Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Unveils 'Urge' Music Service
CHaN_316 writes "CNNMoney has an article entitled, 'Gates unveils his Urge.' From the piece: 'Bill Gates aims to take over your living room and late Wednesday he unveiled a new music service and new software to do it. Using an appearance with Justin Timberlake, the Microsoft chairman debuted a new music service, Urge, to directly compete with the iTunes music store and interface. Urge launches with over 2 million tracks for purchase or as part of an all-you-can eat subscription, an option the iTunes music store doesn't have. The offering will include exclusive material from MTV.' Begin the living room wars we must." Confirmation of an earlier story on this topic.
I have the urge to point out that Urge is a stupid name.
"The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved." -- John Ashcroft
The only urge Bill should have is to pee his pants and the ass-whooping iTunes is giving him!
Q: I am short, useless and provide no value. What am I? A: a sig
Geez...just the mention of him appearing with Justin Timberlake just killed any idea of quality and usefulness I might have had thought of concerning this service...
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
When will somebody notice that with a sentance that include the words
in a story about a online music shop, that all this DRM is really just shooting themselves in the foot! If it doesn't work on a iPod will it not work on a RIO either? how about a sony walkman? Maybe I should download a copy for free and at a higher bit rate from the internet?
Why would i want to buy/rent music that i can't even listen to?
"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
Urge? and Vista? Where do they get these ridiculous names?
Or dirge. Just the sort of hip, radical, urban and bitchin' cool attitude that is so well understood by old white male executives in grey suits.
The articles are short on technical details unfortunately, so I'll assume that the music is in WMA format, which, for me, is a reason right there not to download it.
Anyway, I imagine this service is much like Napster in its all-you-can-eat mode; all the music you can download, until you stop paying, and then all the music stops playing. While I could easily strip the DRM off the WMA files (assuming they use a current-gen version of WMA, which we don't know), that would take too much effort on my part to make it worth the money.
Message to Microsoft: If you want to attract people who are currently downloading their music for free elsewhere, you have to offer more than what other music stores offer. Let people who download music through the subscription service (with perhaps a decent per-month limit, say, 100 tracks, to keep people from trying to download the entire database) keep their music when their subscription ends. Otherwise, the service has no value to me, because I know later on I'll get tired of downloading music for a while, and quit paying for the privilege to do so; that doesn't mean I want my entire music collection that I've already paid for to stop working.
I'd also recommend using non-DRM MP3, but hey, this is Microsoft we're talking about. Can't expect everything...
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
"The offering will include exclusive material from MTV, though it will not be compatible with iPods, which are currently the most popular MP3 player."
In my opinoin, that will doom it in the long run. Sure, people will play with it for a while, but those with iPods won't be happy when they can't put the music on the iPod.
Unless someone gets Apple to open up Fairplay to potential licensees, or to include WMA playback on the iPod. I don't see either happening without a court case though.
All they need now is a stable platform to run it on. Having switched from Microsoft Windows XP to the Apple Mac platform shortly after the release of OS X 10.4 (Tiger), I know that they have a long way to go to get anything close to the experience that Apple offers.
Any fool can talk, but it takes a wise man to listen.
Whoever comes up with this kind of product names at MS has to be fired.
Now let those Bill Gates "urge" jokes roll.
you mean they are gonna have reality shows too?
where are they gonna get the music from?
I subscribe to Yahoo! Music service for $5 a month for unlimited listening. I listen to it at work on my PC. Not everyone needs an iPod to hear music.
to pull down Bill's breast pocket...yet another Microsoft equipment malfunction!
Somehow the idea of being able to stream directv doesn't appeal to me, mainly because we already have expensive HD cable. And having to buy ANOTHER peripheral to watch HD-DVDs is not appealing. But at least M$ is manning up that claim of the xbox being "the only box you need".
Is it just me or does 4.5-5.5 million xboxes sold by June 2006 sound rather small for what is supposed to be a living room revolution?
Bury me in mashed potatoes.
The reason it won't work on iPods is because Apple won't let it work on iPods. If they offered FairPlay up for licensing, I guarantee you Microsoft would be interested. But since Apple wants their store to be the only one truly compatible with their device, Microsoft has no choice.
BTW, do you not think that songs purchased from iTMS have DRM in them? Why do you think it's so difficult to transfer them to another computer?
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
Urge and Justin Timberlake?
Sounds to me like Microsoft's new iTunes clone might as well be renamed "Gay"!
This is my sig.
Yes, Microsoft has the desktop market, but they are too clumsy to see this through. Music purchasing requries a finesse that they do not have. Apple has made its mark in the content delievery medium. It goes beyond PC applications into an ease of use, integrated delivery system. I predict this to be DOA. Savvy people won't put up with the hoops they have to jump through to get their content.
Two great tastes...
"We are all geniuses when we dream"
- E.M. Cioran
"These (partnerships) will allow you to enjoy high definition content and take that away on a portable media device" for what Gates called both the "two-foot experience and the 10-foot experience."
Two feet or ten feet, Justin Timberlake still sounds like crap. Whenever I listen to him, I get a temporal lobe malfunction.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Hi, my name is Bill and would you like ketchup and fries with that download?
I find that 'Urge' having an 'all-you-can eat' subscription interesting.
Perhaps the marketing droid at MS that 'invented' this shit loves to pie Burger King, mmmmmm?
I don't know about you, but the last thing I want is any of Billy's Urges being aimed anywhere in my living room.
Not only is the name stupid, but it's downright creepy for some reason. Also, does it play on iPods? Oh, no? Then nice try.
Slashdot: 24 hours behind every other site or your money back!
Obligatory Simpsons quote from snpp:
...just my 2 gil.
in a story about a online music shop, that all this DRM is really just shooting themselves in the foot! If it doesn't work on a iPod will it not work on a RIO either? how about a sony walkman? Maybe I should download a copy for free and at a higher bit rate from the internet?
A great man once said, "I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient."
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
Kind of unusual to see this microsoft story in the apple section. Yeah, yeah, apple's got a music store, but I don't expect to see linux stories go in the apple section just cause apple makes an os too.
p.
free music
The offering will include exclusive material from MTV
I hope they are depending on more than that to sell their service.
WMA downloads not compatible with iPod?
Believe me, when the snake bites the apple, the apple makes no mistakes...
If you go to urge.com, you see just a "coming soon" graphic. It's marked copyright "MTV Networks", no mention of M$, but the really great part - the bookmark icon is the Netscape logo...
From the article:
The company also discussed HD-DVD, which allows for greater interaction for consumers watching DVDs. For example, users can search and find information on actors in a film while the movie is still playing.
From the simpsons:
"computers can do that?!" -Homer
seriously, am I the only one who discredited the author based on this paragraph? wow! you mean with HD-DVD I can multi-task?! WOW!
I can do that already. With my Mac or my windows machine. Without HD-DVD.
It would be neat, "real neat" even, if perhaps this company had hired someone who knew SOMETHING about computers before writing the article. Ideally, they could have used someone who has used a computer before.
calling all destroyers
Check out http://www.urge.com/ it looks like MTV owns the rights to the Urge name and it might not be a MS name decision.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
First, there was that whole thing where Britney broke her public oath of virginity.
Then, he helped Janet Jackson get funky with the famous "wardrobe malfunction."
Later, he was there when Cameron Diaz stole a paparazzi's camera, not a particularly classy reaction to the tabloid sleaze.
Now he's gonna help Bill's Urge to compete against Apple in a consumer space where the competitor already has a huge majority of the action.
Weird resume, this guy has.
[
Now, let's see... Microsoft, MTV, Justin Timberlake?
Throw in "50 cent" and we're all set.
Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
Urge launches with over 2 million tracks for purchase or as part of an all-you-can eat subscription
And here I was, thinking the Urge only had like two albums out.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
There is already an online music service that offers songs in mp3, aac (iPod), wma and flac formats, which is much cheaper than iTunes.
It's called AllOfMP3.com and is quite excellent. I've paid $20 so far for almost 1 Gb of music.
Only one of these choices actually makes music. Coincidentally only one of these companies has a successful online music store.
Nuff said.
OK, I read the article. I still don't know what the software being released does. Is it a Web application or a traditional one? What OS's are supported? Does this include a Media player, like iTunes, or is it just the retail store portion? Is this being illegally bundled with Windows or offered separately? They go on to talk about support for TV, without mentioning if that functionality is supported by this new service, and if so what programs will be available. Of course I'll never install this crap anyway, being as it is tied to WMP and I can't think of anything worse for the media industry than to be locked into an MS controlled, proprietary format. Still, I want to know what crap I'll have to deal with when working on PCs. Where's the beef?
Well, the obvious answer for this is not to use DRM.
Digital Sign the music you download so it can be tracked back to you if you swap it, and have a updating list on your PC (updated through Windows Update) that stops banned/illegal copied music from being played?
Or come up with a DRM that will work everywhere! It's not that i mind DRM, it's that is stops me from using music the way I want to use music.
"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
Nonsense there's loads of formats that MS could use mp3, wav, aiff, APE for example or is DRM the be all and end all of digital music.
AS for DRM, yes iTMS has it, however I don't have 5 computers at home to use up all my authentications and I have no problems transferring them between the computers I have.
I also have a CD Burner, in case I want to lend some tunes to a friend.
I wonder what MS's DRM terms are.
>>though it will not be compatible with iPods
That old joke about "if Microsoft built cars... they'd only drive on MSFT licensed roads" just got a little funnier.
>>Why would i want to buy/rent music that i can't even listen to?
As if that should matter. It's not your job to ask such troublesome questions, your job is to sit at home and wait for instructions from marketing departments (commonly known as commercials), then spend money on the appropriate techogadget dujour. And you have the nerve to call yourself an American... now get out there, citizen, and CONSUME!!!
Yes, that was sarcastic, but I share the OPs sentiment. I, too, am really getting sick of being taken for granted by big stupid companies that feel they have some God-given right to my money even if their products mostly suck and are more interested in their corporate partnerships and their fiefdom than their products.
These services, while having a lot of variety, lack any real spice for finding good quality, inspired music/bands/artists. Try ituneslove.com... an A/V club for online music.
The offering will include exclusive material from MTV
;)
MTV is involved? So I'm guessing this service won't have any music.
Esoteric reference.
Er... It is not difficult to transfer them to another computer, provided you are the user of both computers, and are prepared to register that fact. If not, then be prepared to burn pruchased music to CD first (which you should probably do anyway...).
Any fool can talk, but it takes a wise man to listen.
Bullshit. Napster might switch but MSFT will not use any format that they themselves didn't create/enhance/ruin.
Just look at the ODF spectical. Independant researchers and archivists have been chiming in saying MSFT format is horrible. MSFT could easily support ODF. MSFT could easily support W3C standards. MSFT could of been smart and killed ActiveX years ago preventing the majoity of the viruses currently in existance.
It's MSFT's way or the highway. Now Napster and Real have all but begged for apple to open up Fairplay. And Apple should of done that by now. But in the end Apple is just as bad as MSFT when it comes to those ideas.
of course I still own a powerbook and have no working windows machines in my presence any more.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
Urge????? they should have call it "iUrge" (to kill gates)
- - - - - .
I've been using iTunes and an iPod since 2002, and I've never once bought a song through the iTunes Music Store.
Who cares about Apple DRM when all your songs are encoded in 192kbps plain-old mp3? I'm DRM-free baby! If you do download from iTMS, just get PlayFair and decode those songs, no biggie (assuming it still works, haven't checked in a while).
And I'm glad Apple is locking everyone out of iTunes and iPod. Let MS twist in the wind. Better yet, offer licensing to everyone BUT Microsoft, that would be even better.
With the first link, the chain is forged.
If they offered FairPlay up for licensing, I guarantee you Microsoft would be interested.
You guarantee that do you? (Is that you Bill?)
Microsoft doesn't license anything - they developed wmv rather then licensing quicktime and so on.
It is simply not in their nature to pay royalties to another company - especially Apple who've been a thorn in their side all these years.
I suspect Microsoft are waiting to see what happens Real's Harmony before embracing and extending fairplay.
My pics.
Seems to be working for Apple as far as I see. Not everyone owns an iPod or buys music from the iTMS but enough people seem to like it. I like it. It's easy and convenient.
