Slashdot Mirror


iTunes Music Store hits Billionth Download

SirWraith writes "In case anyone hasn't realized Apple has had a counter going up to a billion for a few weeks now. Apparently last night, they hit the mark. From ABC News: 'Apple says Alex Ostrovsky from West Bloomfield, Mich., was the lucky audiophile who downloaded "Speed of Sound" by Brit pop band Coldplay, giving the Cupertino, Calif., company bragging rights to the 10-figure milestone. Thanks to a generous prize package from Apple, Ostrovsky will now use a $10,000 iTunes music card to keep those downloads flowing on his new 20-inch iMac computer, and listen to his favorite tunes on one of the 10 60GB iPods.'"

214 comments

  1. what a scam by Yahweh+Doesn't+Exist · · Score: 5, Funny

    $10,000 / $0.99 = 10,101.01, so he's going to have to pay $0.98 of his OWN MONEY if he wants to actually claim that .01 of a song.

    DON'T BELIEVE APPLE, if they offer you $10,000 open your eyes and see it's a SCAM to get YOUR MONEY!

    1. Re:what a scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, I don't know. Apple may let the guy claim his 0.01 of a song if the song is John Cage's 4'33".

    2. Re:what a scam by nick_davison · · Score: 1

      It works out even worse, when you think about the capacity of the devices they've given him:

      10,102 (paying the 98c) songs ~= 40,408 GB of music.

      They, however, have given him 10 x 60GB players. That great gift card won't even fill one of them. He'll have to drop another five grand of his own money at the rate the iTunes music store charges just to fill one of them.

      Then, with another $15,000 / player for the other 9 players... Apple have given him the gift that keeps on giving [back to them], needing a total investment of $140,000 in addition to their "generous" prize if he wants to fully use it.

      Wouldn't it make you feel all fuzzy to hear "Congratulations on winning our prize. Now give us $140,000 to use it fully."

      On the other hand, you could just sell those other 9 on EBay and easily buy a thousand nice un-DRM'd albums to fill up the remaining 10,000 songs.

    3. Re:what a scam by Firehed · · Score: 1

      Obviously. You had to pay them the $0.99 in the first place to win the thing too! WTF? I'd think eBaying the card for about $8k or so would be a better idea - you get spendable-anywhere cash, they get a discount but still have to pay that extra ninety-eight cents.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    4. Re:what a scam by mybadluck22 · · Score: 1

      "10,102 (paying the 98c) songs ~= 40,408 GB of music."

      No.
      Songs are not 4 GB each.

      Songs are 4 MB, so 40.4GB or, all the songs on a single ipod.

      --
      If I could rearrange the keyboard, I'd put U and I together.
    5. Re:what a scam by sootman · · Score: 1

      Apple sells shows now. They advertise the iPod as holding 150 hours of video, so that's 204 shows @ 44 minutes each, which would only cost $405.96. Duh. :-)

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    6. Re:what a scam by slimak · · Score: 1

      Or, the author is from a country that uses the comma as a decima separator: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_separator

    7. Re:what a scam by AddressException · · Score: 1

      the author is from a country that uses the comma as a decima separator
      That might be true, but comma use in the rest of their post would suggest they made a mathematical error.

  2. Re:That... by Funkcikle · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hardly lucky. He paid for a Coldplay song and is probably comatose now. No number of iPods will wake him up.

  3. 40 Year Old Virgin by sgant · · Score: 3, Funny

    This leaps to mind when I found out that the Billionth song was a Coldplay song:

    David: You know how I know that you're gay?
    Cal: How? Cuz you're gay? and you can tell who other gay people are.
    David: You know how I know you're gay?
    Cal: How?
    David: You like Coldplay.

    --

    "Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
    1. Re:40 Year Old Virgin by PrescriptionWarning · · Score: 0

      hehe I was thinking the exact same thing. I'd rather be put on the news having downloaded some Led Zepp or AC/DC or something. Hell I'd even take Asia.

    2. Re:40 Year Old Virgin by MyDixieWrecked · · Score: 1

      the kid actually has hot [chick] friends. he's got a myspace page.

      another reason that I think myspace is evil.

      --



      ...spike
      Ewwwwww, coconut...
  4. 1060 GB IPod? by Sub+Zero+992 · · Score: 1

    A thousand billion bits of music or one bit of bad writing style?

    --
    They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security - Ben Franklin
    1. Re:1060 GB IPod? by Yahweh+Doesn't+Exist · · Score: 1

      no, it's bad comprehension.

      it's ten 60GB iPods.

    2. Re:1060 GB IPod? by tdemark · · Score: 1

      it's ten 60GB iPods.

      Does that mean he can go deaf ten times faster?

    3. Re:1060 GB IPod? by Yahweh+Doesn't+Exist · · Score: 2, Insightful

      no, perception of sound is not linear. 10 iPods will make him go deaf twice as fast as 1 iPod.

    4. Re:1060 GB IPod? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the best you can do: to write it out according to MLA style, "ten sixty-gigabyte iPods."

    5. Re:1060 GB IPod? by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      10 iPods will make him go deaf twice as fast as 1 iPod.

      10 iPods? I wonder where he's going to cram the other 18 earbuds.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    6. Re:1060 GB IPod? by Eccles · · Score: 1

      There's a picture floating around of a guy who tried that. I can't remember the URL, goat-something-or-other I think.

      --
      Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
  5. Yay, math! by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 0

    Assuming an average mp3 size of 5mb, that's 12000 songs to fill up just one of those ipods. He'll only have to win about another dozen $10k cards to complete the task!

    1. Re:Yay, math! by Aqua+OS+X · · Score: 2, Insightful

      he could always buy TV shows

      --
      "Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
    2. Re:Yay, math! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last I checked, the iTMS sold songs for $1 a pop, not $10 (although with the RIAA around, who knows)... so he'd actually only need another 1/5th of a card :D. Yay math indeed!

