whose music store only works on Windows
-whose DRM'd WMA and WMV files cannot be played on a Mac, even with the latest version of Windows Media Player available for the Mac.
The only standards-compliance here is Microsoft keeping to their standard levels of FUD dispersal and attempted platform lock-in.
the hardware released by Creative to go along with the MSN Music Store (is that thing trademarked yet?). MSNBC reviews it here >> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5888913/. Not just an mp3 player, it's the first PMC! "Creative's Zen PMC goes on sale today "i nfo/features.asp i nfo/features.asp
WOW >> http://www.creaf.com/PortableMediaCenters/product
hmmmmm >> http://www.creaf.com/PortableMediaCenters/product
Really only 12oz with a battery? Has anyone seen or got one these? Are they any good? Who is the guy in the picture and why is he staring at me?
Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life, son.
As a test I tried to buy a piece of music...
1) Provided my hotmail login (passport)
2) My credit card was on file (which is scary since I haven't purchased anything from them in years.
3) The credit card on file had expired in 2003 and the expiry date was correct on the MSN Music Store page (correctly showing as expired)
4) The store allowed me to purchase the music anyway, the credit card is from Canada and the address on file is from a hotel in the US. Not only did they not verify CC information but it's expired
5) When I check my account via the 'Microsoft Billing" page it shows 'Unbilled Activity for MSN Music' and shows my song purchase, so they bill after a certain period without even checking the credit card on file?
Huge potential for abuse here... It'll probably change pretty quickly.
Save your money. To quote another post above,
The best service I've found for this kind of thing is allofmp3.com [allofmp3.com]. You can encode music as at any bitrate (you can pick custom bitrates and it does on the fly encoding), in any format (mp3/wma/ogg/mpeg-4/mpc/lossless) including downloading the original cd data.
It costs $10 per GB you download and is legal (because of strange Russian copyright laws).
"Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
I'd rather not have my credit card number floating around Russia, thank you very much.
Are you looney? The two sites look totally different.
http://www.apple.com/itunes/store/
http://beta.music.msn.com/
Just look for yourself. They don't look the same at all.
Microsoft has exactly duplicated the iTunes pricing structure, from what I can see so far.
You are, therefore wrong.
Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast.
All you say may very well be true, and probably is.
What I find distastefull, especially from the company that talks so much about how they innovate, is how MS cant seem to see anyone enter any market and do well in it without having to enter it themselves. Whether it makes real sense for them to be in that market or not. They do a lot of following for a company that talks so much about innovation.
Not that they should be disallowed from entering new technology arenas, but I would like to see them blaze a new trail every once in a while.
emt 377 emt 4
From Microsoft's music store FAQ: If you are an iPod owner already and unhappy about this policy, you are welcome to send feedback to Apple requesting that they change their interoperability policy. source
Does this remind anyone else of Real's recent petition to whip up public opinion against Apple?
In the same FAQ answer, Microsoft offers a workaround for getting music purchased from the MSN store on to your iPod:
[I]t is still possible to transfer MSN Music downloads to an iPod, but it will require some extra effort. To transfer MSN-downloaded music to an iPod, you need to first create a CD with the music, and then you need to import that CD into iTunes.
I appreciate how open Microsoft is to defeating their own DRM.
It's amazing how many computing "problems" can be solved by using existing industry standards instead of creating lock-in prototocols and licensing. In the end most businesses prefer open standards where they can leverage competition between implementations.
With the number of applications for simple security wrappers on various media content for delivery, it's clear that the attempts to "patent" the idea of any form of content-specific data delivery is silly. You need a security envelope, a transport or media, and a secure playback facility.
The rest is just competing on the details of quality, reliability, and price as perceived by the customer, not by the RIAA/MPAA or other media manager.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
Worse yet, you will find no documentation telling you which of the available bitrates is the "original". Is it the 384k CBR or is it the 320k VBR? How 'bout the tracks for which neither of those is available. How do you pick the one that is "the original source" to avoid double-lossy encoding?
Some review site claimed to have the answer (it's been referenced here before). If I recall they said it was 320k VBR mp3. So ideally you'd select that format to get tracks that are encoded only once. Problem is, just try to find tracks at that bitrate. They're rare, meaning the review is probably wrong and you still don't know which file to download to get the one that is only encoded once.
Amy
Looks like maybe I should read the other replies next time (or mod myself down as redundant).
It's usually days later.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
May I have a gmail invite please? stomemilder@hotmail.com
They all allow you to make audio CDs.