I've yet to have a need to transfer Apple's DRM'd music to another computer. If I did I'd probably just plug my iPod in and listen to it there. I don't have an innate need to give everyone my music so that's not a problem.
So you see, there are people like me--lots of them--that like the experience Apple provides. I have no *urge* to buy music from Microsoft and put it on my iPod. If I did I probably would not own an iPod anyway.
That's the point...most iPod owners aren't interested in Microsoft's offerings anyway. So why should Apple make it work? We don't care.
Of course we torture people, we need the information --Gen. Pinochet
Not having rtfa yet, I'm going to guess that it not compatible with the ipod becuase of the file format (wmf?). FairPlay is more about playing music from iTunes music store on players. It doesn't have to do with what formats the iPod itself can play.
Seriously...
iPod is a piece of hardware.
IS Microsoft really, REALLY saying it cannot write a piece of OS software for a hardware product like ipod?
I'm serious, the chip used in most ipods is well known. It can even handle WMA...its just not done via Apple's ipod OS.
As far as "oh that would make them responsible for support" BS! Like they support any piece of hardware windows runs on.
Oh well, I should be happy it didn't happen this time...cause Urge is a horrible name -_-
Why is it that Microsoft just seems to be copying or buying other companies, then giving its products really terrible names?
I can picture it now:
Ballmer: Hey Bill, I've heard that Google is going to start producing food products.
Gates: Why didn't we think of that? What better way to publicize Microsoft!? We'll make some kind of food product; we could call it 'Bolus', that's a great name!
Ballmer: I've also heard that the CEO of Google is getting a raise of $50,000...
Linux/Open Source/Anti Microsoft News
... lets hope Bill does not have a "wardrobe malfunction".
Religion and politics, without the flame. godgab.org
The reason it won't work on iPods is because Apple won't let it work on iPods. If they offered FairPlay up for licensing, I guarantee you Microsoft would be interested. But since Apple wants their store to be the only one truly compatible with their device, Microsoft has no choice.
I think what the parent meant was that DRM is causing the issue. You can put non-DRM'd MP3s on almost any device, including iPods. However, the fact that M$ DRM and Apple DRM and whatever else exists out there is completely incompatible is causing the problem.
The worst part is that this is not just a problem for us consumers. It's a real problem for content suppliers and device makers. I think DRM is a pretty stupid idea, myself, but if this is going to work for anyone in the long run they're going to need to suck it up and work together.
>>Urge? and Vista? Where do they get these ridiculous names?
I'm guessing Shit(tm) was already taken.
I'm hoping that Apple will follow suit by coming out with a pay per month service. I would most definitely be interested in that.
"You had this look that of an angel, it was such a bad disguise" --Dishwalla
Just like MTV Overdrive, I bet this URGE is only going to work in Explorer.
The reason, for those who are about to ask, why this is under the "Apple" category, is that this is really an Apple ad in disguise. The slogan practically writes itself: "iTunes: No WMA and No Justin Timberlake as spokesman. What more proof do you need?"
"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one " -Albert Einstein
I don't think the GP thought iTMS downloads were DRM free - just that all DRM is anti-user and makes the user more likely to think "fuck it, I'll download it".
I don't think they could *licence* FairPlay anyway, cos it's a server based system: it wouldn't be like licencing a standard, more like a web service, or otherwise all 'fair use' would go out of the window and Urge would only let you d/l to one iPod. Not what we the public want!
Justin.
You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
What exactly are you saying "bullshit" to? I agree with practically everything you're saying!
See my post further down; if Microsoft wanted to attract people like me, they'd distribute in MP3.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
It seems quite obvious to me that they are aiming after iTunes users by offering them two different methods of obtaining music. iTunes doesn't have a subscription service, which I bet many would jump at the chance to use if it did.
The all you can eat till you stop paying system has many benefits, namely you don't have to backup your "purchased" music. If you lose your songs you bought from iTunes they will not necessarily allow you to download them again.
Nothing your asking of Microsoft is beyond asking of Apple either, just Apple is given a pass by many people for doing the same crap Microsoft does. DRM'd to hell music that you cannot play on any other player, oh but I know, we can convert it and thats okay even though its as simple as converting a WMA.
Microsoft is doing what they do best, letting someone else show there is a market then moving in. Apple is going to put themselves in the bind if they keep trying to fly solo, they did it with PCs and look where they ended up. Granted with iTunes and iPods they have a substantial lead but they are one company against many as this just isn't Microsoft.
Apple needs to become more open, just like you and others complain Microsoft must. I want to be able to use ANY service to obtain my music and play it. By far iTunes it the easiest but you get locked into iPods to play it. They may be the better hardware now but for how long? (and I'm on my second iPod as the first died from HDD failure, if I do a third and stick with Apple it will have to be a RAM based offering)
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
I still think the WUS server takes the cake over Urge.
Once again, M$ has lost before they start. Even with billions of dollars behind them the marektroids cannot make up for the fact that this new service is immediately known as the M$ knock-off of iTunes. Just like a month ago when M$ launched their new search engine and everybody called it the M$ knock-off of Google. The idea of mindshare was overblown during the tech bubble -- but that doesn't mean it's a wholly invalid idea. If you have product and mindshare it's hard (or very expensive) to beat.
Subscription-based music is the way to go. This, combined with the Windows "Plays for Sure" initiative will ultimately give MS the upper hand over Apple in the music arena, unless Apple comes out with a subscription option.
I have a subscription to Yahoo Music Unlimited and I've found it is definitely worth the $60/year. Right now I've got 744 songs in my collection, which if purchased at iTunes would cost more than 12 years of subscription fees (assuming the price doesn't go up). I can license 3 computers to access my subscription, so I've got it set up on my home computer, my work computer, and my laptop. The service keeps them in sync so if I add music at home, it gets downloaded at work next time I start the service. Since I download the music to my computer, if the network goes down I can still play music.
If I want to burn CDs I can buy tracks for $0.79. But I haven't needed to do that. I have a Creative Zen Micro to carry around. What's really nice is the Roku SoundBridge is compatible with the service. I've got that hooked into the home theater system (and our wireless network) and I can access my complete music collection (even ripped music) using a remote control.
Ok, I realize this sounds like a commercial for the service. It's not...but I'm very happy with it and think that $60/year is a steal. I used to search the assorted P2P networks but my time has value too and it just wasn't worth it to search for and download music, only to find that I've picked up a bunch of bad tracks (P2P is still great for porn though).
So based on my experience with Yahoo Music Unlimited I think that despite its name Urge will be successful and combined with MS's marketing power may turn out to be an iTunes...well, not killer but maybe wounder.
Why should I be forced to burn music to a CD, physically take that CD, move it to another computer, then rip the music back into another format (which, BTW, lowers the quality of the music, unless you use FLAC or something otherwise lossless).
Right now, I can move my MP3 music like so: Copying it across the network. Said feat takes approximately five seconds per MP3.
So why should I be using these stores again?
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
...the legal-ese and lawyer jibber-jabber that is preventing a company from creating a service where I can download actual .mp3s for a fee? If it's such a taboo issue for the RIAA, then I don't understand why the RIAA does not decide to simply do it themselves.
As a consumer, I am simply tired of having to strip DRMs off of my iTunes purchases just so I can make sure that I can play my music when and where I want, and never have to worry about my music being "inacessible" for some reason.
Any company that decided to offer this service would have immediately be earning my dollars; however, I'm going to have to assume that the masses simply don't care about having DRM free music. As long as it plays on their iPod, everything is fine.
Respect It.
I was replying to the question raised by the poster, not the practicality of it... If you want to move the music you legally own from one computer to another, it can be done legally. If can also be done illegally - take your pick.
Any fool can talk, but it takes a wise man to listen.
Microsoft will buy MTV. Their new tag line
changed from:
'I want my MTV!'
to:
'You'll want our MSTV, and you'll like it!'
Resistance is futile,
we are the Urge!
Is it any wonder that Microsoft continues to be hated more and more? They're trying to be all things to all people which to me doesn't seem to be the best of ideas when you can't even keep your core business product stable or bug free. How exactly do you expect customers to take any new offering of yours seriously when a patch for a highly exploitable bug comes from a third party developer? And since when was MTV related to anything music? I thought they killed off that idea back in the early 90's. Perhaps they're planning on allowing folks to download just the audio segments to Real World so that we can see the Springeresque theatrics of it all via our own imagination.
If big boobed women work at Hooters do one legged women work at IHOP?
Amen, though the whole "digitally signing / banning" is DRM, however you want to put it. Besides, if they did what you suggested, non-Microsoft players would simply ignore the digital signing bits and play the music regardless of its status.
The solution is simply to avoid DRM altogether. DRM is fundamentally flawed and will always be broken, because in the end, I have your music on my hard drive, and you're not going to be able to stop me from doing what I want with it.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
Historically flat-rate type music services have not let you transfer to mp3 players or burn CD's unless you pay the approx. 99 cents to buy the song fully. They assume once it's off your computer, it's pretty easy to exploit the analog loophole (it's still pretty easy to exploit anyway).
So I'm pretty confident that regardless, you wouldn't be able to transfer to your ipod with the unlimited service anyway.
However, they are lamey McLamersons, because there are programs out there that can do a sort of "high speed dubbing" digitally. They force the native app (say, windows media player) to play at 4x, 8x, whatever and listen right on the sound card (before it's analog). Then encode at the matching speed so the resulting mp3 is correct.
If an officer ever threatens to taze you, say you have a pacemaker.
is to hurl..
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
Initially I was shocked that the creator of Winamp showed together with Gates but a quick google search revealed that the one in the article is another Justin.
Worse interface. Less tracks than iTunes. Lame.
Goddammit have they ever dropped the ball on this one! An EXTERNAL HD-DVD DRIVE? FFS, what do you think you are doing, Bill? NOBODY wants a home entertainment box with an EXTERNAL DVD DRIVE!!!!! Sony are so going to kick your ass. AGAIN.
I don't care what Microsoft's history on licensing is, it would be damn stupid of them to ignore the iPod segment if it were possible to reach it.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
I think you're missing the point. Any music store could easily support the iPod and it would require no help from Apple. The store would simply have to sell MP3s or non-crippled AACs.
To quote the GP: all this DRM is really just shooting themselves in the foot
"It ain't a war against drugs.it's a war against personal freedom" --Bill Hicks
All the songs I've purchased from a competing service, eMusic, work just fine on my iPod.
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
I guess legal must've ix-nayed "Compulsion".
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
> Or come up with a DRM that will work everywhere!
Which is what Microsoft did, considering their DRM is open and cheaply licenced to all comers.
Eventually there will be such a large installed base of WM-DRM devices (car stereos, stereo components, phones, game consoles), that consumers will force Apple to compromise.
MS & Apple's business plans for DRM almost exactly reflect their respective business plans for PC OSes. And we all know how that turned out.
...is to throw a chair!
Did you get that thing I sent ya?
With the music industry demanding a sliding pay scale for music and Apple dominating the online music industry, it's worth noting that this is a horrible time to get into it. For most people, the question will be, "Does it work with my ipod?", and of course the answer is "Not without jumping through some hoops".
What MS should have done, if they were serious about this, is wait for Apple to lose their edge with the ipod, then hit this full force *WITH* a player of their own that rivals the Ipod.
Anything less means disaster for any online music shop.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
The reason it won't work on iPods is because Apple won't let it work on iPods.
No, no, and no. The reason that it won't work on iPods is because Urge have locked the files.
People keep on making the argument that "it's Apple's fault that you can't play ${DRM_MUSIC_SELLER} songs on an iPod. They should licence fairplay". It's arguable that Apple should licence fairplay. But that they haven't isn't the reason that you can't play music from Urge on the iPod. Urge chose to lock it, they bear the responsibility for it being unplayable.
Christian rock is like some youth minister's idea of what rock and roll is: you don't even have Link Wray or the Rolling Stones, no it's derivative boy band music and hair metal. And Urge is like some out of touch dorky software mogul's idea of hip -- aesthetically perfectly paired with Stryper, Petra and Creed.
``Have you heard about this totally praiseworthy and righteous new music service, Urge? Rock on! Praise the Lord, man!''
"Stable platform"? C'mon. Can't you trolls come up with anything new? Windows hasn't has stability issues since the Win 95/98/ME days. At least come up with something that's marginally relevant or true. This pathetic FUD is getting really, really old and tired.