    3. Re:Yay, math! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AAC, not MP3. Apple's own ads describe the 60 GB player as having room for "15000 songs."

      Your math also assumes that he owns no CD's (which he could rip as lossless files as well as MP3 or AAC), nor will he store any videos on his iPod, nor will he keep any other files on it.

    4. Re:Yay, math! by crashelite · · Score: 0

      not to mention his one cold play song that he downloaded

      --
      (yes i know i suck at spelling fell free to correct my grammar and/or spellin i dont care, im still not going to change
    5. Re:Yay, math! by sirambrose · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ignoring your poor math, there are several other major problems with your argument. Your argument assumes that the owner of the iPod doesn't pay for their music and is looking at how much it would cost to re-purchase their entire collection of mp3 files.

      The purpose of an iPod is not to be full, it is to carry the owner's entire music collection. When I bought my 20gb iPod, I only owned 10gb of music. I have no intention of attempting to fill it up. I'll just buy music when I feel like it. Assuming that the usable life of an iPod is 5 years, I'll probably fill it up about when it dies. If I buy music faster than that and fill up the iPod in 2 years, I will go buy a larger one with space to fit my growing music collection.

      In my experience, buying an iPod is reasonable exactly because it costs so little compared to the retail value of the music it holds. The value of an iPod to me is proportional to the value of the music that it allows me to carry, but it was priced at a flat rate of $300. If I had 150 albums, an iPod costs only $2 per cd. Assuming that each cd costs $15, the iPod costs only 13% of the cost of the music that it initially held. As I buy more music this ratio will drop towards 6.5%. Essentially, an iPod has value to me because I buy cds. For someone who doesn't buy cds, an iPod will not be attractive because it will "require" them to buy music.

      Buying an iPod is sort of like buying insurance for a cd collection because the iPod allows carrying a large music collection without risking loosing the music. Carrying a $300 music player is much safer than carrying $2,250 in cds.

    6. Re:Yay, math! by databyss · · Score: 1

      "In my experience, buying an iPod is reasonable exactly because it costs so little compared to the retail value of the music it holds."

      I told the same thing to my woman when I tried to convince her to let me buy a Ferrari... How could she not value my life that much?

      BTW, you MUST take me for a ride in your school bus. Consider the (cost of contents)/(price of container) ratio on that bad boy!

      --
      Hmmm witty sig or funny sig? Maybe elitest techy sig!
    7. Re:Yay, math! by geekee · · Score: 1

      "Assuming an average mp3 size of 5mb, that's 12000 songs to fill up just one of those ipods. He'll only have to win about another dozen $10k cards to complete the task!"

      Or he could sign up for a subscription music service. Oh wait Apple doesn't offer one or let any other company offer one for iPod users. He's SOL.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
    8. Re:Yay, math! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      err, you can sync as many ipods as you want with your music collection, even with the fairplayed songs. Ah, well.

  6. Anyone shooting for it by BigDogCH · · Score: 2, Funny

    Do you think people were actually trying to be the 1 billionth? I mean, once it was a few thousand short were people buying a lot of songs to try and be the billionth? It seemed to pay off for one person if they were. Our local TV news agency said that the winner got "a 20 inch computer".

    1. Re:Anyone shooting for it by BigDogCH · · Score: 1

      Hmm, our news agency also just stated that the $10,000 was a cash prize, but it appears to be wrong. I don't suppose apple bucks are usable at allofmp3.com ? That would buy a LOT of music!!!

    2. Re:Anyone shooting for it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      And fund at least two, maybe even three mafia murders!

    3. Re:Anyone shooting for it by AnalystX · · Score: 1

      Yes. According to Apple's logs the number of songs sold per second climbed from 63.81 to 122.49 in just the ten minute window surrounding the 1 billionth song. It's a shame that most people assumed the counter on Apple's website was accurate. It was off by several minutes. By the time the counter reached 1 billion the 1 billionth song had long been purchased.

    4. Re:Anyone shooting for it by DancesWithBlowTorch · · Score: 1

      Actually, that's why I bought exactly one song about five minutes before the counter hit 1B. Had to get out of bed at 6:40 am to do this. Had been extrapolating (least square approximation with a Gaussian parabola) over the last day. Unfortunately, I didn't win. Was fun though. The hardest part was deciding what song to buy...

      What? Why are you looking at me like this?

    5. Re:Anyone shooting for it by AnalystX · · Score: 1

      The Apple counter was off by just over a minute five minutes before 1 billion. I took a bit more complex semi-realtime approach. I used some calculus on Apple's log entries, in addition to factoring in samples from iTMS server response monitoring. According to a basic interpolation of Apple's log data, my computed target time was right on the money. As for my attempt at acquiring the 1 billionth song, I second-guessed my own computed results and went with gut instinct. Needless to say my gut instinct was not on the money. The timestamp my program gave for the 1 billionth song was: "Thu, 23 Feb 2006 05:33:53 GMT"

    6. Re:Anyone shooting for it by NoStrings · · Score: 1

      I had the counter running on two machines as it approached 1 billion. The two counters were different by approximately 9000, even after re-loading the page several times. I tried to time a purchase with the higher counter, but obviously didn't win. I guess we'll all have to try again when they have a contest for 2 billion.

  7. Lotta loot by 9Nails · · Score: 1

    One Billion x $0.99 cents = $990,000,000.00

    I know they gave away free songs through Pepsi and others. But still... That's a good return for little effort right there.

    1. Re:Lotta loot by hcdejong · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's 99 cents, not 0.99 cents.

      990M is a nice bit of income, but most of it [1] is paid out again. Apple doesn't say how profitable the iTMS is, just that it's "above even".

      1: 10% of the cost of a song goes to the artist, 55% to the record company. Artists who do business with Apple directly, get 70%. Most of the remainder pays for the hardware and bandwidth.
      Rumor has it that Apple's profit is 8%, or $80M after 1 Gsongs.