When I had a system disk crash and so couldn't de-authenticate my Mac, I sent Apple an email about it. They de-authenticated all my computers so I could set the surviving one and new one up again, and suggested I make audio CD backups.
Making a copy of the music you have bought so you can play it on another device isn't a violation of IP law (a better term than piracy). Giving or selling that copy to someone else while retaining your own copy is where you step over the line. Referring to legal actions as "piracy" because "pirates" also have to take the same steps is a step down the slippery slope to losing "fair use".
ActiveX is a liability, that's the point. iTMS isn't and that's the point.
I'd rather gouge my eyes out with rusty nails than ever use some crappy ActiveX shite. I guarrantee you that this ActiveX component on Microsofts offering will be it's downfall. I't s gona get whacked.
I'm looking at it and I see a web portal. Does anyon else see the same thing? It doesn't make me think I'm there to purchase, but rather just window shop. Maybe that's Windows shop. I bet Service Pack 2 breaks the store.
on my Mac?
Because when you download and install iTunes, you don't have to configure your browser to accept any other crack that happens to be sitting in ActiveX packages on the same server.
ActiveX is the second biggest security hole in Microsoft's browser, and one of the reasons it "loses" the competition is because you can turn it off. Forcing you to turn it on again is just plain wrong.
The real implementation will be done through Avalon and Indigo API's that will be part of the longhorn release and made available on 2000,xp and 2003 os's.
.NET implementation that would allow linux/unix/other OS vendors to run the applications.
This project aims to seperate the distinction of remote/local applications as well as migrate the interface to vector based rendering among other things.
The reason microsoft is building up its existing infrastructure using its outdated components is to simply compete in the market while they fine toon the technology that "could" revolutionize the market as well.
Who knows, maybe microsoft could produce a runtime like there
sent. enjoy.
Their service seems to be carrying Brian Wilson's album "I Just Wasn't Made For These Times" http://beta.music.msn.com/album/?album=10179237, that won't be released until 12/25/2025. I haven't checked ITMS to see if they are carrying releases that far in advance...
Sorry, guys, but allofmp3.com is one of these cases where something is too good to be true. AFAIK, they pay zip to the copyright owners. The odd Russian law basically permits Russian companies to sell music as long as they pay to an odd Russian agence (ROMS), which in turn pays nothing or very little to the rights owners.
If it were even remotely legal, we would see all music download services relocate to mother Russia.
Allofmp3.com say they're legal, but so does the shifty guy who is selling brand new stereos for 10% normal price from his van.
A little off topic...
But how much of the windows UI has linux "borrowed"? It's all one and the same. You stick with what the users recognize and relate to. And how many other products do you know that look like clones of successful brands?
Find Nearby Indie Events
After your comments about Apple's service being too "closed," they come out with a Windows-only service. Feh!
There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
I dont have an iPod or any other portable music player, so file compatiblity is really a non-issue for me. The reason I will stick with iTunes and eschew the MS site is simple - I like the fact that iTunes is a stand-alone client that has full GUI functionality and doesnt require a constant web connection. I can bring my laptop when I travel and even without an internet connection listen to music, create playlists, etc. Plus, the user interface is so much nicer than being "hobbled" by having to do everything within a web browser. Can Microsoft offer that?
since the DRM crap only affects the boners who use DRM, why bother Apple about it? Send a REAL message, and get unencumbered music.
I'm sure some people here are smart enough to figure it out.
Not to sound like an ass or anything, but the R in DRM stands for "Rights" "Digital Rights Management"
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
Lots of people seem to fail to grasp this concept. Let me explain. In the U.S., monopolies are not illegal, leveraging a monopoly to take over another market is illegal.
Example:
Legal: I have a monopoly on gasoline (95% market)
Legal: I sell milk (10% market)
Legal: I sell gasoline (95% market) and milk (10% market)
Illegal I sell gasoline (95% market) and give away milk free with the gasoline or charge very low amounts for it, and pay the difference with a gas price increase.
Why is the last case illegal? Because, if you have a monopoly, it is easy to leverage it into another through bundling, this eventually leads to one company controlling all commerce, sort of like a socialist economy, except one that is derived from a free market. This is very bad for consumers, innovation, and basically everyone except that company. Does everyone get it?
Now replace oil with operating systems and milk with music
I'm not quite sure why a store would need ActiveX anyway. I can't test it - I'm on Linux here.