I don't respond to AC's.
As a stockholder, to announce a service that is not compatible with the player that has a huge share of the market for hardware is dubious at best. Perhaps they are banking on a quick hack for all those Ipodders to use??
...I reach for microsoft.
(sorry, couldn't resist)
Hmm, jokes about the name aside, what's this with yet another music subscription service? ITMS is not popular just because of iPods, but also because its DRM and terms are very palatible and easy to understand. Apple doesn't put all kinds of spyware on my computer to keep me from burning ITMS purchased tracks to CD and then subsequently ripping said tracks to MP3 files so that I can play them on my TiVo box. And Apple doesn't take away my ability to play the tracks I buy from them if I stop paying a subscription fee, because there is no subscription fee to be paid! Simple and easy.
I think most people want simple and easy, so it is truly baffling that these subscription services keep coming out. Of course, I could be wrong, maybe people do want to keep paying for their music every month. Are any of those subscription services like Napster actually making a profit?
To the making of books there is no end, so let's get started
If it's from Microsoft, it better work with devices that has their "Plays for sure" logo on it otherwise both Urge and "Plays for sure" are a total lack of respect for customers.
if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
AP (Las Vegas) -- Microsoft has received mostly negative reviews at the CES unveiling of its Operation Shitstorm initiative, in which bags of excrement are to be dropped on consumers in major cities throughout the world. The initiative is expected to result in bags of excrement landing mostly on Microsoft customers, since research shows that 95 percent of all people everywhere are Microsoft customers. Critics of the plan assert that it's inconvenient and distressing for consumers to experience bags of excrement falling from the sky.
Microsoft spokesmen expressed surprise at what the called the "sour grapes" of a few rivals caught off-guard. They note that the EULA specifically authorizes bags of excrement to be dropped onto customers and their dependents and add that most humans everywhere are Microsoft customers. An unidentified Microsoft spokesperson cautioned that users of pirated Microsoft software may wrongly consider themselves exempt from the EULA, but should expect Operation Shitstorm to reach them without regard to Microsoft's right to legal action against them.
Some consumer groups have questioned the cost and effectiveness of air-dropping bags of excrement all over the Earth. "What do they hope to accomplish?" asked one activist, who preferred not to be geo-identified. "True, no one disputes their right to retaliate against the popularity of the iPod in this manner, but is it the best thing for Microsoft shareholders? What about releasing products that people actually want?" A Microsoft spokesperson, reached for comment, replied that people obviously want whatever Microsoft provides, as evidenced by Microsoft's total penetration into every aspect of consumer experience. "Let the market decide," concluded the Microsoft spokesperson, who requested geo-identification of the above-mentioned activist.
Mmm... I like YAMS.
Sound a bit like N.U.R.V to anyone???? "The house knows the paintings I like, knows my favorite music (insert timberlake joke here), some for anybody else that's in the system There's a little sensor that defects who's in the room Doesn't Bill Gates have something like that? Bill who? ha, ha. ah, no, no. his is primitive. " Sorry, I just had to... hehehehe
The urge.com page that is presented that says coming soon or whatever mines ALOT of data about you.
s 9552561766906?%5BAQB%5D&ndh=1&t=5/0/2006%2015%3A49 %3A12%204%200&pageName=urge_splash&g=http%3A//www. urge.com/&r=http%3A//apple.slashdot.org/article.pl %3Fsid%3D06/01/05/1334231%26tid%3D109%26tid%3D95%2 6tid%3D141%26tid%3D3&cc=USD&s=2048x768&c=32&j=1.3& v=Y&k=Y&bw=1016&bh=544&p=PCMan's%20IE%20Tab%20Plug -in%20for%20Mozilla/Firefox%3BPCMan's%20IEView%20P lug-in%20for%20Mozilla/Firefox%3BMozilla%20Default %20Plug-in%3BAdobe%20Acrobat%3BQuickTime%20Plug-in %206.5.1%3BMicrosoft%20Office%202003%3BJava(TM)%20 2%20Platform%20Standard%20Edition%205.0%20Update%2 06%3BShockwave%20Flash%3B&%5BAQE%5D
....
For example this is the URL of an image included on the page...
http://viadms.112.2o7.net/b/ss/viadms/1/G.7-PD-R/
Then there is the little javascript that creates this URL
http://www.urge.com/s_code_urge.js
"most iPod owners aren't interested in Microsoft's offerings anyway. So why should Apple make it work? We don't care."
I suspect there are vastly more ipod owners than Mac owners. What do you think those other folks are using for a computer? I'm no fan of Microsoft either, but I don't think Apple has the clout to continue going alone. Eventually, when they feel they have the necessary leverage, the labels are going to pull the rug out from under Apple and price them out of the market.
Personally, while I like the ipod as an appliance, I only use mine with non-DRM'ed mp3 songs that I rip and put on it myself. I don't use the iTunes store at all....
This is just like having to buy separate cd players for different record labels
or separate DVD players for different movies from each production company.
To watch MTV content online you need MS software, for NBC stuff Apple iTunes...
Let's wake up. This mess doesn't serve anybody's interests.
Same goes for IM software and IP telephony as well.
Another lousy music service to me. The only one that really stands out in my mind is the iTunes service, which I do use from time to time to find specific things, but I have tried others.
I would much rather see MS develop something that's, I dunno, going to fix problems with the security in Windows.
Let's start with releasing the WMF udpate patch...
Xserv
"I love lamp."
just get PlayFair and decode those songs, no biggie (assuming it still works, haven't checked in a while). It doesn't work with the current versions of iTunes and Quicktime.
"It ain't a war against drugs.it's a war against personal freedom" --Bill Hicks
You know, the quality isn't that bad for a 'traded' CD. If I wanted better quality sound, I'd buy the damn mastered CD however for a song that a friend trades with me that I really don't care about, I'll take it and hear it once and maybe again in a couple of years.
if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
"[...] with over 2 million tracks for purchase"
I can actually purchase the song and own it? Also, shouldn't this article be filed under microsoft.slashdot.org rather than apple.slashdot.org?
Only Microsoft would come up with a product branding that most people associate with a bodily function. Maybe their slogan can be "After satisfying your Urge, please be sure to flush."
about 80% of what comes out that I am interested in at the moment is available on www.emusic.com.
LAME -APS encoded mp3s averaging in price at about 20 cents a pop.
I think DRM is necessary to have an all-you-can-eat subscription though.
What I would like is itunes to:
A) Get a better selection of music
B) Start an all-you-can-eat subscription model.
on Janet Jackson's tit.
I bet Microsoft really loves being on the wrong side of the vender lock in coin, if you can't make your service work with an IPod then you are not gonna be the next big store. End of story.
If Em's ad is anything to go by, you're more likely to see a 50 cent ad for Apple's Music Store.
Just sayin'
If I am gonna pay, that's who gets my money. Where can I complain about my tcpip page file memory leak on Win XP Pro? Or why did my Task Scheduler service go to crap a month ago, without any type of error meassage what so ever regarding that in my Even Veiwer on SBS 2003?? What a great morning. I leave for a week for HOLIDAY vacation, come back, and everything falls apart. It never fails. Anyway, MP3. I already told you who I will pay.
iPod compatibility isn't the point. I'll bet the music will stream gorgeously through an xBox360 to a stereo, of through a Media Centre Extender to the rest of your 'digital home'. Will an all-you-can-eat subscription model, it seems like this is another gambit to gain a foothold into in-home entertainment, not portable.
Stasis is death. Embrace change.
Oh, no, history shows they're perfectly happy to license (or partner on) anything from anyone, provided the terms of the agreement somehow give MS the right to rip the other guy's balls off at a later date.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
While they marketed it as "Surge" in the US, Coca-cola's soft-drink was marketed (and trademarked) as "Urge" throughout the rest of the non-English speaking world -- where it's still relatively popular.
Why should they pay Thompson Consumer for the encoding when they own their own format?
Moreover, their format has a 90% desktop saturation rate.
if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
Then it's got to be good, right?
You're quite correct - it would be stupid for MS to ignore the iPod segment.
:-)
I was simply pointing out that they're a company that do not pay for other companies tech if they can possibly help it.
You shouldn't ignore history unless you want to repeat it
My pics.
"The offering will include exclusive material from MTV"
huh. since when does MTV offer music?
- Entertaining Bits from the Ancient Kernel Tree
When Steve announces a product, he makes it available. There's no coming soon, or available within 4 years, or in the near future crap...
Steve announces these things and you can buy one immediately. If it's software, you can download it/buy it today.
I think the slow lumbering of MS will make this product as much of an also ran as every other competing service to itunes. Tying themselves to MTV is supposed to appeal to a younger demographic, but what teenager associates MTV with music? Unless they're awake at 2:30 am on a Tuesday, they've never seen MTV air a music video. What older person does? VH1 coulda been a better fit than this.
not a Troll. Notice the modderation.
Um, OK.
ob-culture-slam: call me a curmudgeon, but unfortunately, that doesn't sing as sweet a tune as material excluded from mtv (spit spit).
I'm on firefox and I get a Sun looking logo too.
IE has the same ol' 'e on a piece of paper' logo.
Or so I've heard it said. They could turn on a subscription service any time they want to. I sure as hell won't buy it. Any time you see me paying $10 a month for the privilege of continuing to own the music I like, please kill me and put me out of my misery, because I've gotten stupid and useless. I do listen sometimes to the free Real Rhapsody service. Not bad. But please, please spare us from the fake tears and the requests for Apple to please open its DRM for everybody. In those areas where MS has the majority of the market, they are more heartless than Apple screwing anybody who wants to play their proprietary file formats with the proprietary DRM.
What a f-ing lame name. That's worse than Microsoft Bob.
We have this great invention in the UK. It's called "radio". You tune in and you get to listen to music. And better yet, it's free. You even get unlimited listening too. Buy two radios and you can both listen to the *same* station at the *same* time - no extra cost, it's still free!
Wow.
Just as well it wasn't Balmer who had his urges unveiled on stage, as they may have involved 'fucking killing' the competition and throwing a chair across the stage.
Also, who are these two trying to kid?
Steve Jobs will probably revel something similar next week, but he'll use someone cool, he'll have a much better product, and maybe we'll believe him.
When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
That's the point...most iPod owners aren't interested in Microsoft's offerings anyway.
Are you serious? You think most iPod owners are members of the cult of Apple? I LOVE my iPod but if microsoft offered me music cheaper, easier, or in less lossy methods AND it worked with my iPod...I'd definately use them. If it doesn't work with my iPod but is cheaper, easier, etc...then when my iPod inevitably dies, I would switch to a player that would be compatible.
I like my iPod. Its small and easy to use...the interface is nice. The POINT, however, is the ability to have most of my music collection with me wherever I go. The player is just the media I use...whatever is the "best" player when its time for me to buy. It happened to be an iPod when I bought my last player...next player, we'll see.
If it's so "open", then they surely wouldn't mind releasing the sources, I mean shit, they still own the key servers which is the crux of the scheme right? Even better, take a page from MP3 and only license the encoders, make the player runtimes free, no? Don't get me wrong, Apple's just as bad, but I've yet to hear a key based DRM scheme that wasn't an invitation to vendor lock-in. The fairest solution, at least in my eyes, is digital fingerprinting, do what you want with the music you buy, but upload it to the general public and we'll know who you are. Yeah, somebody will write a program to erase finger prints, but the plethora of DRM removal progs out there doesn't prove hard DRM is any iota better.
Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
The future for retail music sales is obviously online and digital...yet the record companies still tell everyone they have to buy CDs. Microsoft and Apple are two heavyweights that have jumped into the retail music business with both feet. How long will it be before they start signing recording artists directly and cut out the middleman? What is it that the record companies do anyway? Oh yeah...
And if so would they please post them here?
Wee someone not knowing much about activex and whining... tooo common to see on slashdot.
ActiveX is good, the technology makes using a web browser as an application environment feasible. Just because some of teh activeX plugins had security holes, and people always clicked on yes to install activex stuff does not make it bad.
I do agree that I would not think that MSFT would readily accept DRM by apple, but then DRM by apple has been broken over and over again.