    2. Re:Lotta loot by ukdmbfan · · Score: 0

      Actually, it costs Apple $1.25 for every song they sell for $0.99 on the iTMS (due to the record labels greed) so the more songs they sell on the iTMS the more money they lose. About $260,000,000 with this billionth song. However, the iPod's quite a healthy money maker with a very tidy profit.

      --
      "If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all"
    3. Re:Lotta loot by sleeper0 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      while true at one point, not true anymore. Apple makes a modest profit on the majority of content they sell via itms

    4. Re:Lotta loot by Walking+Dude · · Score: 1

      Most analyst think Apple makes about 7 cents a song now with iTMS. Certainly not a huge money maker but it is great advertising. Apple makes much more on videos, but they have some higher costs there (content providers get 1.23 a pop and Apple gets the rest according to some reports I've seen).

    5. Re:Lotta loot by OneSeventeen · · Score: 1

      Now the sad part, they make $990,000,000.00 and celebrate by giving away an iMac? Isn't an iMac like the Mac equivalent of an intel celeron?

      Yay, thank you for making us hundreds of millions of dollars, here's the cheapest big computer we make... and 10 ipods...

      I mean, it is cool that he gets an iPod and 9 eBay sales, and a crap load of music, but come on, I'd rather have some fancy powerbook or MacBook or something like that.

      --
      "Now the trouble about trying to make yourself stupider than you really are is that you very often succeed." -C.S. Lewis
    6. Re:Lotta loot by miller701 · · Score: 1

      I'd rather have some fancy powerbook or MacBook The core duo iMac is basicly a Mac Book pro on a stand (with a much larger screen!). It'd kick the snot out of any g4 Powerbook.

    7. Re:Lotta loot by mmkkbb · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's the top of the line iMac, and the highest-end Mac with an Intel CPU.

      The 10 iPods is weird though. I'd rather have one of the iPod commercial girls.

      --
      -mkb
    8. Re:Lotta loot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, you mean silhouettes? Well, whatever turns you on...

    9. Re:Lotta loot by mmkkbb · · Score: 1

      What can I say? I really love black girls.

      --
      -mkb
  8. Yawn...who cares? by Charcharodon · · Score: 1

    So there were 1 billion instances of Apple's marketing machine working, who cares. Wake me when something really interesting happens.

    1. Re:Yawn...who cares? by magores · · Score: 2, Funny

      In other news...

      Free music downloads reached 80 bajillion last week. Music companies are rich, complaining, putting out crappy stuff like Coldplay.

    2. Re:Yawn...who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So there were 1 billion instances of Apple's marketing machine working, who cares.

      No, it would have had to be less, because you're assuming that nobody purchased albums. At 10 songs an album, that's only one instance of Apple's marketing working instead of 10.

      Wake me when something really interesting happens.

      Hey, a /.er's math was off? That's really interesting. Good morning!

    3. Re:Yawn...who cares? by Charcharodon · · Score: 1
      Hey, a /.er's math was off? That's really interesting. Good morning!

      lol a /.er's math being off is about as much of a surpise (interesting) as the sun rising in the morning.

      (Smacks snooze and goes back to sleep)

  9. The RIAA was right by TallMatthew · · Score: 4, Funny

    Downloadable music isn't a viable music model.

    1. Re:The RIAA was right by pekoe · · Score: 1

      6% of sales, not so good - but four-fold growth in 1 year? Could be very interesting by 2010. The model RIAA doesn't like is the fact that people aren't willing to pay to download musci they already have on CD!

      Personally I like emusic (www.emusic.com). But more power to iTunes for bringing downloadable music to the masses.

    2. Re:The RIAA was right by garcia · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Downloadable music isn't a viable music model.

      It's not, for them, they aren't 100% in charge of how much Apple charges for the music. Steve is fighting the conglomorates to keep the prices on iTMS low. They want to raise the prices. Because they can't do as they wish it's not viable.

    3. Re:The RIAA was right by 91degrees · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is something I was thinking about the other day... The RIAA resisted any attempts to allow mp3s to be sold, initally (I think) because they thought it would compete with their CD business and later because of fears of piracy. They didn't want to lose control of their product. So iTunes came along and offered DRM. Unfortunately, iTines is the only online music store that works with the most popular brand of player (the iPod). This means Apple gets to call the shots.

      So, having avoided giving up control of their songs to the pirates, they've given up control of their songs to Apple. They could possibly get control back by letting other companies sell mp3s, thus meaning there's competition for the iPod market, but they're never going to do that.

    4. Re:The RIAA was right by jimicus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because they can't do as they wish it's not viable.

      Put like that, it rather looks like the business model is more about controlling the distribution of a product rather than the product itself.

      Sounds like organised crime - Prohibition era, organised crime distributes alcohol, makes money and gets very tetchy about someone else competing with them. Today, organised crime distributes music^H^H^H^H^Hdrugs, makes money and gets very tetchy about someone else competing with them.

    5. Re:The RIAA was right by 0x64617272796c · · Score: 1

      Well when you compare iTunes' 1 billionth download against the number of FREE (aka illegal) downloads, I'd say that FREE is a much more "viable" model. As the RIAA knows all too well. 1 billion downloads is a very small drop in a very large bucket. Yay! The only model I would shell out moeny for is one which pays the artist directly, skipping all the greedy bastards inbetween.

      Does anyone know how much of that 99 cents goes to the person who actually CREATED the content?

    6. Re:The RIAA was right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    7. Re:The RIAA was right by supremebob · · Score: 1

      What's really scary when you think about it is how many songs have been downloaded illegally outside of the iTunes Music Store. Even now, many music trade groups estimate * that only 1 of 5 songs in the Internet are downloaded legally. That comes out to about 5 billion songs being downloaded through services like Limewire and eMule while iTMS existed. I can only imagine how many songs were downloaded through Napster and FTP sites before the RIAA started cracking down on such activities.