My idea of an online store would be:
1) select song (HTML page)
2) Make payment (HTML+some dynamic server side stuff (PHP/ASP etc) served over https)
3) Download song to hard drive(FTP/HTTP)
What extra functionality does the activeX add?
The aqua buttons are enough.
It takes a conscious effort to copy because there is no one right way to do anything. That is the essence of creativity. If you can't come up with a better idea that doesn't mean that the best idea has already been found. It just means you can't come up with a better idea.
Any first year design student would be embarrassed to create this design because any first year design student this would see this as plagiarism. Believe it or not, but every blank canvas does not pull itself to Apple's very strong design aesthetic.
I stumbled on Audio Lunchbox by accident and I wondered why I hadn't heard about it. They've got mp3's and Ogg Vorbis, both around 192 kbps, no DRM at all, and you can download either mp3, Vorbis or both. (I just want oggs.) Ninety-nine cents, and the service has been good.
Whether or not 128 kbps sounds "at least as good" as 192 kbps MP3 (or 160 kbps VBR WMA for that matter) is certainly up for debate, but aside from that, is anyone up for some more "MHz don't matter" or "kbps don't matter" as the case may be? Apple couldn't win that argument in the past, why would they win it now? 160 is bigger than 128. End of argument. On the other hand there is the 10000 songs factor. With 160 kbps VBR WMA, you won't be able to fit as many songs on your player from the MMS as you would from the iTMS (in the imaginary world where you could have a player that plays either.) 10000 is way bigger than... well... whatever that 160 works out to.
--- What?
Please try to gain a bit more knowledge instead of repeating nonsense that you've heard. There's this thing called the internet that you can use to check facts. Look into it.
Obviously a Maczealot. Let me refresh your memory... The topic of discussion was the fact that MSN had copied iTMS. It was obvious that the first poster didn't mean a pixel by pixel copy but rather a very similiar representation.
Now, KDE/GNOME copied Windows look/feel right down to a similiar "start menu". Windows copied MacOS' look and feel right down to a similiar "recycle/trash bin". And unfortunately for you Apple did copy Xerox's ideas right down to using a mouse for user input.
You can be a zealot all you like but face the simple fact that Apple didn't come up w/the idea all by themselves. Sure, they improved on it (just like you could say for any of the other ladder rungs I laid out) but it wasn't their idea first.
I have read multiple books on the subject, read multiple articles on it, and even watched plenty of documentaries. Perhaps YOU should do some research on zealotry although a quick mirror check would give you an instant definition.
Try here: http://support.msn.com/feedback.aspx?productkey=en tmusic
We just use Hymn.
Where is Hymn for the MS store?
Why would you choose a DRM you can't disable?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Windows ME turned out to be a big mistake. It broke a lot of hardware compatibility (such as ACPI support) and also created many quirks and other problems with a lot of software that runs just fine under 98SE.
I actually paid for a copy of ME, and feel like I have been totally cheated (even after lowering my standards to being realistic for a Microsoft product). It has put me in the difficult position of never wanting to give another dollar to Microsoft, and yet wanting to upgrade to a version of their OS that actually works.
--AC
I've yet to understand why on earth should someone spend 10$ to get crippled, bad sounding songfiles when most of the time the same CD is available on ebay for less.
I guess the joke's on Jack, since his mother turned out to be his sister.
ITMS has some songs that are "album only" - you don't need to purchase the phyiscal CD, it means you have to buy the whole album to get the songs.
I think this might be the same, but can't tell - it's kind of confusing since you can also link over to Amazon.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
From an aesthetic perspective, there are striking similarities between the two. Take, for example, the use of solid color blocking. No, Apple certainly did not invent this technique, and no, they don't have a patent on it, and yes, anyone is free to use it. And also the iPod look-alike (seems that I have to clarify that point as well--yes, I know it's a Creative). Then, you have the sans-serif white font in a brightly colored box.
Maybe I'm seeing things that aren't there; maybe you're the one with his head up his ass. Either way, can we have a discussion, or are you too busy having a tantrum?
Anyway, it seems to me that the reason MS chose to design the site so similarly to iTMS was to provide visitors with a familiar interface. However, I'm not sure this is the best idea if you're trying to build a new brand. I'd think MS would want too readily differentiate the look of their site so as to avoid confusion. Again, maybe not. Just my opinion.
Oh, one last thing, I've never seen a Xerox GUI beyond those on the copy machines at Kinko's, and it really doesn't matter. My original comment was meant only as an observation--if my reference to plagarism came off as trolling, then WTF are you writing a reply for?