Personnally how do you know those "independent" researchers had nothing vested in ODF, and could you link a some of them, as i have not heard of any, only complaints by both that the other sucks
...because without iPod (and Mac) support, that's what it is.
Most of their target demographic already has and loves iPods. A lot of them have been influenced to switch to the Mac, as well. All of those people will turn their nose up at this service.
And if all these companies keep insisting that everyone loves subscribing to music services, one of them really needs to explain how the iTMS, which has no subscription option, has been by far the number one downloadable music store for nearly as long as it has existed and remains so today.
Not a bad invention... however don't you guys end up paying a tax/license for all TV's and radios that you own in order to get to use them legally?
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
I don't know how many people have said this over and over. Apple is successful with iTunes/iTMS/iPod because of two words: Easy and integrated. Since Apple controls all three components, the whole experience of buying music has been designed to work easily so that the average consumer can do it. Microsoft at best can only control two of the three.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
No, they're saying that they MAY not - legally, that is, because they cannot sell the music without DRM, and the only DRM the ipod supports is Apple's Fairplay, and Apple will not permit Microsoft to license their patent for it.
It's not a technical problem at all, it's an IP issue.
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
The reason it won't work on iPods is because Apple won't let it work on iPods.
Nonsense. If Microsoft wish to sell music that will play on iPods, they're free to provide music in unencumbered MP3 format, as online stores such as eMusic and Magnatune currently do. What you're suggesting is that Apple should specifically support a proprietary format designed solely to be used by competing stores on a competing operating system.
Surely the onus here should be on Microsoft, not Apple? What you're asking is about as realistic as expecting Microsoft to provide a fully-featured Windows Media Player for Linux.
There are 2 theories. One, is that this will wipe out the smaller players, consigning the Napster-Yahoo-Rhapsody-whatever 10% of the market to oblivion, and Microsoft will occupy this space with a bit of a boost.
...
The other theory is, Microsoft is going to use market power - money and leverage - to crush iTMS. After all, the only PC that ships with iTunes installed comes from FruitCo, and even though everyone has an iPod these days, they eventually require replacement, and so do PCs, and that new PC you get will probably have Vista and URGE installed by default
The favicon file on Urge.com is the old Netscape logo - http://www.urge.com/favicon.ico
I enjoyed Rhapsody a ton myself. It's great for music at the office or whatever when I'm away from my computer. Unfortunately, for what I used it for, and for the quality of the audio, it was just too expensive. If it had been cheaper (around maybe $10/mo.), or if they had included the ability to dump unlimited audio to my MP3 player for free, I probably would have stuck around. (They introduced an unlimited download subscription service for MP3 player users -- you just had plug our plyaer in every 4 weeks or so -- but it was around $35/mo. Way too much, IMHO.)
No. We pay a license fee for owning a TV - that funds the BBC: they're sort of like PBS, but with the funding to be a decent broadcaster and no donation drives. They also use that money to provide things like the World Service, which broadcasts news etc. throughout the world. Oh, and they make their own shows - a surprising number of which other people subsequently buy, especially documentaries.
Everything else on radio is either free or ad supported.
Maybe the radio is better in the UK, over here all we get is wannabees (many nearly as pathetic as Justin Timberlake) on the radio. Yahoo music is a scam because you dont get anything other than commercial free radio. You can't keep the songs, and you can't play it in your car. On the other hand, you'll find a lot more metal, and a good collection of trance on usenet.
"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
1 John 4:14
No.
Yeah, Microsoft would be interested in letting competitors make iTunes-compatible players so they can destroy Apple. And then comes the WMA format, and blah blah. Bill Gates is just pissed that his company is floundering in digital media, from HD-DVD to WMA.
And since when was it difficult to transfer iTMS songs from one computer to another? I have five machines including my laptop that all have my songs on them. I just copied them over and authorized the computer in iTunes. What's difficult about that?
And for those who will claim iTunes is lock-in, iTunes is the only cross-platform solution. Everyone else supports Windows only, since they're in bed with Microsoft. Microsoft is only interested in extending the Windows platform in the living room. So far, they've been failing miserably. Let them do what they want. Will "Urge" even have TV shows and movies like iTunes?
"Sufferin' succotash."
Yeah, that's pretty much where I stopped reading. I really need to get some of the drugs they must be using down in Redmond. Delusion like that must be an incredible high.
I did like the "all you can eat" idea, though. The real question is "If I unsubsrcibe to the service, does every song in my collection just disappear?" If the answer is "yes" then my answer is "no thanks."
-Eric
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
They are not interested in reaching it. They are interested in crushing it and absorbing it.
Micorsoft's overtly stated concept of a fair share of a market is 100%. It's total war, not business.
KFG
This is really bugging me here - who exactly said "I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient", besides AC several times on /.?
fortune -o
They'll probably get quite a few customers by bundling it with Vista when that comes out. Maybe some kind of 1 month free offer like they used to do with AOL and CompuServe IIRC.
Sure IRiver H10 doesn't look quite as nice as iPod, in terms of UI it's really close (iPod has a slight nod), and sound quality is a dead heat. The iPod is enjoying what I call the "Motorola Advantage", which is the same advantage Motorola held in cell phones earlier. Everyone had one, because Motorola was what everyone wanted. Other cell phones were nearly as good for a short period of time, but then slowly other phones started surpassing them (Nokia and Samsung mostly). People eventually bought different brands when their Motorola's died and Motorola hasn't been the same since.
Today iPod is marginally better than other MP3 players, but not a quantum leap better, and not good enough to trump a superior music service, and for many of us (not everyone, but many) a subscription service is what we need.
I wouldn't invest in Apple based on the iPod, that's for sure.
Your post is summed up as, "Even though it had security holes, ActiveX was good." Umm, no.
"Sufferin' succotash."
You spelled "empty v" wrong.
"I get URGES in my AREAS!"
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0149458/
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
"Urge" is the name brand of munchies and sodas sold at Kwik Trip gas stations throughout the midwest.
-everphilski-
while I could easily strip the DRM off the WMA files[...], that would take too much effort on my part to make it worth the money
How does that make sense? If you can EASILY do it, then it should take very LITTLE effort on your part.
Stop talking nonsense...
It is simply not in their nature to pay royalties to another company - especially Apple who've been a thorn in their side all these years.
They are paying royalties to ATI to use the graphics processor in Xbox 360. They also pay nVidia royalties for making Xbox 360 compatible with some Xbox games. They'll pay when they have to, and they'll do it themselves when they can't. I don't think they'd be that stubborn to not pay Apple to reach the huge iPod audience, but, then, who knows..
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a 747 filled with CD-ROMs.
Let's take a look:
It's nice that Microsoft gets to decide whether your continued listening to music you paid for is "legitimate". But it gets better:
The bottom line is, if you buy a WMA, you're not really buying anything.
Before the /. crowd puts MS down for the count to Apple---look at the sales numbers.... MS is on track to sell 3 million xboxes (about as many ipods as Apple has sold) and has sold 5 million copies of Windows Media center.
Oh boy, yet another damn OMD, what an original, insightful concept... Big friggin deal...for every iTunes mock that works there are about a hundred that fall off the planet in a year...while Microsoft has the money to make it work and these little indie "stick it to the man" OMD's don't...but either way, so what? And Justin Timberlake, couldn't Bill do better and higher profile than that?
dB Masters
IOW: "Microsoft, as part of its 'Innovation By Impersonation' initiative, launched its Urge music service. Justin Timberlake was on-hand for the kick-off singing a rounding rendition of 'Anything You Can Do I Can Do Better.'"
When I lived in central London I plugged in my Psion Wavefinder USB DAB Radio and could listen to over fifty free radio stations and save the raw MP2 streams to my hard drive. Some good stations and variety too. (Yet I didn't listen to any of the BBC's 8+ radio stations...)
If only I didn't live out here in the sticks (35 miles outside of London next to a major international airport) where they'res no signal. If only the Psion Wavefinder had drivers for something slightly more likeable than Windows 98 - 2000...
I think MSFT would switch. I read an interesting article about how MSFT tried to convince apple to let them license fairplay for use on the 360 and apple said no way...
So they did try asking...
Urge NT?
While MS chases after a market already owned by Apple, Jobs and company are moving on into the video realm. Next week Apple will unveil a new Mac Mini media center that like the iPod is easy to set up and use. And just like the iPod knocked out the other mp3 players out there with its combination of simplicity, elegance, and service, so too the Mac Media PC will knock out the the poor media center effort by MS. That is what should happen anyway. I hope Apple delivers.
Billy Boy has had his MSN music store around for around 2 years now and it has been, like MSN itself, a total failure. Now, Billy Boy, touched by the same infinite creative wisdom that produced Microsoft BOB, Clippy and Windows ME, brings out exactly the same fucking product under another brand, and, using exactly the same model as Napster and Yahoo and his other store, expects to win out with his "superior" product.
Billy Boy's new toy, not compatible with the most popular by far audio player, will only help Billy Boy to lose even more money than his current MSN venture does.
My only wish, Billy Boy, is that in a year or two, some journalist with real balls instead of the pants-shitting, brown-nosing creeps that pretend to be such these days, will play you back a recording of your words this day and force you to either admit to just how badly you erred, or to get you to walk out of the studio in tears.
No, what the parent post is saying is that MIcro$oft could write their own iPod OS/firmware and thus wouldn't need to worry about Apple's DRM, as they could use their own. Nothing is preventing them from doing that, though I seriously doubt that it would be popular.
A big "N" on the favicon makes you think of Sun?
Dude, settle down. Yes, I know what the Netscape logo looks like. I'm using Firefox, and I see the sun logo, not the netscape logo.
You might want to look into getting some small, portable copies of the Roche logo, and eating them.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
By similar logic...
After I've gone to a movie theater and watched a movie I should get a free copy of the DVD.
After I've paid rent on my appartment for a couple of years I should own it.
Hello reclusive slashdotting millionaires. I am currently starting a small scale operation with a small but savvy target market. We are going to hire a renegade group of engineers with principles and build a flash-based music player that looks good and works, allowing the owner to play any form of digital audio they wish that is stored on the device without being forced to use any extra software. Now--where da VC at??
Bill: Hey, we're introducing this great new music download service!
Record Company Executive: Great! Does it work on iPods?
Bill: Errr... not exactly.
RCE: Well, then, uh, Bill, you know you're my number one guy, right? Why don't you just let yourself out and I'll get back to you real soon. We'll do lunch, 'kay?
It's hilarious. I know that MS doesn't license squat from anyone but the iPod juggernaut is just that - a hold on the market. iPods have been accepted as being the best and easiest to use portable music/video player that is out there.
Anyone whose music cannot be saved onto an iPod will not succeed. At least no time in the near future. I've heard countless iPod users going online, looking around and being disgusted that they can't get music from other providers... and the interesting thing is that they think the other so-called providers are the jerks for not being compatible. They don't even bring Apple into the equation - it is more like "Hey, i've got a Mac (or PC yeech) and this iPod works on it just fine... what the **** is wrong with this site?" and 99% of the time they just head back to iTunes happily and continue to enjoy the seamless experience.
IT was created for the average computer user - which is probably 95% of the users out there (not like the savvy folks using Slash, etc.) - and it satisfies their needs just fine. They don't give a damn about DRM or ripping more than 7 CD's before having to change the order around. They just know they either love their 'pod or that they want one and any site that is incompatible will lose a tremendous revenue stream and eventually choke and die. It's not that much rocket science to see that.
FairPlay's DRM allows you to copy iTMS music onto up to 5 computers (Mac or Windows). Just authorize the second computer, then copy it across the network, just like you would with MP3s.
Now, you can *also* do it the burn-to-CD, move-CD-to-2nd-computer, re-rip-music-onto-2nd computer method as well if you want to strip the DRM off completely, but you don't have to.
After which they'll rely on their money and lawyers.
Just look at what they tried to do with Java.
Hmmmm... the Urge "G" kinda looks like the QuickTime "Q". :)
If you buy ANY DRM'd music, you don't own it.
Everyone praises Itunes, but they have the same types of restrictions on music you buy there. This isn't just Microsoft going after you. Its any DRM music.
So how many computers do you have on which you actually listen to music. You are aware that you can move music "like so: Copying it across the network" and play it on the other computer as long as you register the other computer. You don't "HAVE" to burn a CD first, you only have to burn a CD if you want to use it on more than 5 (?) different computers (or devices not using iTunes or an iPod, but that is not the issue you were complaining about).