      * Yeah, yeah I know. Most music trade groups are RIAA cheerleaders, so those numbers don't mean much. If you can find some unbiased research on this topic, please reply with some links.

    8. Re:The RIAA was right by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      It's more than viable, the problem is that they want to keep increasing profit margins every time they format-shift. "Oh well, this gives people more, they will pay more, we will get more money." iTMS isn't playing along with this desire. The general public simply wants to pay less. They will put up with all kinds of crap in order to pay less, Fairplay being minor proof of this since it's fairly permissive... But it does put restrictions on you. I won't buy anything from iTMS any time there's not a Fairplay-stripper.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:The RIAA was right by dloose · · Score: 1

      "Unfortunately, iTunes is the only online music store that works with the most popular brand of player (the iPod). This means Apple gets to call the shots."

      Not true. In fact, the grandparent of your post mentioned another music store that is 100% iPod compatible:

      "Personally I like emusic (www.emusic.com)."

    10. Re:The RIAA was right by timeOday · · Score: 1
      It's not, for them, they aren't 100% in charge of how much Apple charges for the music.
      I think you're fooling yourself. Most of the money iTunes collects goes straight into the coffers of RIAA members, at 0 effort to themselves. The fact that they still want more doesn't mean they're suffering, only that they want even more free money.
    11. Re:The RIAA was right by Onan · · Score: 1


      Not to mention Magnatune, which we should all take every possible opportunity to plug.

    12. Re:The RIAA was right by geekee · · Score: 1

      "Sounds like organised crime - Prohibition era, organised crime distributes alcohol, makes money and gets very tetchy about someone else competing with them. Today, organised crime distributes music^H^H^H^H^Hdrugs, makes money and gets very tetchy about someone else competing with them."

      Are you talking about Steve Jobs or the recording industry. It applies to both.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
  10. NEWS for Nerds... by Microsift · · Score: 0, Troll

    This happened Wednesday, winner announced Thursday, hardly news on Friday.

    --
    My other sig is extremely clever...
  11. Audiophile? by G�tz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think the term 'audiophile' does not fit here. Audiophiles buy expensive HiFi equipment and don't listen to 128kbit AAC from the Apple store. Especially as many people can hear the encoding artefacts on good equipment. But I must admit that I cannot hear the difference with the crappy earbuds that came with my iPod.

    1. Re:Audiophile? by arevos · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I was about to say the same thing. 128kbit AAC files don't quite seem up to 'Audiophile' standards.

    2. Re:Audiophile? by spooje · · Score: 1

      You can play AIFF files and get yourself a good pair of Sennheiser headphones. That's about as good as you're going to get if you want to listen to music on the go.

      --
      Tea and kung-fu. Life is good. Rising Phoenix
    3. Re:Audiophile? by Bazzalisk · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Begone with your value-judgements.

      --
      James P. Barrett
    4. Re:Audiophile? by guytoronto · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Some audiophiles aren't pretentious little dweebs. Vinyl is dead. Deal with it.

    5. Re:Audiophile? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or use Apple Lossless and put 2x as many songs on there.

    6. Re:Audiophile? by michrech · · Score: 1

      I think the term 'audiophile' does not fit here. Audiophiles buy expensive HiFi equipment and don't listen to 128kbit AAC from the Apple store. Especially as many people can hear the encoding artefacts on good equipment. But I must admit that I cannot hear the difference with the crappy earbuds that came with my iPod.

      Of course you can't hear the artifacts. You're hearing is leaving you!

      --
      bork bork bork!
    7. Re:Audiophile? by int14 · · Score: 1

      Interestingly enough, I had never noticed any major artifacts in my music purchased from iTMS or music I ripped from my CDs, but I recently got a pair of the Bose TriPort headphones and I've been noticing many more songs that have small artifacts here and there.

      Now these headphones aren't even top of the line, but they are a step up from my white iPod ear-buds that were falling apart anyway.

    8. Re:Audiophile? by middlemen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Maybe the word should be podiophile !?

    9. Re:Audiophile? by SpaghettiPattern · · Score: 2, Funny

      Audiophiles buy expensive HiFi equipment and don't listen to 128kbit AAC from the Apple store.

      Audiophiles buy expensive equipment like record players but listen exclusively ... to the scratches.

      --

      I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
    10. Re:Audiophile? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Especially as many people can hear the encoding artefacts on good equipment.

      Sounds like a dumb reason to buy "good" equipment.

    11. Re:Audiophile? by G�tz · · Score: 1

      It is at least better than pedophile. Seriously, iPods are nice equipment, but stuff like 'podcasts' sounds fine on other players.

    12. Re:Audiophile? by heinousjay · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, not for 99 cents anyway. Raise that price to 10 bucks and they'll line up.

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    13. Re:Audiophile? by soft_guy · · Score: 2, Funny

      But with AIFF you will never have the clarity that you have with an original 78!

      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
    14. Re:Audiophile? by Expert+Determination · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, but scratches are analog and hence have a warmer feeling that's less obtrusive. You don't get the sharp angular sound that you get from digital distortion and so it's truer to the original recording. They don't upset the relative phase and so keep the sonic field in a good state, and if your audio cable has a prime number of cores in it the eddy currents caused by the scratch signals cause destructive interference that actually cleans the audio, especially when the aspect ratio of your room is the golden ratio. And anyway, if you keep your vinyl under a pyramid ths scratches heal themselves over time.

      --
      "The White House is not an intelligence-gathering agency," -- Scott McClellan, Whitehouse spokesman.
    15. Re:Audiophile? by maxume · · Score: 1

      Apellation or denigration?

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    16. Re:Audiophile? by Duke+Machesne · · Score: 1

      Wow, man, that's some funy shit.

    17. Re:Audiophile? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry, your songs are fine. It's just the shitty Bose headphones.

    18. Re:Audiophile? by Fishstick · · Score: 1

      Garry? Is that you?