-micaelus
in order to use Microsoft's store we must make our computers vulnerable? Let's see, we have IE running ActiveX to download a file to run in Media Player 10. That should be an easy combination to find features to exploit.
Wonder what their agreements look like? (Must be used on Media Player 10. Ipods must be reconfigured with WindowsCE to properly handle files. Silly? Perhaps. Typical MS fare? Absolutely.)
It's still DRM. How have they improved on FairTunes? I can use Hymn to strip FairTunes, how can I strip WMA DRM?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The Microsoft Music Store is categorically not cheaper than Apple's iTMS.
Let's all stop this myth right here
The MS store tacks on "additional taxes".
Also the choice of going with 160kbps WMA (and I'll leave the sound quality comparisons to the discussions above that are already underway) DOES however mean that your MP3 player that used to store 5,000 songs can now lonly store 4,000.
Plus no iPod support - 58% of all mp3 players, yes, even thte cheapo ones, are iPods.
Plus the fact that this is a half-launch, and MS risks giving the store a half-assed reputation. Plus the fact that WMP is a castly inferior user experience to use to buy music compared to Apple's iTunes. Plus the fact that, Apple already has 70% of the download market today... what does MS offer to change those people's habits that are already buying from Apple happily?
This sig has been deprecated.
But people really need to stop being dazzled by the "cool factor" of iPods and other digital music players and face reality.
iTunes and MSN Music both use DRM which restricts what you were previously able to do with music. 99c a downloadable song probably seems cheap but please remember that with downloadable music, the record companies are no longer having to press CDs, print covers or factor in the mark-ups of traditional music stores. In other words, they are making just as much (if not more) money from music and treating you like a criminal at the same time. The price you pay for your cool little music player is your freedom.
The solution is to still buy CDs (provided they are unprotected ones) and rip the music yourself in an un-DRM'ed format. If you don't like the prices of CDs then find them as cheap as possible, buy them second-hand or just don't buy them.
It's no different to walking into your bank in, say, a black leather jacket and being ushered out immediately by a security guard just because you look like a criminal.
It's time to take the red pill and wake up people...
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
ITMS has it, and states a release date of August 15th - where are you getting your release date from?
I have seen early ITMS releases though, BNL's CD Everything to Everyone was on ITMS a week or two early.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I don't know about anyone else. But I tried the Jazz Link on the home page and guess what I got. A Big Nothing. It goes no where quick and it locked up IE tighter than a plier's grip. Had to End task and have tried it several times.
Their "iPod Help" page blathers about how "Apple doesn't let us interoperate with their proprietary format". Boo f*cking hoo. The iPod also plays MP3, so wake up Microsoft and sell your music in MP3 format. Oh that's right, you have your own proprietary music format only playable in Windows Media Player.
It's sometimes funny how much some people want to have their cake, and eat it, too. To talk about being locked out of a proprietary data format... coming from Microsoft... man that makes me just laugh and laugh.
MORTAR COMBAT!
Let's look at the progression of the ladder... KDE/GNOME (most recent), Windows (next most recent), MacOS (next most), and then finally the mother -- Xerox PARC's UI.
Thus I wasn't talking about OSX I was talking about the original MacOS interface.
God you're fucktard.
The iPod plays regular, open AAC songs as well. So MS has the additional option of providing a way to export their WMA crap to either AAC or MP3 now. But instead they go on this whiny pathetic rant about how you have to burn a CD and re-import into iTunes. Bull sh*t. Windows Media Player could offer an "export this song as MP3" or "export this song as AAC" option and have instant interoperability with the iPod.
What a crock of crap MS is spewing out.
MORTAR COMBAT!
The iPod plays many different audio file formats and plugs into many different platforms and devices.
If you do decide to buy music online and purchase music from another store besides iTMS, you can easily move it to the iPod by burning it to CD and importing it or using one of the many DRM removal apps out there.
I also used to buy anything up to 6 or so CDs a month purely because the stuff I listen to isn't usually mainstream, doesn't get radio airplay and was therefore bought "as seen" - suffice it to say, about 50% of my CD purchases weren't worth it.
Now I get MP3s from Usenet to check what an album is like before I decide to buy it - if the songs are good, I buy the CD because it's the only way I'll get the quality I want through my hi-fi; if they're crap, they're deleted because they're not even worth wasting disk space on.
If I can't find the CD at a good price (I live in "rip-off Britain"), then I go to Ebay for it or maybe a local second-hand store.