The radio license was abolished decades ago.
The TV license gives us advert free TV, and soon it'll give us internet downloads of most of the TV programmes too... bargain.
Radio over here is generally very good... probably why podcasting hasn't really caught on over here (Adam Curry notwithstanding).
Except that record companies don't allow any of their good albums to be put online in a non-protected format. I am guessing that Microsoft's strategy to take over the living room of every home in the country wouldn't exactly pan out if they only offered mp3's from artists that nobody has ever heard of.
Buy Yahoo Music lets one pick which songs they wish to listen to.
-Eric
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Dear Astroturf,
Recently our small but rapidly-growing hosting company made the decision everyone needs to be utilizing a company-purchased PC for work purposes. Formerly, over half the company had been bringing in their own Powerbooks and leaving the provided Windows box unpowered underneath the desk; imagine that--people bringing in their own computers for work because the platform was easier to work with than Windows.
The policy change forcing everyone to use Windows boxen took effect on the first of January, and already productivity is down. Yesterday, after one of the support guys spent a couple hours trying to clean up spyware and trojans that wormed their way on to one of our SQL Server boxes I spent a couple more hours cleaning up the box and the 21 different trojans, spyware and viruses that it was trying to propagate over RPC. A few rebooots later (one of which just to turn on port blocking... cripe), the server is back up and running. When's the last time I had to reboot any of our 100+ Linux servers for security reasons? never. We've got anwhere between 60 and 200+ clients on each of these boxes--definitely a hostile environment--and these boxes require much less time and maintenance than the Windows servers that we're required to maintain.
So, when people talk about the lack of stability as a platform, Windows is still as bad as ever. You guys get all proud and beat your chest now that Windows doesn't randomly crash & can stay running longer than 60 days without requiring a reboot... sorry, but that's nothing to be proud of. Don't get me wrong, I'll be the first to say that there's some good things about Windows, but it's not stability or security.
If you have the service licensed for your home computer, your work computer and your laptop, doesn't that use up your three licenses? How are you also putting songs on your Zen Micro? Doesn't that count as a device?
I, to see what would happen, went to urge.com. It is just a pic that says "Urge, coming soon", (which if you think about, is funny in and of itself) but the page source (and the bottom of the page) has this:
2005 MTV Networks. MTV, URGE and all related titles and logos are trademarks of MTV Networks, a division of Viacom International Inc.So it seems the brand, at least legally, belongs to MTV and Viacom, unless I am reading too much into it.
Argh. The laws of science be a harsh mistress.
Operative word here: "launches"
How can this be said to "launch" when I can't find a link anywhere to this new service/program?
The folks at Redmond are so utterly consumed with the competitive 'urge' that they failed to notice that iTunes makes no money . It exists merely to feed ipods.
And the subscription thing is super... if you plan to be subscribed for years. When you cancel, bye-bye music.
M$ has lots of cash to throw away on loser projects and so they do....
+ Britney Spears new song
+ Deodorant brand from the UK
- ActiveX: This {is,is not} signed, do you want to trust it? It runs (iirc) as any other program on your PC. Downsides: terrible permissions granularity, Windows-only.
- Java Applets: This {is,is not} signed by foo and asks for permission to do bar, do you want to give it these permissions (e.g. disk access)? Runs in a sandbox, so access (unless signed and allowed and barring bugs) outside the sandbox is verboten. Downsides: For full functionality, requires Sun or Sun-compatible Java runtime, so is usually an extra download for users. For abridged functionality, you may wish to restrict your functionality to the ancient Java runtime 1.1.1, which is (at least mostly) implemented in Microsoft's Windows-Extended Java (also known as "Microsoft VM"), but will still likely be an additional (free) download for most users. I suspect Macs come bundled with Java, but I'm not certain.
- XUL: A mozilla-only technology, does applications via XPCOM, XML, and JavaScript. Downsides: Restricted functionality (unless you can install stuff for XPCOM, I think, I'm somewhat fuzzy on this) compared to other solutions; Mozilla-only, a (free) download for most users.
- XAML: Microsoft's take on XUL. Windows Vista only (if it's still included, which iirc it is), I believe it requires Microsoft's
.net, but I could be wrong.
- AJAX: entirely javascript in-browser. Downsides: requires good JavaScript compatibility.
- Plain old CGI: available in any browser. Downsides: very, very limited ease of use compared to other solutions, places very rigid restraints on the user-server interaction.
- Shockwave Flash: I have little experience with this outside of watching short animations and interactive websites with it. Downside: requires Shockwave Flash plugin (a problem on any non-x86 platform, last I knew, including x86_64!)
There are likely others, but these are probably the most common. Notably, several of these are quite cross-platform and provide little, if any, vendor lockin, and the security options of some are much better than the security options of others.--
Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.
And pretty good market penetration in portable players too. Nearly every non-ipod digital music player plays non-DRM'ed WMA files, even the no-name $40 MP3 players.
you missed the part where Justin ripped off a piece of Bill's shirt, revealing his nipple shield.
This is so typical... announce your grand plan with NOTHING to support it or release. At the moment all of this is just hype, possibly to take away from next weeks MacWorld where there will be actual hardware and software released for public use. This entire "strategy" is based on an OS that isn't even released yet, and may not be for a few months. I don't want a pile of frelling speculation!!!! Though I doubt this will result in any more head way into the foray of media integration, I would still rather see this than hear Bill$ Gate$ rattle on about how great Mircro$oft products will be some day.
It takes $18 and 10 minutes to replace the battery in your iPod.
I think you have it wrong. MS is in a much different competitive position re on line music than they are with office suites where they have a virtual monopoly. When MS has to play technological catchup the tried and true formula has always been embrace, extend, extinguish. So here, I'm sure MS would be willing to license from the market leader, Apple, which would be the "embrace" step followed by "extend" and "extinguish".
But JHymn does. http://www.hymn-project.org/
I have no
Well, I usually never post sites in posts, but this service from Pandora is good enough for me, and has some advantages over iTunes as it *teaches* you about music you might like. Dunno why slashdot didn't post news about it, but for those who like music -- check it out.
You know what you should do?
Install RealPlayer.
Goto the Radio1 website.
Click "Listen Live"
Commercial free, varied artists, free, radio.
If you want to listen to it someplace else, I believe one of the digital radio systems in the US carries all of the BBC radio channels, too.
http://www.mygigabeat.com/2006/01/its-official-gig abeat-s-series-with.html
you are talking complete bollocks.
MS lets you have your music on 2 computers ever, including the same computer uprgraded.
Apple lets you have it on any 5 computers at the same time. if you have 5 computers and buy a 6th, you can just unregister one of the old ones. I honestly don't see how being restricted to only 5 computers simultaneously interferes with any more than a tiny minority of legitimate users. and even when you are affected it just means one less computer - no music is lost.
MS's system on the other hand is guaranteed to affect every user who upgrades, and to effect them in such a way that they lose all their music completely.
metal? trance??
Here's a quarter, get some fucking taste in music.
DRM is fundamentally flawed and will always be broken, because in the end, I have your music on my hard drive, and you're not going to be able to stop me from doing what I want with it.
Not entirely true. Take computer security for example. True, absolute security (security that only, ever allows the people/programs in/out that are supposed to be) is impossible. Therefore it's fundamentally flawed and will always be broken. Yet you can use secruity to make unauthorized access extremely difficult. The same goes for DRM. It may barely work, if at all, but it does increase the difficulty and therefore decreases the amount of piracy somewhat. Nobody is foolish enough to think that DRM is or ever will be perfect any more than they think computer security will be. It's a measure they can take to minimize what they perceive as lost revenue and so they will. So unfortunately it's here to stay.
[tangent]The whole concept "rights" is an illusion anyway - digital or otherwise. If copyright holders have exclusive rights to copy their music, then how come other people are making copies? If you have the right to live, then how come you could get hit by a bus tomorrow? The only rights any entity really has are those that it can take or retain by some force.[/tangent]
Question everything
The reason it won't work on iPods is because Apple won't let it work on iPods
Apple would do absolutley nothing if Microsoft used MP3 (or even unprotected AAC) as the transport format, which plays on an iPod just fine.
Microsoft however would never use either of those, so really it's all abount Microsoft trying to shut down ITMS.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Hell, I can buy *one* radio, and listen to the *same* song *all* the time!
(seriously, though, I haven't listened to the radio for music in years because all the record companies can come out with these days is crap-flavored crap, but I do listen to talk radio quite a lot)
--
"Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
"Open source is evil." - Microsoft
If history is an indicator of Future performance, Urge will:
1. Break iTunes when installed
2. Prevent iPods from connecting
3. "embrace and extend" your AAC files by automatically converting them to WMA, deleting the original AAC files in the process
4. Run on any OS you like, as long as it's Windows XP or higher. You run MacOS? Linux? BSD? HA!
5. absolutely REQUIRE Internet Explorer
6. Display ads as you listen
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
I wonder what MS's DRM terms are.
I think it involves a newborn, or being stretched over a barrel, or some blood ritual.
It's not the ActiveX technology that's at fault (though it is riddled with problems). Exposing ActiveX to the internet was the stupidest thing Microsoft has ever done. They were warned... they went ahead with it because they saw the opportunity to force Windows as the only web platform.
Off the back of that bullshit, billions of dollars have been flushed away in virus/trojan outbreaks, and I don't know how many peoples' personal details have been phished and their bank accounts raided. If there was any justice, Microsoft would be sued into the ground for that anti-competitive decision.
Where in the world did you get that from? That sounds like nonsense.
I can't imagine that the you'll ever be able to record or store songs from a subscription. The song IP will be far too valuable for you to listen to them at your leisure..
Not that I either expect them to, or want them to, but if they can't win on this, they're going to be in serious trouble. After the total failour of the XBox 360 launch (quite possibly the weakest launch of any major console in terms of "trend setting"), and a pretty dismal year for their shareholders, noone's going to take them seriously in new, younger markets anymore. In other news, their market share is slipping (slowly, but still on a negative trend), and national headlines (NBC nightly news) were made yesterday when serious flaws in windows security were discovered. They're currently losing the HD media wars badly. They're on the cusp of losing all their major upcoming battles, and with all the money they have, you'd think they'd find a quick way of bailing themselves out, but I think MS have really bitten off more than they can chew. Sure, they'll get a chunk of change from "Vista", later this year, but that's only because they've got one market locked in, their break-in power to new markets, on the other hand, has been pretty bad as of late.
They're not going to have as easy a time killing off iTunes as they did Netscape. They got IE in the door because of large businesses with a "no touch" attitude towards new installs on their computers, so they'd stick to the pre-installed IE. Their main demographic in THIS battle, however, is a highly capable, No Fear, computer savvy youth who previously had the RIAA worried by their increased downloads of illegal music from virtually no-named services. This isn't the same crowd with the, "if it's not broke, don't fix it", this is a demographic that's not afraid to go out of their way to get what they want. So, this time, they're really going to have to compete in terms of style and trend, something they've never been good at. Their first move seems pretty clueless to me: hire on a former music content provider (MTV), which is currently regarded by today's youth as being "so yesterday"; for you're spokesman, get on board a washed up teen idol who may have hit it big with 14 year old girls in 1998, but who's name is going to insite a resounding "Justin who?" response from the same demographic today. I mean, Justin Timberlake coule be Dick Clark for all they care—yes, pop culture moves THAT FAST. And for the grand finale, name your service, as someone said, something associated with gross bodily function. Seriously, my first reaction to the name was "ewww", it conjure's up images of some guy badly needing to take a dump. This reminds me of a funny scene from a commedy a few years back, "Nothing to Lose", in which the main character, a marketting specialist, warns one of his clients, "Excriment is the last thing people are going to want to think about when buying cookies", I think this holds true in this case too. Apple captured millions with sillohette's dancing around with iPods, how popular would they have been if the sillohette's were holding their crotches, swaying back and forth saying, "I need to pee"?
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
Pay back's a bitch, ain't it?
"The world is a construct of forceful imagination. Those who don't know walk around in the reailties of those who do"
I've never had a working Windows machine in my presence.
There ain't no rules here; we're trying to accomplish something.
