Slashdot Mirror
iTunes Store Available in Australia Very Soon
tintub writes "New Zealander Russell Crowe has probably infuriated Apple by revealing the launch date of the iTunes store in Australia. Apparently it will be open as early as tomorrow (Thursday), selling tracks for AU$1.80 each. Personally I think this is too much, but I'm glad it's finally available in Australia. Now, when's Amazon coming?"
that even though we have something that is truly global such as the internet and the web, we still find citizens of the web denying access to services based on real-world geographical location?
Doesn't that defeat the all-encompassing nature of the web?
Why paying A$1.8 per song when you can buy a
:7 555 6.html
whole unprotected CD at www.allofmp3.com for
the same amount ?
And legally as well
http://smh.com.au/articles/2004/04/26/10828314
I agree with the fact $1.80 is too expensive.
I would be much more inclined to purchase tracks if they were $1.00 or at least $1.10 or $1.20.
A lot of traditional distribution costs don't apply and I think they are not really passing on these savings as they should.
If you really could get cheap fast track downloads with high bitrate in a flexible format you would cut out a lot of piracy.
From the article:
iTunes is the only site where iPod users can legally download songs.
Is this really the only site where iPod users can legally download songs? It's a shame that the mass media can get away with spouting complete falacies such as this :(
There are many sites to get free, legal, mp3s from:
In This Defiance bandOnline Tonight
John Peel sessions
The problem with slashdot is that most of its users were bullied and stuffed into lockers as kids!
The RIAA cut out the middleman btw not Apple, it isn't Apple which dicates pricing nor the DRM, iTunes music store is the result of what the music industries want. However I do agree with you on all the other points. Although I do buy music from them, I resort to cherry picking good albums for their singles because I'm not prepared to pay for price for an album to get a few good songs.
There is also nothing wrong with selling 320kb songs in AAC either as long as the DRM wrapper isn't there, it is an open format after all.
Jonathanjk.com
> As long as you don't sell MP3 / Ogg files in 320kb - / very high quality however
Most people listen to MP3 files though headphones or in a car. The quality of the sound though headphones is so bad that it doesn't really matter if it's only 128K - you're never going to tell the difference anyway. Especially if you don't upgrade from the crappy white headphones that came with your iPod.
Oh and while we're at it: 99c a song is acceptable, 9.99 per album is not, specifically for some crippled format, which may or may not play in three years. You cut out the middleman and a whole lot of manufacturing -, distribution and logistics in the process and I - as the consumer - want at least a part of that savings reflected on the price.
You might want to address this to somebody more appropriate, such as "Dear RIAA." Apple does not have as much control as you might think over the prices of songs on the iTMS...in fact, if I remember correctly, they've had to fight the record labels a couple times when they wanted Apple to raise their prices (especially on albums). I believe that is the reason that many albums are not even available at the 9.99 price, but instead you are forced to buy all the songs on the album individually (leading to 19 and 20 dollar DRM'd lossy-encoded albums!); the record lables refuse to license some albums for sale on their store at that price, but but instead just allow sales of the songs.
I hate DRM, and I hate the idea of paying 9.99 for an album off iTunes (which is why I never have)...but let's give credit where credit is due. Apple has gone with the least DRM and the lowest prices that the record companies will allow them, or something very close to it.
Remember, Apple does not own the music they sell. They are simply a reseller...most of your complaints are regarding the companies actually producing the product Apple sells.
As for their 128kb encoding rates...well, even Apple is stupid sometimes. Unless that was another concession to the record companies. But I think that was just their (bad) choice. I've found AAC files as low as 192kb to be rather nice, qualitywise, however....320 just seems unneccesary to me.
>You cut out the middleman and a whole lot of manufacturing -, distribution and logistics in the process and I - as the consumer - want at least a part of that savings reflected on the price.
/. effect *cough*).
yes because we all know how expensive producing CDs is (*cough* AOL *cough*) whereas internet bandwidth is so cheap people never run out (*cough*
Damn right. Consider the following:
- the difference in sound quality between 128Kbit AAC and 320Kbit Ogg Vorbis
- the difference in sound quality between your current crappy earbuds and (for instance) anything made by Etymotic
- the difference in sound quality between your current crappy sound card and (for instance) an external box with much less noise
- the difference when listening to music between sitting near a humming PC and sitting in silence
- etc. etc. etc.
Most people focus on the first point. And yeah, it's a good point. But there are all these other things you can do to make your music sound better.In Australia if I buy a CD then its is illegal to make a backup. Its illegal convert the songs to mp3 . Transfering a song from my cd to my iPod is illegal. This law is not enforced but thats not the point. How can a company sell a product that if used as intended will be breaking the law.
If you are such a sucker for uncompressed source materials, why are you listening to ogg then? It's been compressed. So no MPEG or JPEG for you either.
In other words, you are not the type of customer Apple is marketing towards, so really they shouldn't care and neither should you.
Break out the turntable and the tube amps.
Why the hell does everyone think that taking the US rate and doing a currency conversion is a valid comparison in price? Do you morons think that the Australian (or other countries) record labels have the same cost structure? They're negotiating the price with the record labels people, not picking a number out of a hat and deciding that it's fine.
Something intruiging...
you *DO* realise that we don't have to put up with price gouging?
you *DO* realise that people will just buy this stuff over the net (or when they visit the US)?
you *DO* realise that businesses have been using the "we have to charge more because Australia is so far away" excuse for decades?
you *DO* realise that they *will* go out of business with this attitude and they will blame everyone but themselves?
You didn't, of course.
It's time to stop this bullshit. Especially since we are supposed to have a free trade agreement with the US now.