Sure, I accept people want to download music but they're being ripped off because they're getting poorer quality product.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
How about a super mod up?
too many over mods up and it gets moved higher in the page?
Now, if all those WMA supporting players that have been out almost as long as mp3 players...
Then it must suck; because WMA sucked and only became half bad in recent years.
Or will only SOME "WMA" players actually play these songs? Or will only DRM "enabled" players actually play? (meaning they are newer)
Seems to me this is nasty marketing... They make it seem like there are tons of supporting players out there, but I bet you that most can't do it.
Bit rate or even VBR does not mean better quality.
Last benchmark I saw on ACC/MP4 codecs, apple's was hands down the best even against VBR codecs.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
Get it straight. Xerox stupidly sold it all to apple, not knowing what they had.
And I'm glad apple was in charge. Xerox would have patented every stupid thing, and then in the 90's sued everyone. Remember gif?
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
The MSN Music Store has a help page up saying that they are having problems interoperating with the iPod. Could you send their engineering department links to the MP3 or MP4 specifications so that they can fix their service? There is nothing wrong with the iPod, apparently they have never heard of the widely-supported MP3 and MP4 formats? I find it hard to believe, since their music player software plays music in the MP3 format, but apparently some of their divisions are not talking to each other!
MORTAR COMBAT!
erm, so I should complain to Apple that my iPod won't work with the MSN Music Store? Or any other store for that matter? My iPod works with my Mac and my friend's PCs, and both can run iTunes, which is better by a long shot than all the other stores, and on Linux? well, that's moot because its hard enough to get my iPod working, let alone some way to access the music stores...
I'll just stick to using my iPod with the iTMS
e to the pi i plus one equals zero
Be sure to also read further commentary on the original article, the RealNetworks issue and direct comparisons with the iPod:
Why 2004 Won't Be Like 1984
GAH! I hate being pedantic, but please, use a goddamn dictionary people (no, I'm not picking on you specifically garcia, just Internet denizens in general).
Plagiarism
Ok, got that off my chest... I know the new school of thought is "if it's spelled close enough for you to understand, it doesn't matter," but the problem is that it does. "lose" and "loose" are NOT the same thing, even if I can tell what you mean by context. It makes my job as the person trying to comprehend what you write harder. Have you ever considered what other people think about you when you misspell things? Not typos, those are more easily distinguished and acceptable, but gross misspellings. They make you look like Cletus the Slack-Jawed Yokel who done listened to a big word and wanted to use it hisself.
I suppose that's the end of the rant, and I realize it's way off-topic, but c'mon people, have some self-respect. Give people a reason to take your comments seriously.
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
He's just calling it what it really is, not by its marketing name.
One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
Well thank my lucky stars!!!
The graciousness of MS and Real now allows me to do something I previously took as my right to do with products I legitimately bought previously.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
No ActiveX required.
No iPod or iTunes required, neither. Props to "Hard N' Phirm."
Regards and Yee Haw -
What a horrendous interface! Talk about a half-assed attempt. I should be used to that with MS.
Karma Schmarma
Seems that no one can even design a retail OS without plagerizing someone else's UI.
Hmm, I wonder if this has anything to do with learning curves and being used to an OS. You know, the same reason why you usually choose gears on a car the same way, regardless manufacturer.
I wonder...
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
seth{a}mk120.mine.nu
thanks!
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
The mere fact you call it iTunes "crappy" completely obliterates any point you could possibly be trying to make.
Karma Schmarma
I was actually being an asshole and copying the spelling of the original poster.
Living in technologically repressed Canada, its hard to see things like the ITMS and Microsoft music store so close, yet so far away. I would love to buy honest, legitimate music, however neither Apple, nor Microsoft apparently, nor Napster or Real Networks seem to think our 30 million or so people are worthy enough for them to help spearhead online music sales in this country. The fault is not them, but of course, our extremely efficient Canadian government, who wrap miles of expensive Red tape around every issue (gee, the Liberal's party color is red), so that nothing is quickly implemented in this country. Where is our Tivo and Replay TV? where is our music store (i.e. not some Canadian force fed version that ensures 60% canadian content), where is our choice?
From the MSN Music Site...
How can I get MSN Music downloads to play on my iPod?