People seem to forget that MS still has ~ 90% market share in the desktop market and as such they set trends not follow them. We can bitch and moan all we want but MS does what MS wants to do and the rest of the industry dutifully falls in line, it's been like that for a long time now.
You always point your finger at the bad guy, but what if the bad guy points his finger at you?
Also unveiled in Vista: a new interface with features including live preview in the task bar, which will allow users to see all applications as they are running.
Wow. Sounds great! I'd LOVE to have the feature on my Mac.
Its still a restriction. Everyone wants Microsoft to make their music restriction free, but people tolerate Apple's restrictions. Apple can impose new terms at any time and you have to comply. Maybe they'll move theirs to be more in line with Microsoft.
"Why should I be forced to burn music to a CD..."
Because the record companies are greedy fucks who don't get it and you're not going to have any sort of comprehensive catalog without a minimum of DRM at this point in history.
Next question?
"The world is a construct of forceful imagination. Those who don't know walk around in the reailties of those who do"
It is simply not in their nature to pay royalties to another company - especially Apple who've been a thorn in their side all these years.
I suspect the problem in this case is Apple: making it any easier for other companies to compete with their music store would be a serious problem for them. And the entire iTunes/iPod infrastructure is carefully designed to keep out competition. Given that so much of Apple's success is depending on it, who can blame them?
Or just go to http://www.shoutcast.com/ The only reason I'd own a portable MP3 player is to stream a few hours a day from shoutcast to a file, and then dump that on the mp3 player. While I like my own collection, I would just get bored with it on the bike after awhile anyway.
And I listen to radio on iTunes at work for free, and I can listen to a lot of music I really like that I would never hear on free radio (in the USA).
Dude, that's called a mortgage.. and yes, it's better than renting :-p
Well, let's look at adult lifetime costs. 60 years x $60 = $3600; I have paid far more than that for CDs. So, subscription services make sense if you don't already have a large CD collection.
My only concern are that Yahoo's selection isn't big enough and that it only works on Windows.
Let's see... Microsoft + Justin Timberlake + MTV.
Which of those makes me want to run out and sign up?
Oh, right - NONE of them.
Forgive me for being underwhelmed.
Why, oh why, didn't I take the Blue Pill?
"But since Apple wants their store to be the only one truly compatible with their device, Microsoft has no choice."
In other words Apple is just as evil as Microsoft.
"It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -- Prof. Dumbledore
DeDRMs hasn't worked since iTunes 6 came out.
[tangent]The whole concept "rights" is an illusion anyway - digital or otherwise. If copyright holders have exclusive rights to copy their music, then how come other people are making copies? If you have the right to live, then how come you could get hit by a bus tomorrow? The only rights any entity really has are those that it can take or retain by some force.[/tangent]
But you do have the right to live, and we all agree that it's your right to live. It's inherent to being human. That way, we all should make our best efforts in trying that you don't get hit by a bus tomorrow. And lots of regulation and money goes in that direction.
About the copyrights, it's not about some persons rights. It's a monopoly on distribution given by your government, as an incentive to share your works. You might say that when people copy the songs they are in breach of that agreement, but they are not violating your rights, they are violating your priviledges. It's not the same thing.
And we can add a widget to Windows (fully embedded so it can't be removed without breaking IE) so that people can order Bolus online! Any time! Electronically! It'll be a wonderful service! Electronic Bolus on demand! And we can call this new service E-Bolus!
You cannot truly appreciate Dilbert until you read it in the original Klingon.
Said it before, now saying it again:
--- The American Way of Life is not a birthright. Hell, it's not even sustainable.
i agree...
i was going to sign up to yahoo music's subscription music.... figuring there'd be plenty of DRM but big deal it's cheap... don't work on ipod, so i immediately discounted it. i'm sure that'll be the same case with the 11 million+ ipod owners out there.
i just can't see something being designed to compete with iTunes, if iPod users can't use it. ipod users account for what, 99.999% of the portable player market?
While I do think they are on bad drugs, I don't think the philosophy is so cracked. It's just playing out differently this time.
When Apple started to have huge success with the iPod, all the naysayers came out of the woodwork and (rightly) pointed out that this very strategy - keep it proprietary and lock it down as best you can - totally backfired on Apple before, in the desktop PC area. Microsoft capitalized (to say the least) on the 'open ecosystem' of PC parts that were more-or-less interchangeable, and that came to rule the market. So for MS to say, let's let all the digital audio player manufacturers chip away at Apple until they are marginal again, and we will concentrate on being the software that powers all these music transactions... it really wasn't such a crazy thought.
Except this time, for whatever reason, it is actually working for Apple. So they are stymied. MS, Creative et. al fully believed that the iPod's market domination would surely have slipped by now. The iPod has been out for several years now. But it really hasn't.
Having said all that, I am convinced Apple is too smart to make the same bad decision (I mean books have been written about that decision!) this time around. They just haven't felt the pressure yet, so they have no motivation to do so. If iPod sales slip below a magic number of saturation, say 40%, Apple WILL open Fairplay and go from there. And everyone but MS will praise them for it. I did like the "all you can eat" idea, though. The real question is "If I unsubsrcibe to the service, does every song in my collection just disappear?" If the answer is "yes" then my answer is "no thanks."
That is exactly what happens. You get maybe a month's worth of grace period, then... poof. Welcome to Janus, your two-faced media guardian.
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
...this IS the 21st century and MOST of us ARE schizo...
Coincidence? I think NOT!
Does he have a controllable Urge?
--
It's got style. It's got class.
So strong, I can't let it pass.
One nice thing Apple lets you do is deauthorize all of your computers at the same time from the iTunes web site. That way, if you sold one of your computers or if you signed on to a public computer or a friend's computer with your Apple ID, nobody else can use your account, etc.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
"I haven't listened to the radio for music in years because all the record companies can come out with these days is crap"
;) Heck they play a full album each night at 11 for classic pirates, hehe :)
Perhaps thats why i have it tuned to a classic rock station
Repeat after me... SHOULD HAVE.
Only uneducated (and/or careless) morons say SHOULD OF.
Actually, they seem to be doing a great job with their Media Center version of Windows, and the xbox360 interface is reportedly a very good one.
If they integrate it into Media Center properly, I can see it being sustainable and then taking off as people find out how useful and just plain cool a media center (of any variety) is.
Now if Apple gets TV into their product and gets full media integration into a minimac or other media center pc, they could well maintain their stranglehold on the market.
This is all assuming the media content companies don't sink the whole system up by trying to raise prices too high. That's probably giving them too much credit though.
"I'm Henry the XXXVIII I am, Henry the XXXVIII I am I am..."
Those who complain about affect & effect on
On that 3dge, duuude.
*.WAV
.wav format. + you get the bonuses of having the best digital sound quality to boot, every cd player can play them.
Lets see them try to DRM that...
Besides, who doesn't have a home server w/ a petabyte or more these days.
Wave used to be too big for our small drives, now I can fit a wave CD onto a mini sd card.
100 gigs is about = to 160 CD's in
If you can afford 320 cd's surley you can afford 200 gig drive for about $70-$100 to hold them right?
How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
Speaking of streaming radio, I really love "Streamtuner" http://www.nongnu.org/streamtuner/ It's a very nifty internet radio stream browser for *nix platforms like linux and FreeBSD (there doesn't appear to be any windows ports that I'm aware of). Makes it very easy to find what you'd like to hear.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
I cancelled one of my subscriptions for an audiobook service because they would not make downloads available in an MP3 format.
We are developing audiobooks for software developers (see http://www.developeradvantage.com/products.html) which are released as MP3 files - simple and easy to use!
FREE - Java, J2EE and Ajax Audiobooks for Software Developers - www.DeveloperAdvantage.com
The stuff about Microsoft came from the GP post, who got it from Microsoft's website.
The stuff about Apple's iTunes comes from Apple's website.
So no, it's not nonsense. Don't believe it? Go read the websites.
Peter
People tolerate Apple's restrictions because they find the restrictions tolerable.
You can burn iTMS purchases to CD. Can you do that with URGE purchases?
It is slightly tedious but possible to make non-DRM copies of iTMS purchases with no loss of quality. Can you do that with URGE purchases?
It is possible to make mp3 copies of iTMS purchases that you can then play on any mp3 player. Can you do that with URGE?
iTMS purchases can be played on up to five different computers at the same time. URGE purchases can be played on two computers, ever.
Ten years from now, you can play your iTMS purchases on up to five totally different computers. Five years from now, when you have upgraded your PC twice, you will not be able to play your URGE purchases at all.
Apple can impose new terms at any time and you have to comply. Maybe they'll move theirs to be more in line with Microsoft.
Sometime in the future, Apple might change the terms, which would then apply to any future iTMS purchases. If Apple tried to make the change in terms retroactive, they would face a class action lawsuit faster than you can say "iTunes Music Store".
On the other hand, Microsoft's restrictions now guarantee that songs you purchase from URGE now will not be playable after you have upgraded your computer twice.
I know which restrictions I am willing to tolerate.
Peter
Dollar short and a day late, when will MS ever learn.. nm they are still worried about IBM.
Ah, I didn't see that. However, that KB article is a year old so it may not apply to the new service. After all, "Plays for Sure" software can be activated and deactivated at will on different computers. It wouldn't make sense that Urge would use something other than Plays For Sure.
Mr Gates! Mr Gates!
I've come up with this great idea, why don't we offer Music up for buy and download!!
What a good idea! Get the patents people in here! Tomorrow, we 'invent' legal music downloads! I wonder why nobody else has done it before...
3 weeks later Apple were successfully sued for millions on the grounds of a patent violation...
History repeats itself, and minutes are written by those who won.
You feel sleepy. Close your eyes. The opinions stated above are yours. You cannot imagine why you ever felt otherwise.
But in the end Apple is just as bad as MSFT when it comes to those ideas.
Nonsense. I was going to add something like, "unless you mean in that they both X" where X is something related to DRM, but I can't think of anything at all where they are equal, except the fact that they both support DRM, which they do in such different ways that it's hard to equate the two.
With a very few notable exceptions, Apple supports open standards like crazy (OGG, FLAC, and DivX come to mind as notable exceptions, but then, MS doesn't support them either). And when it comes to DRM, I tend to agree with the "DRM is bad" sentiment, but *if* there's going to be DRM, Apple's really seems to be the most reasonable and consumer friendly of the lot.
of course I still own a powerbook and have no working windows machines in my presence any more.
I tend to forget just how bad MS products are when I haven't used them for awhile too.
It should be noted that Gates did not unveil it, it was Van Toffler from MTV Networks. It should also be noted that Urge is a product of MTV Networks, not Microsoft. It was developed by MTV Networks. Microsoft is a partner, obviously because of DRM in WMP.
"We have seen the enemy, and it is us." - Pogo (comic strip character)
"All the modern inconveniences." - Mark Twain
However, all I have to say about that is, "I hate quotations. Tell me what you know." - Emerson
"f it doesn't work on a iPod will it not work on a RIO either? how about a sony walkman? Maybe I should download a copy for free and at a higher bit rate from the internet?"
It doesn't work with iPod because Apple refuses to lince Fairplay and refuses to support WMA. They enjoy their monopoly on the mp3 player market and leverage it for music sales on iTMS. It'll work with all players that support the WMA, which is everyone else in the market.
Vote for Pedro
"Bullshit. Napster might switch but MSFT will not use any format that they themselves didn't create/enhance/ruin."
mp3? microsoft supports mp3. Don't make stupid absolute statement. It only takes 1 counterexample to prove you wrong.
Vote for Pedro
"Microsoft doesn't license anything - they developed wmv rather then licensing quicktime and so on."
MS doesn't license mp3 for their software?
Vote for Pedro
n/t
Why? Because the latest version of Media Player only support DRM-enabled players, and the Riot has no DRM.
So I have a couple of other ways to put music on the Riot, but the Media Player transfers worked pretty well.
When I can no longer repair the Riot, I guess I'll get another player, but I won't like it!
"Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair" - George Washington
Thanks! I've been looking for something like this for quite some time! This makes setting up an appliance in the living room that much easier.
Uh, if you read the same article I did, that's not what it said. It quoted some MSFT spokesperson as saying "we'd like to work with Apple" which isn't really the same as saying "we asked Apple if we could license their DRM tech and they said no".