      *guy I knew in college talked like that. He had his own A/B room set up in his mom's basement -- had little triangles of styrofoam glued to the walls and ceilings at strategic locations. Had some nice equipment, but going over to listen to something with him was an ordeal.

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    19. Re:Audiophile? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Especially since the guy bought a Coldplay song, their early stuff is alright, but their recent stuff is utter shite.

    20. Re:Audiophile? by ShyGuy91284 · · Score: 1

      Is that really true? (Real question, not me trying to act like a smartass) I have an iPod, but haven't touched the iTunes store other then for podcasts, so I'm not sure myself. I remember back in the day when mp3s first became popular 128 kbit was the norm. Yeah, You could hear artifacts/distortion if you had decent headphones/speakers, but most were content, and some even spinned it as "CD-quality" to consumers (which is laughable). I have assumed mp4/AAC would have bumped the audio quality up so most people (even with good expensive equipment) wouldn't be able to tell the difference at 128-kbit, or at least bump up the kbit rate to a point where a blind audio test between the mp4 file and the original CD would prove no difference to the human ear.

      --
      In undeveloped countries, the consumer controls the market. In capitalist America, the market controls you.
    21. Re:Audiophile? by OOGG_THE_CAVEMAN · · Score: 1

      But only for the oxygen-free download over a gold-plated DSL connection with the bits degaussed to remove any residual polarization.

    22. Re:Audiophile? by MKalus · · Score: 1

      128KBit MP3 years ago was horrible. The 128KBit ACC from the iTune store are "okay".

      The problem is: A lot depends on the song as well. I know there are many people out there who say they cannot hear a difference between a compressed file and a "pure" file even on expensive equipment. For me it truly depends on the song.

      But one thing to keep in mind (in my opinion) is the "feeling" a song produce in the room, if I play it back on a pair of 10K speakers then I am more likely to hear any artifcats or "feel" the missing pieces then when I listen to it on my $50 Boombox.

      --
      If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
    23. Re:Audiophile? by Expert+Determination · · Score: 1

      Did he have a Quadratic Residue Diffuser in his room? Or use Golden Section Stranding?

      --
      "The White House is not an intelligence-gathering agency," -- Scott McClellan, Whitehouse spokesman.
    24. Re:Audiophile? by Fishstick · · Score: 1

      heh, no nothing that elaborate

      he did go on and on about how he had acquired suitable paneling and ceiling material to fashion his "listening room" to the proper dimensions and how the little pieces of styro tacked to the walls helped diffuse "undesirable wave confluences", or something.

      he did manage to suck all the joy out of just putting on a disc and cranking it up and listening.

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    25. Re:Audiophile? by anno1602 · · Score: 1

      The line between Sci-Fi-Technobabbla and audiophile talk blurs. Who will be first to invent a gizmo that reverses the polarity of something, thereby creating a much richer and nuanced sound?

    26. Re:Audiophile? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah! I listened to Coldplay when they were still ghetto.

    27. Re:Audiophile? by databyss · · Score: 1

      This guy is an audiophile: http://www.royaldevice.com/custom.htm

      Not some kid who bought a song on iTunes.

      --
      Hmmm witty sig or funny sig? Maybe elitest techy sig!
    28. Re:Audiophile? by ShyGuy91284 · · Score: 1

      Ok, that I def. agree with. Classical in particular comes to mind as a genre that suffers the most from low kbit encoding.

      --
      In undeveloped countries, the consumer controls the market. In capitalist America, the market controls you.
    29. Re:Audiophile? by MKalus · · Score: 1

      Again that depends on how it is arranged. There is (unfortunatly) no easy formula I think. I have some classical music encoded in 128AAC and it sounds good enough (at least on consumer equipment), and I have some more "generic" stuff that sounds just horrible.

      Having said that, encoders have made great strides in the last 10 years.

      --
      If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
    30. Re:Audiophile? by thatguywhoiam · · Score: 1
      Well, not for 99 cents anyway. Raise that price to 10 bucks and they'll line up.

      So true, its painful...

      "Apple only uses certified kryptonite-plated Monster(tm) Cable to connect its servers to your internets."

      --
      If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
    31. Re:Audiophile? by macjim · · Score: 1

      Vinyl dead?

      Shellac you insensitive clod!
      --
      Does "No Child Left Behind" mean they'll all be right arses?

  12. Re:first post by thelost · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    it's hardly surprising digg posted it first, their stories don't need to go through the same moderation process stories do on /. as they have a different news system which promotes stories more quickly. However on digg you can't expect to have any kind of decent conversation (ignoring rabid OSS fanboi's etc) so it balances out somewhat.

    Go to digg for the latest news, come here to chat about it.

    --
    Promote Charity on Myspace, Show Your Colours!
  13. MOD PARENT FUNNY by Bazzalisk · · Score: 1

    Seriously, that is not a troll.

    --
    James P. Barrett
    1. Re:MOD PARENT FUNNY by corvenus · · Score: 1

      Thanks Capt'n Obvious :)

  14. Re:first post by Fear+the+Clam · · Score: 1, Funny

    ROFFLE? What are you, the Hamburglar?

  15. Thanks a Billion ... dammit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I'll *NEVER* hear the fucking end of this now.

    My gf loooooves Coldplay ... and I cannot stand to hear any it. We've been over this many times. Including a whine-cry-fest because I wouldn't subject myself to hours on end of her tittering friends AND Coldplay on a concert night.

    So now, my heavy iTunes-Store using gf will gloat and yammer on, Coldplay this, Coldplay that, iTunes' Billionth this and that ... god fucking dammit ... was fucking Hendrix or YoYoMa or ... jeeze, just about anything too much for the winning song?

    Fuck. At 7:56, my fresh, new, cripsy Friday is fucking. Thanks Apple, thanks a lot.

    1. Re:Thanks a Billion ... dammit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      At least your girlfriend has musical taste, too bad her ability to choose a mate is so tragically impaired.