Although Apple computers and Apple iPods do not support the PC standard WindowsMedia format for music, it is still possible to transfer MSN Music downloads to an iPod, but it will require some extra effort. To transfer MSN-downloaded music to an iPod, you need to first create a CD with the music, and then you need to import that CD into iTunes. This process will convert the music into a format that can play on the iPod.We're sorry that this isn't easier - unfortunately Apple refuses to allow other companies to integrate with the iPod's proprietary music format.If you are an iPod owner already and unhappy about this policy, you are welcome to send feedback to Apple requesting that they change their interoperability policy.
First off, WMA is only a "standard" on Windows not all PCs, and only because MS makes it so. The iPod plays a lot formats (MP3, AAC, WAV, AIF, Audible, Apple Lossless), just not WMA. The only proprietary format the iPod uses is the DRM attached to AAC files purchased from the iTunes Music Store. And that is the iPod owner's choice if they buy music online. It sounds like sour grapes because MS isn't making the licensing fees that would be attached to every iPod that plays WMA format.
There must not be any advantage for Apple to support WMA or they would have by now. Sure they could sell iPods that would work with other music stores, but that may just cut down the sales from the iTMS.
Besides, I don't see MS shipping a compatible version of WiMP or IE so Mac users can use the store, and even on Windows you have to use IE (or an ActiveX compatible one) as your browser. MS shouldn't point the finger at Apple when they are using proprietary formats themselves.
Plus MS apologizing for a lack of ease of use, that's a first, but they're putting the blame on Apple for this. And the balls they have to get people to tell Apple that Apple should change their interoperability policy...HA!
Take a look at www.audiojelly.com if you're into trance & electronica.
It's an awesome online musicstore, you are able to listen to previews of everything (using a flashplayer) and what you're buying is 192 kbit MP3's! Not some lame DRM format which you can't play in the future / on your favorite OS / on your favorite MP3 player..
This is how an online music store should be! Screw Itunes, screw MSN music, support stores like this!
-pug
it looks like crap. m
$ whatis msft msft: nothing appropriate
A few links:
- Audiocoding - open source AAC codec
- MPEG-4 - MPEG 4 specification making reference to AAC
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
most songs [on allofmp3.com] are $.01 (1 cent) per megabyte. The site isn't breaking the laws of its parent country (using Russian Federation [copyright] law).
However, would U.S. users of allofmp3.com necessarily break U.S. copyright import law (17 USC 602)?
Well said.
"Dave, I stand still--the conclusions jump to me!" - Bill McNeal, NewsRadio
...Or instead of waiting months for tracks 'coming soon', you could get them somewhere better. Cheaper, sooner, any format you like, and no restrictions on use.
</plug>
You know you've been IMing too long when you almost say 'lol' out loud to a non-geeky friend...
You'll be able to browse and buy tunes from within Windows Media Player 10 and no network connection is required to just play the tunes. There you go, standalone client.
And, of course, if you legally purchase albums the old fashioned way (CD), you can put any songs you *do* manage to rip to MP3 from them onto an iPod as well.
CDs are the old fashioned way, as many record labels have stopped selling CDs and started selling shiny 120mm discs compatible with some CD players but broken in such a way that conventional CD digital audio extraction software produces garbled sound. The Shift key is a circumvention device in violation of the DMCA. So is any operating system with a *n?x kernel, be it FreeBSD, GNU/Linux, or Mac OS X.
It's no problem for FireFox to implement ActiveX support for their Windows versions of the browser, they just don't want to because its less-secure/not java or whatever. I think Mozilla is wrong for not supporting ActiveX. If 90% of the users that stick to IE do it because of stupid ActiveX-using web sites that don't know better, then Mozilla can collect those users by giving them even more reasons not to go back. I know ActiveX is the only reason I ever use IE... well almost, but it's the major reason.
Mozilla folks! Implement an ActiveX container plugin that optionally ships with the browser and be done with it.
It could be like:
Click here to download FireFox 1.0 Premium version,
or here for an Internet Explorer compatable version.
The power of Christ compiles you!
I download Windows Media Player 10 today, from a link at the MSN Music Store.
It isn't a beta, and seems fully functional. Not, I'm not suggesting that the online music store is functional, only that Windows Media Player 10 is.
Neopets - the best free game on the Int
Redmond, your photocopier has jammed.
This deserves to be modded up. But my mod points expired 2 days ago.
Actually if you look at this chart [w3schools.com]
Aren't w3schools.com's statistics typical of those of web developers rather than those of the average user?
Who gives a crap.
At Rhaposody (listen.com) I can pay $0.79 per song to be BURNED onto a CD as a "standard" 44Khz, 16-bit, Stereo audio track.