Really, the Xbox thing was pretty different- they're talking about being able to have an Xbox play music directly off of an iPod. There's a big difference between that ( just using the iPod as a storage device off of an Xbox 360 ) and licensing FairPlay DRM for use on a Windows computer.
Just for reference, here's register article on the topic. It's not the same one I remember reading, but covers the basic issues. Key being that, according to the article "Anecdotal evidence suggests Apple isn't unwilling to license its FairPlay DRM technology, but it's very picky about how it will consider. Our sources indicate well-established hi-fi brands might be in with a chance. Whatever, clearly the Xbox 360 isn't in the right league. Enabling base-line iPod compatibility is easy enough - they're essentially standard USB mass storage devices, the AAC audio format is part of the MPEG 4 standard, there are open source Apple Lossless decoders available, and numerous third-party utilities have figured out how the tracks are stored on the player - and so that's what Microsoft has done."
No where have I seen any MSFT employee quoted as saying that they had actually attempted to license FairPlay DRM from Apple. I'd be very interested in any reference that shows MSFT tried to license FairPlay from Apple. Do you have one?
I don't think they asked what you think they asked... if they really asked Apple anything at all. Publicly, all they've said is they'd like to work with Apple.
Really, the big problem in iPod compatibility ( so MSFT will say ) is that they require a DRM scheme that includes a duration restriction, so your music, er sorry, your license to listen to their music can expire. I've never bought anything which uses FairPlay DRM, and yet I'm still all for Apple never including that ability.
Right now I've got 744 songs in my collection, which if purchased at iTunes would cost more than 12 years of subscription fees (assuming the price doesn't go up).
Which means that Yahoo got 1/12th the money from you than Apple would have. And iTMS isn't making any great profit for Apple, so who's paying for the difference? Under the counter kickbacks from Microsoft?
Meanwhile I've got several thousand songs in my collection, and I've probably got more music from MP3blogs and podcasts than you've got altogether. Music isn't a scarce resource, you don't need to worry about how much you can afford to buy... finding stuff you like and stuff that'll expand your mind is a much more interesting worry to have.
I can get an endless stream of music that I've never heard before from pandora.com, from last.fm, and when I find something I like enough to keep I can buy it from iTunes, or direct from the artist, or if it's only available as a CD from Amazon, and with most free streams it's just a click of a button. There's more material there than I could ever listen to... why should I pay to subscribe to a service that's only got music from the labels?
To the Apple fanatics who are modding me down for no reason, using a combination of Flamebait and Overrated (c'mon guys, Overrated is the one to use, then you don't get metamodded! Geez, at least game the system right...), thanks muchly for demonstrating to everyone how stupid you are.
I fully expect this to end up a -1, Insightful and to have this entire, great discussion (that part said without sarcasm, because it is) shifted to the bottom of the thread. Thanks a lot, seriously.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
Or, you know, you could install winamp (or, on *nix, XMMS) and listen to shoutcast streams. For free. Without realplayer.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I think what would really make a splash at CES (or at anytime, for that matter), would be an easy to set up box that would have networking capability (802.11x or wired ethernet, or both), a hard drive, a remote control, and television outputs. You would hook this thing up to your TV and network (it could look like a regular set-top box), have it configure via DHCP (or input IP addresses if that is your thing), and it would use an RSS feed (with published format?) from the company that sells it to allow it to aggregate video content from places like Google Video and other video sharing services (and video blogs), in some easy to browse format. Maybe add in picture surfing/slide shows from sites like LiveJournal or such. Allow the ability to "save" the video/image to the harddrive for later viewing (or queue up for watching later ala Tivo). Perhaps even allow podcast downloads?
Something like this might revolutionize how we "watch" TV - how TV is created, distributed. We will probably never see something like this, at least anytime soon, since it could undermine the cable company's purpose. I would just like to have an ISP provide me the feed, and me get my content from all over the internet. We already have this in a haphazard form with a web-browser and PC, but if it was available in an easy to use box for the TV (maybe add a DVD-RW drive in it as well, to allow movie watching and archiving of things downloaded/streamed) - it could be interesting.
As it is, I am figuring since this is something I want, it is going to have to be something I make myself...
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
They should totally use "Jump Right In" as the theme song in their commercials.
I'm sure you are aware that ( unless you pay an extra time to buy a permanent copy ), the answer is "yes, your music will no longer be available when your subscription expires".
Since Napster et al have had such a stunning success with this model ( er, that's sarcasm, they've had marginal success at best ), why does Microsoft think they're going to be successful with it ? Maybe they have some secret plan to prevent everyone from using iPods and force us to buy one of the "Plays for sure" devices that are clearly so popular? For their sake, I hope it doesn't depend on leveraging the music service to get us to do it... unless the Xbox 360 becomes the way everyone gets their music, which somehow I don't see yet...
Dont have a clue about this urge crap but with MSN Music
Not only do I get more songs encoded at 192 or 256kb I get to burn songs to CD's an UNLIMITED number of times as opposed to 7 with ITunes.........
Also I can authorize up to 5 computers at one time to listen to DRM'd music I purchase on MSN music.......
Which is really not an issue, I do not buy songs I usually buy the entire album and burn it on CD then turn right around and re rip it with out all that DRM crap which one can do with iTunes also
Um, why exactly ? Napster and several other online music services have all-you-can-eat monthly plans. Why aren't these already beating the iTunes music store ? You already have been able to buy for quite some time now "Plays for Sure" devices, they're advertised in all sorts of Best Buy and Circuit City adds... but wasn't everyone asking for iPods this Christmas?
How is Microsoft striking a deal with MTV and marketing it's own music store going to change things and suddenly beat the iTMS ?
You are right, you sound like a commercial for Yahoo Music Unlimited. Don't get me wrong, it's great that it works for you, but... based on market numbers, I'm going to guess there are a lot of reasons why the vast majority of people aren't going for that type of service, and all MSFT entering the market currently owned my Napster and Yahoo is going to do is fragment *that* market, it isn't likely to impact the iTMS much. It'll wound Yahoo, not iTMS.
Disclaimer : I have never bought music online, excepting physical CDs.
If you don't live here, try 89.3's live stream.
Of course, they're hoping we'll settle for the "all-you-can eat subscription, an option the iTunes music store doesn't have". iTunes doesn't have that because it's a stupid idea that won't sell. Music ain't like movies; we want to keep our own copies and take them with us.
yah yah, same with shoutcast. but you can't pick which songs u want hear.
"Interesting comment.
Here Apple has iTMS which works on Apple own OS as well as the competing Microsoft and functions exactly the same on either OS.
Will Urge do the same on Apple's OS or is this going to be another anti-trust issue?
Hell, they could support Linux like Rhapsody and get out of the hot seat."
MS already licenses WMA. It's Apple that's obstructing compatibility and the one who is creating an antitrust problem
Vote for Pedro
The break-even point for you would be 25 songs in a month
I've recently been burning fresh backups of my purchased songs. I'm back to May 2005, with 6 CDs filled, with 10-15 tracks per CD. That's at most 11 per month, and that doesn't count the free samples every Tuesday... which I pick up at least a couple of times a month. I bought more to start with, but it's kind of tapered off over time...
I still buy more music on CDs and rip it than I buy from iTMS, but the stuff I bought from iTMS gets a lot of play. 6 of my top 10 tracks came from there. Of the top 50, that's 16 ripped from my CD collection, 20 from iTMS, and 14 direct from the artist's website (plus or minus a couple each way, I don't recall exactly where each track came from originally).
it's still a restriction that they reserve the right to change. sure, the apple chains are longer, but i'de rather not be chained at all. this is simply chosing which chains i would prefer to be shackled by. if noone bought a single drmed song, drm would go away.
The TV license gives us advert free TV, and soon it'll give us internet downloads of most of the TV programmes too
Including Monty Python's Flying Circus?
"Hello 911? I just tried to toast some bread, and the toaster grew an arm and stabbed me in the face!"
The Napster-to-Go service, which uses the Microsoft Plays For Sure provisions, has the following restrictions:
Computers: You can have three authorized PCs at a time. You can unregister one PC per month. Authorized PCs are used to store/playback downloaded music. This is not a restriction on the number of PCs that can _stream_. You can have Napster on any number of PCs and use the client for streaming on all of them.
Portable devices: You can have two registered devices at a time. You can unregister one device a month. Registered devices can be used to listen to tracks that you haven't purchased. This is not a restriction on the number of devices to which you can transfer _purchased_ tracks.
These contraints seem quite reasonable to me. I have never needed more.
DRM combined with the DMCA makes it impossible to legally build a compatible product unless the company actually gives you permission to do so. This would of course be stupid on their part, but it would not matter anyways for reasons I will explain later. That means to build a new product you either you sue to break the monopoly and make them give you access to the DRM or you change the DMCA to allow you to legally create a compatible product, ie, break the DRM. In either case there is no way to let DRM a little out the box that will work. Why? If the maker of a given form of DRM were forced or chose to give it to few companies, it would only result in a monopoly. This is true no matter how large a intial set they give it to, the companies would compete at first but as one became dominant and absorbed the others or through their collusion the effect would be the same a new monopoly would form. The reason is that no new competing company or innovation can enter such a set to disrupt this natural economic effect. Keep in mind if they freely gave it to any companies that asked this would either defeat the DRM or the result in the need for a costly ever growing review process which itself would create a entry bar too high for anything really new get past the cost. Why, the process time and costs for a review process are exponential, for each new product you have would have to include its interactions with all others its needs to work with. There would also be an ever growing risk of the DRM being defeated if a mistake is made and an ever growing range of possible dangers for each new product meaning the cost to create and enforce safeguards and time to avoid this would grow each time. This alone would create the enormous start up costs but you have to also remember that the government or like third pary company would have to be the one doing these reviews with all the bureaucratic nightmares and fees that would involve. Why? Could you trust the companies whose DRM is going to be taken to be fair. An full analysis will show you that any DRM using option will always results in another decay set being created that results in a monopoly. It is direct result of DRM's fundamental incompatibility with a market economy. Therefore DRM must and will always fail as the only way to prevent the monopoly effect is to either not use it at all or legally allow it to be bypassed which defeats is whole purpose. There are even some who will argue that if we do allow these monopolies to form they will in time fail under their own weight taking down the market with them. It may take time to happen but in the end monopolies do not innovate, prices go up because of greed and simply increasing internal costs, and lack of any outside threats leads to sloppy management. Since you cannot possibly fail why try harder?
Yahoo music is a scam
I got my Yahoo Music subscription at $36 for a year. That's a whole year of listening to quite a few preset and customized radio stations that never have commercials. And I can skip any songs I don't like or don't feel like listening to at the moment. I can even check a little box to remove the songs with explicit lyrics so I can safely listen at work (though, admittedly, this feature needs some tweaking).
I don't call that a scam. I call it pure genius.
"There are more important things than stopping terrorism. Upholding the Constitution is one of them." - Ars Forumer.
The real question is "If I unsubsrcibe to the service, does every song in my collection just disappear?" If the answer is "yes" then my answer is "no thanks."
If the answer was anything else, you could for one monthly fee get their whole X million song collection. Regardless of the fee, that cannot possibly work as a business.
In online music services you can sell individual songs permanently, or you can sell timed access to a huge song library. Either model has its pros and cons, but you have to pick one.
I'm surprised you don't have to pay a radio license.
TV Licensing in the UK
My amazing wife - Artist, Author, Philosopher - Laurie M
There is no way MS can compete with Apple. Microsoft has a terrible image problem right now. Everything they make is considered clunky, buggy, ugly, poorly designed, uncool.
Apple on the other hand... has a very trendy image. Apple is sleak, cool, very well designed, their devices are works of art visually, their OS is pretty, the Apple store is "cool", The IPOD is the hottest item one could buy this year (last year, the year before etc) IPOD is dominating the market in such that every kid wants one.
Apple has great marketing... You have to admit their IPOD commercials are very well done.
MS has a huge image problem, and the worst thing is.. NO one wants anything to do with Microsoft and their music service. They're entering a market that is APPLES. And every IPOD owner is perfectly happy with their IPOD, ITUNES, free mp3s online etc.
MS would do better to get into the online downloadable movie market.