    2. Re:Thanks a Billion ... dammit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, just drown out the gloating with some Opeth or Mars Volta, you know - music that's actually good.

    3. Re:Thanks a Billion ... dammit. by CrazyTalk · · Score: 2

      I'm glad I'm old - I've never heard Coldplay, even once. I sure won't seek it out now!

    4. Re:Thanks a Billion ... dammit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think coldplay would be too bad, originally when I first heard them on the radio I didn't think it was too bad. Big problem is that all their songs sound the same. And I can't tell what songs came from what cd because it really sounds all like the same darn song. if they only had one or a few songs like that it wouldn't be all too bad..

    5. Re:Thanks a Billion ... dammit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you missed the part about her loving ColdPlay...

  16. Audiophile? by psymastr · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Listening to a mainstream (shit) single of a mainstream (shit) band hardly makes you an "audiophile".

    --
    Improve at backgammon rapidly through addictive quickfire position quizzes: www.bgtrain.com
  17. -1: Troll - Slashdot's Record by Seltsam · · Score: 0, Troll

    When will Slashdot hit their 1 Billionth Dupe?

  18. Why does everyone focus on the iPods? by TCQuad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Beyond the iTMS certificate, the iPods and iMac, the prize includes a 4 year scholarship created in the winner's name to a "world renowned institute of music" selected by Apple. So, while all the loot he gets is nice, he's not the only winner. Actually, given the price of tuition, he's not even the biggest winner.

    1. Re:Why does everyone focus on the iPods? by Humm · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure I'd want a scholarship created in my name as a result of spending $0.99 on some song. I can imagine people getting the scholarship asking "so who was he?"... wow, what an amazing accomplishment to be remembered for.

    2. Re:Why does everyone focus on the iPods? by notthepainter · · Score: 1

      Apple is so hoping the music student wants to go to Yale or Curtis....

    3. Re:Why does everyone focus on the iPods? by Hrodvitnir · · Score: 2, Informative

      to a "world renowned institute of music" selected by Apple

      Juilliard, for the curious.

      --
      "There are more important things than stopping terrorism. Upholding the Constitution is one of them." - Ars Forumer.
    4. Re:Why does everyone focus on the iPods? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can almost picture the scholarship recipient being some rapper wannabe... That would be torture for the poor person who recieved it if that was, in fact, the case. Do you think that Juilliard teaches any instrument that a would-be rapper would want to play, like say, drums?

    5. Re:Why does everyone focus on the iPods? by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

      drums have their place in classical music (that and Chip davis gets down)

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
  19. turning iTMS-dollars into real money... by Humm · · Score: 1

    So, the guy won $10000 to spend at the iTMS. Resale of DRMed music is... a little tricky (which is actually one of my main problems with DRM). But there was talk of Apple selling iPods directly through iTunes Music Store, and resale of iPods isn't really a problem...
    If he's able to spend the $10000 on iPods, he should be able to get most of that money back through ebay.
    I certainly would :)

    1. Re:turning iTMS-dollars into real money... by Eccles · · Score: 1

      Resale of DRMed music is... a little tricky (which is actually one of my main problems with DRM).

      How would you resell it if it *didn't* have DRM? Would you really buy FLACs, mp3s, or OGGs from random private individuals, and expect them to be legal? At least with ITMS, Apple could conceivably set up a transfer mechanism, so you would have some proof of ownership.

      --
      Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
    2. Re:turning iTMS-dollars into real money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think he could sell iTunes gift certificates to his friends...

      Alternatively, he could wait a year and buy 10.000 songs to get a good shot at the even bigger '5 billionth iTunes song' prize.

  20. Could've been worse by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    It would have been something REALLY embarrassing. Like a Britney song. Or some of that American Idle (no typo) crap.

    Or imagine him DLing some Boyband junk. Or Tokyo Hotel. Oh, the ways of f..ing up when DLing music today are so numerous, you could get ridiculed for pretty much anything there is in the charts today.

    At least by me! :)

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:Could've been worse by michrech · · Score: 2

      Who *really* cares what you (or anyone else, for that matter) has to say about what someone downloads?

      I'm gunna keep downloading the tracks I like, no matter who "performs" them, whether you like it or not.

      Snob.

      --
      bork bork bork!
    2. Re:Could've been worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Awesome! Dude you can totally come over and watch sports and music with me next Monday. It's gonna be great, I hear Triple H are gonna kill each other Joey Styles and don't get me started on how totally amazing this year's idols are. The are some much better than Kelly Clarkson! It's gonna be great, god I love music and sports, especically the good stuff like the stuff they play on the radio, that stuff is awesome!!!

    3. Re:Could've been worse by dloose · · Score: 1

      For real, man. Sports are totally lame. Unless they're played with joysticks and shit. Jocks are so mean, amirite?

    4. Re:Could've been worse by nacturation · · Score: 1

      No kidding... I've always wondered about that too. What if the guy had downloaded The Shaggs song My Pal Foot Foot?

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    5. Re:Could've been worse by CylanR77 · · Score: 1

      Could have been worse than all that, even...

      It could have been Rush.

      --
      http://cylan.deviantart.com/gallery/
    6. Re:Could've been worse by UserGoogol · · Score: 1

      Heh heh heh. Instead of "idol," he writes "idle." Now that's humorous! Today's comedians could learn from this post.

      --
      "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's Razor
    7. Re:Could've been worse by javaxman · · Score: 1
      It would have been something REALLY embarrassing. Like a Britney song. Or some of that American Idle (no typo) crap. Or imagine him DLing some Boyband junk. Or Tokyo Hotel. Oh, the ways of f..ing up when DLing music today are so numerous, you could get ridiculed for pretty much anything there is in the charts today.

      You really think Coldplay isn't as bad as any of that other stuff you mentioned ?

      Man, you're in *denial*.

      p.s... out of morbid curiosity, what's Tokyo Hotel? Nothing shows up in iTunes for that, and Google just wants to show you places to stay no matter how many words like "pop" and "music" I add to the search...