Then, I can rip my new song as a nicer 192kbps file and load that into my ipod/mp3 player/whatever.
Note: When I look at the songs available from iTunes, I find it ironic Rhapsody has the excat same songs available to us. How do I know that (especcially if there are thousands of songs)? I listen to trance, dance, & techno. When they release an album out on iTunes (which is rare), they've also come out on Rhapsody the same day.
Hmmm....My theory is, it's all really the same service.
Since MS doesn't mind taking a bath on the X-box hardware, how soon till we see an MS mp3/wma player that is significantly undercutting the IPod? It seems like a sound strategy to make the store more viable.
free online diet tracking.
Upon visiting Microsoft's new music store, I immediately saw uncanny similarities. The pastel colors. The grid layout. I guess it's smart to imitate what's been proven successful, but this just cements Microsoft's position as a fast follower.
-- n
If you're going to copy another website's (http://arstechnica.com/) content, you should at least give credit where credit is due.
In case you didn't know, on XP SP2
The changes to Internet Explorer in Microsoft Windows XP Service Pack 2 are all well and good, but has XP SP2 even been out for 4 to 6 weeks for the update CDs to have shipped to users of dial-up Internet access? Or is Microsoft using this as a way to push people to upgrade to MSN DSL?
And has Microsoft rolled these changes into versions of Internet Explorer capable of running on older Windows versions? Not all PCs in use today were put together in fall 2001 or later, when Windows XP first shipped. Mozilla products, on the other hand, can run on older Windows operating systems.
"So just upgrade to Windows XP!" Not everybody's computer hardware (remember, from before fall 2001) meets XP's increased system requirements. Or has Microsoft published a program that would optimize Windows XP for use on older computers with less RAM and less hard disk space?
I would mod up but I used up my mod points a two days ago. Ooooooh, but it was worth it though. Guilty pleasures..... Slurp.
The Paypal option has been unavailable for weeks - gee, I wonder why??
who needs a music store when you can just google for music?
On many DRM encrypted files, you get sent to some web page that states you aren't using a compatible player... and you're using the WMP 9 for Mac.
kind of ironic when ActiveX is required to use the site
Microsoft does not tell developers that they cannot use ActiveX for whatever they want. Nothing is stopping anyone from downloading the windows platform sdks, tools, and libraries for free and writing as many ActiveX controls as they want without paying a single royalty to Microsoft. Not disclosing the source code to a properietary library and not allowing any use of the library whatsoever are two different things. Everyone always knocks Microsoft for not having open products but nobody ever mentions that Apple and Steve Jobs have some of the most restrictive, anti-competetive, and non-open licensing on the face of the earth. They (Apple) are even persuing a legal action against Real Networks for reverse engineering one of their proprietary technologies to acheive interoperability. The open source people have a more legitimate beef with Microsoft than the iPod Apple zealots do. They should take the board out of their own eye before they reach for the splinter in Microsoft's.
Their 'native' file format is 384Kbps MP3 for their 'Online Encoding' tracks. If you select that option, you're downloading the original file and not a transcoding.
Unfortunately, a bitrate of 384Kbps is non standard and many MP3 players refuse to play them. Winamp won't play them unless you install a different MP3 decoder such as the MAD decoder.
"People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
Idiot.
Karma Schmarma
1. If Apple had it's way, the Hymn project would be dead.
Irrelevant, especailly since it has been out for so long now - obviosuly Apple cannot kill it. You are only speculating when you say Apple wishes it were dead. They tried a half-hearted attempt to not read the Hymn files then gave up.
2. Hymn (and playfair before it) didn't out until quite a while after the iTunes Music Store appeared. The MSN Music Store just opened up on a beta basis yesterday. Give it time.
But MS DRM, the same DRM that's in use now, has been around FOREVER. Much longer than ITMS has been around. Apple's DRM is far more "cracker friendly" as it were. Part of that is not having the tricky stuff like support for files expiring, which MS DRM does offer.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Sure is sad when makeing money gets in the way of making things work.
I just came from helping a friend burn her first on-line purchaed songs from Microsoft. Too bad they will be her last. Between downloading the songs, getting them into Music Match with the rest of her songs, and then burning them on a CD (after being sure to buy the right CD-RW media that will work with her 4X burner) the songs still weren't able to be played on her portable jukebox, which was the purpose of the whole exercise.
"Next time, I'll just buy a CD", she resolved after she spent $15 on-line, wasted 4 CD-RWs along with three hours of her time (and one of mine).