That's right, a similar thing happened last year with Steve Jobs:
http://www.bradcornelius.com/images/stevenote.jpg
Andrew
>If iPod sales slip below a magic number of
>saturation, say 40%, Apple WILL open
>Fairplay and go from there.
Myself, I hope they never do. Nor do I hope Microsoft's Urge starts supporting either FairPlay or iPods.
As someone who has spent consierable effort moving my music collection to MP3s, I'm now worried about the longevity of the format. Will I still be able to play MP3s 40 years from now?
As long as there are least two competing formats, Apple's and everyone else's (read: Playsfersure ), then MP3 will remain the only universal song format. People will rip to it to ensure device compatability and device makers will include it to make sure people actually buy their portable music players. Having these giants fight over who gets to offer the dominant media format certainly does encourage the vendor-neutral choice.
Dude, that name rocks.
That name is an extreme 540 explosion of awesomeness. It'll rock your face off, it'll get you laid, and it makes crappy music sound better.
Also, it cures AIDS and Hepatitis.... which is necessary, because, ya know... it gets you laid.... A LOT.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
About a year ago, Microsoft released their MSN music store thing; I don't remember if you could rent the songs from there a-la Yahoo. It was supposed to be pushed majourly by MS and forecasted by Microsoft to overtake iTunes.
Where is it now?
Ok you forced me into it . . .
of course I still own a powerbook and have no working windows machines in my presence any more.
If you did have a working windows machine, you'd be the first . . .
Can I get an eye poke?
Dog House Forum
Has anyone noticed what server www.urge.com runs on ? :-) :-)
Thanks MTV, let's the SUN shine in
... This won't fly. Just look at this. Even though market share is dropping, having > 60% of the number of units sold is still remarkable. And with the whole top 10 being Apple and no. 10 being the large video iPod at a 3.6% share, there is clearly no big competition - just a lot of small competition. The second best companys bestseller is doing worse than 3.6% market share. And the Nano flew in as no. 2 in just half a month. Unbelievable.
-._''_.-
There was a time, believe it or not, when Rolling Stone magazine was relevant. More recently, MTV was the voice of generation that, for better or worse, "killed the radio star." This MS/MTV relationship reminds me how utterly pointless MTV has become (and no, I haven't been in its demographic, for, um, several, years). MTV, meet the shark. (Might as well) Jump!
MS's system on the other hand is guaranteed to affect every user who upgrades, and to effect them in such a way that they lose all their music completely.
Not according to this help page for MSN Music:
So who's talking bollocks? Apparently, there is a difference between "restoring licenses" and "sharing an MSN Music account." Or maybe that "knowledge center article" for Windows Media Player (not a music store) is old and outdated.TO START
PRESS ANY KEY
Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...
The music industry sucks enough already without WMA. Sounds like the EU antitrust action isn't far off the mark (although it probably won't make much difference - the download hasn't slowed down iTunes).
Did Bill's right nipple get exposed?
Cool, just signed up for Emusic, it seems to have loads of music/bands I like and the price is ok.
:)
I didn't realise there were any services that were DRM free with better than 128biterate, nice to finally start downloading music again without having to break the law (I stopped downloading music when I got a job)
"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
I do love Microsoft. Pretty soon they'll redefine the word innovation to mean "Almost the first guy to come up with an idea, except for all the ones that beat us to the punch."
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
I've taken the liberty of boldfacing what that "whatever" reason is in your paragraph above: WMA is just as proprietary as AAC/Fairplay. Instead of competing with Apple on an open system, they're using another proprietary system. And that's why it's working for Apple: There is no open DRM standard. Given the nature of openness and the recording industry's digital paranoia, I will be surprised if there ever is.
Don't spend so much energy being disgusted and hating...
Think of it this way - for $5 a month, you can listen to 1-1.5 million(?) whole songs of your choice.
If you pay for the $10 a month service and have a compatible player, you can even take your unlimited "rented" songs with you wherever you go.
If you really like some of them you can buy them "permanently" (in quotes because I doubt the permanence of DRM songs in general) just as well as itunes, except cheaper ($.79 vs $.99). Yes, you can burn them to CD, and do whatever you can do with itunes purchased songs.
So in other words this can do everything ITMS can (except play on ipods of course, which is apple's fault), plus much more. I for one think that it's quite a better deal than ITMS since I'm not locked into an ipod yet.
The player runtime for MP3 certainly is not free. In fact it's more expensive than Windows Media.
XUL: A mozilla-only technology, does applications via XPCOM, XML, and JavaScript. Downsides: Restricted functionality (unless you can install stuff for XPCOM, I think, I'm somewhat fuzzy on this)
Yeah, there's something called XPI that allows one to install XPCOM components. More or less identical to modern incarnations of ActiveX, permission-wise.
It doesn't work with iPod because Apple refuses to lince Fairplay and refuses to support WMA.
Ah.
So, let me get this straight.
It's *Apple's* fault that Microsoft's product sucks because, after Apple took over the market (in what I'd consider a pretty reasonable and not-underhanded manner), they refused to pay money to Microsoft to allow them the privilege of letting Microsoft control a standard interchange format?
Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
Would it be a scam if nobody bought (leased) it? At $36/year it's nearly reasonable, but I would still stay away on principle. To each his own I guess.
"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
1 John 4:14
There are too many people that I know (myself included) who have iTunes along with music files in other formats as well. Refusing to allow this product to be compatible with such a popular format is ridiculous. If I have a thousand iTunes and they aren't compatible with Urge, that will urge me to ignore the product altogether! It's just another example of Microsoft shooting itself in both feet again.
Since when did anonymous cowards carry quarters?
"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
1 John 4:14
Microsoft doesn't license anything - they developed wmv rather then licensing quicktime and so on.
Apple is even worse. Developing Applelossless even though FLAC already existed and was license free (and offers even better compression). Refusing to add any opensource formats to quicktime (both audio and video).
I'm not sure this will be great, it'll probably suck, but I see some strategy behind it.
Q: Traditionally, who is buying new music? What age group, traditionally, drives record sales?
A: the 11-16 year old crowd... and of the feminine persuasion (Grrls... little girls)
Q: Who do 11-16 year old girls swoon over?
A: Justin Timberlake
Q: Is the name "Urge" making any more sense?
A: not sure
The Admin and the Engineer
Nice. Take a look at the Urge website here and notice how the "G" in Urge is basically the Quicktime "Q" logo rotated about 90 degrees. They even used essentially the same hue of blue. These guys are chumps.
1) What happens when the service decides to raise the monthly price? Do I have to pay the new rate or is the new rate for new customers only?
2) What happens when the service goes out of business? Do I get to keep the music as if I bought it? Will my "playlist" be transfered to another service (of my choice)?
3) What happens when the service decides to remove an artist's music? Does the music get deleted from my computers as well?
4) What happens if I format my Windows partition? Will my music be automatically re-downloaded when I sign in to the service?
5) What happens if I cancel my membership and rejoin 3 months or a year later? Will my music be reactivated or will I have to re-download it?
Eh, I wouldn't worry about it too much. You've got the CDs, and I'm sure your Future Computer will rip them that much faster than before. :)
As long as there are least two competing formats, Apple's and everyone else's (read: Playsfersure ), then MP3 will remain the only universal song format. People will rip to it to ensure device compatability and device makers will include it to make sure people actually buy their portable music players. Having these giants fight over who gets to offer the dominant media format certainly does encourage the vendor-neutral choice.
That is an interesting point. (BTW, PlaysForSure is a specifically Janus-related thing from MS, so you can play subsciption-based music on your portable player and have it self-destruct properly like it does on the desktop. The real moniker for MS's format is just Windows Media.) The only issue here is that there really is no 'vendor-neutral vendor'; the Big 4 labels won't sell uninfected songs and that only leaves the little indies, Magnatune and such. (God bless 'em.) So it is in the Big 4's interest to force either Apple or MS to support a common format but of course neither one wants to budge. I would say 'I guess market forces will decide' but MS is one of these sides and they seem to have a lot more lobbyists these days.
In fact, I wonder who has more lobbyists lately: MS or RIAA. I'd like to see those two groups fight to the death. In an arena. With giant iguanas and such thrown in for fun.
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
Yes, you are totally correct; I was not clear enough... there is no open DRM format that anyone accepts readily yet. From Microsoft's point of view (and only MS's point of view, mind you) the open ecosystem is always in the hardware. They do not substitute hardware for software in their equation, which I agree is a big flaw in the analogy. Software has never been the ecosystem for MS. They figure if they achieve a high enough saturation - install WMP with every Windows install - then they become the de facto ecosystem unto themselves. Which is why it was so important for Apple to ship a Windows version of iTunes. That has kept Quicktime's popularity very high in the face of overwhelming saturation from MS's monopoly; and subsequently AAC and the other formats Apple likes to champion.
Now as to this:
Given the nature of openness and the recording industry's digital paranoia, I will be surprised if there ever is.
You would think so, but there is a strong motivation from the Big 4 labels to create an agreed-upon standard that both MS and Apple would follow. That is in their best interest and gives the RIAA/Big 4 the most leverage. They hateApple right now, because Apple doesn't really give a damn about how much the Big 4 sell. They just want to sell iPods. And for the Big 4, frightened as they already are... to have an indifferent retailer leading the charge in the digital music revolution sort of rankles.
I would like to see the Linux/OSS community 'propose' a DRM standard that is powerful and secure, but allows anyone to sign and wrap up their stuff. Because I cannot imagine a satisfactory answer from either Apple or MS as to why they wouldn't use something like that, short of trivial issues like 'we have to flash-update our music players'. And the hypocrisy would be exposed, just a little bit.
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
1. slap the next speaker who said software is "magical."
2. kick the next speaker who used the "2 ft. vs. 10 ft." analogy.
3. kill the demoer for Vista who kept telling us that we'll finally be able to control our PCs.
4. throw every Xbox 360 controller ever made at Steve Ballmer.
Sure, Windows PCs dominate the market. But so do cheap toupees.
Wondering if this was vaporware since the article lacked links to a service page or client download, I checked the MS homepage and noticed that Gate's keynote [.asf stream URL] is available. Not using Windows I tried opening it in VLC, but got an error saying that there was no WMV3 codec. I'm not about to put the MS player on my machine, so perhaps someone else here can see if the keynote provides any more meat than the article.
It really seems shortsighted that the industry experts haven't figured out that virtually all of their DRM'd works still appear unencumbered on the P2P networks. If they had a little insight and some balls they could actually go after selling to iPod users and everyone else by providing watermarked DRM-free product. Simply make it very well known that the buyers name and city is visible and also well buried by other means into everything they buy (include visible places like ID3 tags and movie intros as a reminder) and that'll discourage the vast majority of purchasers from posting their material to the net. With NO limitations of DRM from a user perspective, their sales can reach maximum potential as their offerings will play on EVERYTHING. (This also assumes that they don't use a proprietary format that requires licensing to support). While it'll likely still be possible to strip the buyer ID, there will be little incentive to do so since all users will have total flexibility in using what they buy and no one is excluded.
No DRM + Open Standards = Good + Profit + Freedom
DRM + WMA + WMV + WMD = Evil + Lost Sales + Digital Constipation
(visualizing Grateful Dead cover with ice cream cone on forehead and hearing Homer Simpson "duh".)
Read the talk given to Microsoft Research by Cory Doctorow, specifically, the section on why DRM doesn't work. To summarize, any provider who uses DRM is, essentially, giving you the encrypted content, the code to how the decryption works, and the actual key used to decrypt the content. And believe me, no matter how much they goop up the logic board with epoxy, DVD Jon will still be able to get that key, and when all three are combined, you've got your DeCSS, or PlayFair, or whatever DRM-stripping technology you want.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
This sounds similar to how it is not difficult to get out from under a tree that falls on your leg - you just have to cut your leg off.
Sometime in the future, Apple might change the terms, which would then apply to any future iTMS purchases.
Apple has changed the number of times you can burn your songs to CD, and it was retroactive. They lowered it down to 5, I believe, from 10. My brother in law ran into this when he was burning out some older itunes purchases.
If you've bought anything using the current version of iTunes, you cannot currently remove the DRM. I bought one song with the new version (my first and last) and ended up burning it to a CD and encoding it as a FLAC.
"It ain't a war against drugs.it's a war against personal freedom" --Bill Hicks