      But really, Britney less embarassing than Coldplay ? You wish...

  21. Billionth??!!? by orion41us · · Score: 0

    Hmmm, that sucks - hope they sell a whole song soon.....

    1. Re:Billionth??!!? by Equis · · Score: 1

      Third, fourth, fifth... All can be reciprocals, no? 1/3, 1/4, 1/5, right?

      What, then, is the ordinal number for song number one billion?

    2. Re:Billionth??!!? by Graff · · Score: 1
  22. Coldplay coincidence! by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 1

    It just so happens my billionth free music download was a Coldplay mashup.

  23. Apple stats by adzoox · · Score: 1

    What I would really like to see are these stats:

    How many people this represents ... how many unique users have downloaded these billion songs ... because I know people who have downloaded hundreds and some that have downloaded one.

    How many of these people are prize redemptions or giveaways?

    How how many of these songs are validated on more than one computer and one iPod --- that would be really interesting to learn if people are still sharing ...

    --
    Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
  24. Audiophile? by QuietLagoon · · Score: 2, Insightful
    the lucky audiophile

    No audiophile worthy of the appellation would download an overly-compressed pop tune.

    :)
  25. *cough*rigged*cough* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Okay, okay, maybe ... and maybe not.

    Ponder for a moment:

    • What if some obscure death metal tune had been the winner?
    • What if the winning song had not been some ClearChannel, Top 40, MTV/VH1 drivel?
    • What if someone got a nice chuckle from 'Barbie Girl' (Aqua) purchased by username PuppyKicker09 and clicked 'Reject, find another one billionth tune, please'?

     
    ... just sayin'.
    1. Re:*cough*rigged*cough* by heinousjay · · Score: 1

      Is it really so hard to fathom that the chances a popular song would be purchased at any given moment are greater than the chances an unpopular song would be purchased?

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    2. Re:*cough*rigged*cough* by AragornSonOfArathorn · · Score: 1

      AC is just bitter he didn't win. Just like me ;)

      (not a total loss. I downloaded an Iced Earth album with an iTunes gift card, heh)

      --
      sudo eat my shorts
    3. Re:*cough*rigged*cough* by bbc · · Score: 1

      "Is it really so hard to fathom that the chances a popular song would be purchased at any given moment are greater than the chances an unpopular song would be purchased?"

      Yes it is, because they aren't. At least not in a store that offers equal access to popular and unpopular songs alike. I do not know if ITMS fits that description.

    4. Re:*cough*rigged*cough* by bbc · · Score: 1

      I thought the same thing. Welcome to the paranoid club, where we won't sell your personal data to strangers, at least ... that's what we say.

  26. 999,899,994 Ashlee Simpson & Cold Play... by bodland · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Everyone else - 100,000

    Soul Amp (My Band) 6

    Actually I am stoked about iTunes/Mp3 and iPods....as a indie musician, self producing with a home grown label, iTunes allows us to collect 65 cents per song. Direct to the the band...

    Unfortunately without the big money for PR and payola (yes Apple probably takes payola too...despite claims otherwise, I think they call them marketing fees or "services") We are relegated to being just 13 songs in a sea of millions. Thus sales have been slow. But...that can change in a heartbeat as anyone who listens to music can see.

    So...feel free to scope iTunes and search for Soul Amp...I need another guitar amplifier (VOX Ac-30 or Matchless) and a leslie for our 1958 Hammond M3 organ.

    Also for people who refuse to pay for music until guilt finally takes hold after scamming every song ever recorded, we have tracks of tunes we are working on for our next disk on our website. Hep yer self...I say whay wait until a rash breaks out from the guilt of free downloading...by indie music from iTunes. The bands actually get the bulk of the money. 65 cents of 99 is pretty damn good. Most bands that get mp3 blogged are on iTunes.

    http://soul-amp.com/

    1. Re:999,899,994 Ashlee Simpson & Cold Play... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This guy has hit the nail on the head... 6 songs in a sea of millions, and the artist makes what? Maybe less than 10 /20 bucks over the lifetime his music is listed? You will starve in less than two days on that. One if you are feeding an entire band.

      Apple, on the other hand, makes 35 cents on the whole sea, on ever single song. 35 cents times a million is like what, $350,000. Its obvious, who is the winner here? Band = $15. Apple = $350,000

      But even look at the $3350,000. That's not a lot of money at all for a corporation even. Certainly not to support the whole Itunes development. Its a losing model for Apple. Not a lot of money for the biggest player in the downloadable music market. Apple is making its money by playing in its own stock and running it up with the whole exposure Itunes brings them. Otherwise its a loss leader.

      When comes back to the main point:

      There is no music business. Its a joke and a lie, of everyone trying to fake looking successful, because the illusion of success supposedly breeds success with human lemming behavior. But the reality is, the numbers are not there at all.

      50 caliber F FK
      http://rootpassword.com/

    2. Re:999,899,994 Ashlee Simpson & Cold Play... by soft_guy · · Score: 1

      Part of being an indie band is self promotion. If I were to see you perform live, and I thought you were good, I would buy your music from iTMS. Get out there and play some gigs and let your audience know where they can buy your music.

      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
    3. Re:999,899,994 Ashlee Simpson & Cold Play... by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 1

      Yes, except Apple sold 1 billion; in three years, that's about 300 million a year. Or $105,000,000 a year in music. $105 million a year is not bad; not great, but not bad. They'll probably hit 2 billion in two years, next, which increases their take to $175 million a year.

      The other thing you don't take into account is that the iTMS is a distribution model, not an advertising model. The RIAA solved the advertising model already (with it's pitfalls too), while the iTMS has solved the distribution model.

      Under the RIAA the artist would get pennies to the dollar via traditional retail mechanisms(they still do, if they sign up with the RIAA); under the iTMS the self same artists now get $0.65 to the dollar.