This is the scenario that unfortunately awaits so many folks tempted into legal music downloading by disjointed services looking for a piece of the action.
In my opinion, it is only the complete solutions (at this time only provided by, by by no means limited to, Apple) that will prevail.
I say this because of the stark contrast of this friend's experience when compared to my Mac owning cousin of equal computer illiteracy. He, a year ago, sat down and bought a couple CD's of music from the iTunes Music Store, burned them, and was off and running in an hour, including music catalog browse time.
I don't know what the future holds for on-line music, and I know Micorosft is really gearing up for on-line video so it doesn't give Apple the foothold, but my recommendation is that if the solution is not complete, no company will be able to provide just a slice of the action and be successful.
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
the whole thing is pretty transparent, really. just another avenue to promote WMA, ActiveX, even IE as the 'standard' in each of their markets. same thing Apple's trying to do with AAC and the iPod. and Real with RM. let the mud fly...
funny how much this whole things starts to remind me of the hoohah we're put thru every four years in november...
hint: Pixar
No. An ActiveX control isn't special HTML, it's basically a Windows (Win32) executable running in a window within the browser's window.
Sometimes I think the difference between Apple and Microsoft, is Microsoft throws it's weight around and bullies more people. Plus, it has more dumb lemmings following it blindly. MacOS X has too many UNIX and OSS geeks following it to have it bully too much.
Do you sit and fantasize about Steve Jobs when you masturbate?
Go suck some more of Steve's cock.
How long will it be until they add this functionality on the XBox?
Thousands of kids, not even needing to leave home to spend their pocket money!
I'm actually suprised this isn't a opening feature of their shop - xbox conectivity.
I wonder how long it will be before their is a credit card scanner attachment for the xbox.
come on people, stop using windows, it's really that hard?
It's not 100% intuitive, but here are my thoughts.
1. I like that I can use it without newest media player/etc.
2. THe experience while using WMP 10 is pretty damned cool. I installed SP2 tonight, then MP10, then the online store's active X control.
It is really, really slick using it with WMP 10... that said, i have only used rhapsody and itunes (Very very little) for comparison.
All I can say is if you are on a windows pc, the experience with wmp10 and the store is really nice.
OK, enough rah rah rah,
the negative? It wasn't clear to me that I need to push buy and then confirm on each song. I originally thought that i could hit buy and then they would cue up in a shopping cart, but such is not the case. Once you figure this out, it's easy to use though.
Secondly, song selection is OK, they had some old kool and the gang and a few others i've been after, but don't have everything i'm wanting to buy yet.
just me $0.02
This is a horrible, unsubstantiated conclusion. No where did those testers EVER compare 160 kbps VBR WMA9 or WMA10 to "the competition" or even AAC at 128kbps. In fact, ALL of the comparisons were done at the same bitrate, for obvious reasons (they were comparing codecs, not bitrates).
In fact, only ONE of the 5 sources you have cited even did 160 kbps tests at all, and the sample size was two orders of magnitude smaller than those for 128 kbps and 64 kbps. This renders the results nearly meaningless. (You can't draw any serious conclusions with 8 test results).
This conclusion is also not substantiated from the evidence you cited yourself. In nearly all of the same-bitrate tests, WMA comes in decidedly mid-pack, occasionally besting everyone and once in a while slipping up. This hardly equals "sucks." "Sucks" would mean that it was consistently inferior to the competition. But this is clearly not the case if you examine the results from all of those sources you just cited.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Looks like Real may be the "white knight" in this whole digital media mess! Actually, apple is pretty straightforward...they sell one product [iPod] that works with 1 service [iTMS] the fact that the songs play on PCs is just a bonus in their way of thinking.
Always charging into battle whenever M$ is attacked. Christ, dumbass, you blew your trustfund on their worthless certification and you're still too dumb to realise it and move on...
Funny how Apple can't (or will not) make its software work on earlier releases of the Mac. There is still a significant percentage of Mac users that haven't upgraded--because of the cost (of the OS and applications), training requirements, hardware or application availablity. Talk about incompatibility...
Looking at the page here finds a link using the mms protocol. I'm sure this is a well documented W3C standard and has it's own RFC right next to the WMA file format.
7 /1222/11451/v0001/msnent.download.akamai.com/12336 /BFHJ23HZ/Prod/wma/v9/Audio/29/76/96/967629.wma?
mms://a1222.v114513.c11451.g.vm.akamaistream.net/
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!