Slashdot Mirror
Web Based Rhapsody Targets Linux
Asklepius M.D. writes "According to Marketwatch, RealNetworks is releasing a web based version of Rhapsody called.....Rhapsody.com that will function on other-than-IE browsers including Firefox and Safari. The article quotes Jupimedia analyst Joe Wilcox as saying "...it brings the first real subscription music service to Mac and Linux-based products.""
DRM has no kernel support in linux, and one assumes they're using DRM. An estimate of 3 days 'til it's cracked?
~HTP~ Hug that tux
I figured iTunes worked on Mac's.. guess I know less about Apple Strategery than I thought.
Maybe to be more inclusive the article should read "Rapshody Targets non-windows users" instead of linux. Last I checked Safari was was not available for linux.
The days of the digital watch are numbered.
"...it brings the first Real subscription music service to Mac and Linux-based products."
Silly Real, of course it's their first subscription service available to Mac and Linux users.
How many companies can do this and then charge for `premium` functionality?
Real's days are at an end. They support very few portable music players, and what happens when noone wants to let real support their player? What happens to all your DRMed music then? And what happens when their ads get more invasive and more annoying?
~HTP~ Hug that tux
This is a subscription service, iTunes is not.
-everphilski-
Using konqueror, it says:
"Incompatible Browser
We're sorry. We currently only support the following browsers: Internet Explorer 6 and higher, Firefox 1.0.1 and higher, Safari 1.3 and higher and Netscape 8 and higher.
Firefox 1.0 users, click here to upgrade"
Ok, let's try using Firefox 1.5:
"To play music, you'll need to do a quick install
Just follow these two easy steps.
1.
Install Rhapsody Music Engine
Click the button below and follow our direction on the next screen.
2.
Register Free
Get a free Rhapsody Account.
No Credit Card required.
We're sorry but the combination of your operating system and Firefox 1.5 is not currently supported."
Will Linux users use Real's product?
If you use Xandros the RealPlayer comes as the default media player. This is not a bad deal either, because the Linux player is not crammed full of ads- it does what a media player should: play media. I give the Xandros guys a lot of credit, too, because ever since they started bundling the RealPlayer with their distro, they've been the ones to actually make the install work. Prior to that, Real had (still does I think) it listed as an alpha.
I would think more Linux folks would be attracted to Real, actually, because they have the open source version of the player and server, Helix and last I checked neither Apple nor MS have made their player OSS.
R(k)
I've used Rhapsody for a year or two now. It's a decent service. Ignore their "programming". Listen to what you want to listen to. As far as it being in a browser, their windows based program pretty much implements a browser in the app itself...which is kinda slow and kludgy...i think trying one that is actually stand alone browser-based might improve things.
;)
...helps me decide what music i wanna track down to stick on my ipod.
NOTE: I don't buy music through rhapsody. I use it to sample new releases, catch up on things I might have missed before, track down the odd song from my youth, and listen to stuff that is available on usenet before I download it.
For the $9/month (or around there, i haven't checked in a while) its the easiest way to listen to music that i don't already own (the only exception is the old days of audiogalaxy. Best. Site. Ever.)
-p
Ever used their Linux player? It's very simple, doesn't do any unwanted things, fits in with the rest of the GNOME desktop, and is open source (except for the codecs in the commercial version). Real's the only major online media company out there paying Linux any attention at all. I say we keep them around.
WeRelate.org - wiki-based genealogy
Well, either Real's servers recovered or your browser/internet connection sucks. It loaded in less that a second on our less-than-perfect connection here at work.
By the way, I don't think your 15 year old sister could do a better job. I think too many people don't understand that just because "anyone can create a website" doesn't mean that everyone does it well. Their website isn't that bad. In fact, it seems to be the best thing Real has ever done. Their main product is Real Player. Guess what's at the top of the page? Real Player. Guess what's new? Rhapsody? It's at the top of the page too. I think you just got out of the bed on the wrong side this morning...they seem to be doing a fine job of releasing their product, crappy though it is.
Grammar Lesson: you're is a contraction of "you are"; your means you possess something; yore means days gone by.
Secondly, RealPlayer is a heck of a lot better than it once was. It's also straightforward to find the free player on their site, after a period where they hid it in the depths of real.com
Sure this is a subscription service - that means it's not for everyone. However there are also lots of folk who are happy to pay $10 a month for a huge music library.
Real made their player available for linux, made their server open source and suffer only complaints.
They're a big company and they make their music player available so it works on Linux and the Mac and supports Firefox perfectly. Folk still complain.
Real's business model is subscription music. That might not be of interest to you so go bug Apple to provide you with iTunes on Linux. In the mean time don't take out your frustrations that apple are ignoring you on another firm that has chose to welcom Linux - Real should be applauded for this
Disclaimer: I'm an ex-Real employee and still own stock. However, no one is paying me to say this.
/never/ paid full price for a lot of it, but it is fun to be able to pull it out. Still, it's a PITA to deal with vinyl.
/that/" moments. Generally, those songs are not the type of songs that I then get all uppity about needing to own.
/quite/ enough there yet for me to switch over to using it primarily on Linux (unless I'm missing something...I need to access my private playlists), but I understand it'll get there.
Subscription music occupies an interesting niche for the way I listen to music. I've got several levels of music:
1. Stuff I need to own: this is the music I can listen to a lot, and not get sick of it quickly. Even when I do get sick of it, I can put it away for a while, come back in 6 months and like it again.
2. Stuff it's nice to own: good tunes that I may or may not get sick of, but I want to be able to listen to wherever I want
3. Stuff I'd never buy (for much), but still have fun listening to: I have a very large collection of vinyl, most of which I picked up in the late 1980s/early 1990s for 99c an album when everyone was moving to CD. I would have
4. Novelty items that I listen to once or twice
5. Stuff that I never knew I'd want, but if I could listen to it in the course of the day, I'd buy.
Rhapsody is not a good choice for #1 or #2. However, I've found it great for #3-#5. I've discovered a lot of music that I never would have without Rhapsody, since it really encourages exploration. I can grab my tattered Billboard Top 40 book, and look for old sludgey hits and occassionally have one of those "oh my god...I remember
Since I use Linux on my desktop, I've had to use my wife's Windows box to listen to/use Rhapsody, which irritates me, but I'll survive. The bad news is that it doesn't look like there's
Rob