      Hook that up to an effective marketing machine and an artist, instead of getting 3%, can get upwards of half the take.

      All it takes is one genius to hook up blogs, podcasts, live performances, and the iTMS together into a cost effective marketing machine. Or something like that.

  27. Audiophiles? by kitzilla · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Apple says Alex Ostrovsky from West Bloomfield, Mich., was the lucky audiophile who downloaded "Speed of Sound" by Brit pop band Coldplay ...

    There are audiophiles using iTunes? When did this happen? ;-)
    --
    This is my post. There are many others like it. If you don't like what you read here, go try one of the others.
    1. Re:Audiophiles? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are. Just go through past issues of, say, Stereophile since the iPod came out, and you will see numerous references to iTunes and the convenience factor it brings. "Convenience" as in just get up, type "Bach" to bring up some of J-S's music and click on "play" to get decent background music for that supper you invited friend to.

      And since Apple's lossless codec came out, along with the AirPort Express, I bet you quite a few audiophiles are toying with iTunes, again for the convenience factor.

  28. Better use for the money by gcranston · · Score: 0, Troll

    Sure, Apple decides to give away $15k, $20k or whatever it comes out to worth of stuff for the lucky punk who happens to download the billionth song - and a bad song at that.

    Why couldn't they have put that money to better use like say...
    Porting iTunes to linux?!?!

    I mean come on! How long have we been asking for that? Wouldn't it be one little victory over MS if this application ran seamlessly on the only operating systems that can remotely be considered competition for windows (sorry BSD, I don't mean to offend) Isn't it always said that the enemy of my enemy is my friend? Now that money might not ahve gone all the way to building a working version (I'm no development expert, that's for sure) but it certainly would have helped.

    1. Re:Better use for the money by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 1

      iTunes already runs seamlessly on the only operating system that can remotely be considered competition for Windows; OS X.

      Why would they port iTunes to an operating system that can be considered competition for OS X?

  29. Do they included refunded purchases in that total? by sjonke · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I recently made a series of unsatisfying purchases from iTMS. First it was the album "Winters Pageant" by The Softies. Most of the album was fine, but the first track was messed up, having a 1/2 second or so blank spot shortly after the song started. I tried playing the track on multiple computers and my vPod and they all showed it. I complained to them, and to their credit they not only refunded me for that one track, but for the entire album purchase. So I can't complain in that regard, but ultimately I just want that track intact. They told me not to buy the track again for 4 to 6 weeks so they'd have time to fix it. I allowed more than 2 months to pass and bought the track again, and it still had the same problem. I complained again and again they refunded my purchase (this time just for the one track as that is all I purchased.) As far as the refunds are concerned that was fine, but what I really wanted was track 1 intact. I don't think I'm going to try buying the track again from iTMS, only to perhaps once again find it is messed up and again having to request a refund. They seem unwilling, or unable, to tell me when the track has been fixed.

    So instead I used the original album refund to buy a different album, Neutral Milk Hotel's "In The Aeroplane Over The Sea". This is a great album, and there were no such technical problems with the tracks, but, my god, is this album ever ruined by the inability of iTunes and the iPod to play the songs without gaps! Like no other. There are numerous seamless transitions between songs. At least they are suppose to be seamless. When listening to the iTMS versions you get heart-stopping gaps. Setting a 0 second crossfade slightly helps, but not much, and the iPod can't even do that. Unlike had I purchased a CD, I couldn't use the "Join CD Tracks" feature of iTunes to join my iTMS purchased tracks as a means to get around this issue. Again I complained and requested a refund. I requested that they give me my cash back, as opposed to crediting my account, because I wanted to buy the album on CD now, but they didn't do that and instead just credited my iTMS account for the album. I ended up then using the credit to buy an album that I knew didn't have seamless transitions between tracks, and I'm basically happy with that purchase, so all is well in that regard. I also then ordered a copy of the CD of "In The Aeroplane Over The Sea" from an online store and happily used the "Join CD Tracks" feature of iTunes to join tracks 1-2, 4-5, 6-8 and 9-11, so those seamless transitions would be intact. Now I've got the album in a form that plays like it is suppose to in iTunes and on my iPod, something iTMS is completely incapable of.

    So, Apple treated me fine, but I'm completely turned off to iTMS unless I can be sure the album does not have seamless transitions between tracks. Even then, I'm wary of the possibility that one or more of the tracks may be messed up, and that Apple wouldn't fix them, or at least that it is not possible for me to know if and when they fixed them.

    --
    --- What?
  30. 10 iPods??? by Dan!+Dan!+Dan! · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Isn't there a limit on how many devices you may put your itunes songs on? Isn't that limit lt 10

    1. Re:10 iPods??? by allgood2 · · Score: 1

      No. At least there wasn't before. There's a limit on how many computers you can authorize to play; and a limit on how many times you can burn a single playlist. But no limit on how many times you can burn a single song, and album of songs, etc., and no limit on how many devices--iPods--you can transfer your music to.

  31. someone mod this man to funny by LordJezo · · Score: 1, Funny

    I got a kick out of it at least.

    Too bad I have no mod points.

  32. Razorback by Tamerlan · · Score: 3, Funny

    Poor guys owning razorback servers probably hit the mark long ago. And instead of fame they got closed.

    Oh wait.

  33. Our Counter Goes Up To 11 by davido42 · · Score: 1
    Well sure, iTunes may be up to their billionth download, but my streams are louder.

    The interesting thing is that people don't realize how bad they have it. iTunes has opened the door for independent musicians to finally market their streams online, but iTunes suffers the problem of serving the mass market. In short, they suck, because the industry sucks. They have to offer DRM to appease the suits. They force people to install their crappy software for the privilege of being told what they want to listen to. They have started the revolution, so thanks for that, but we'll take it from here..

    david

    http://www.bitworksmusic.com/

    odd tunes for odd times

    --

    BitWorksMusic.com -- odd tunes for odd times

    1. Re:Our Counter Goes Up To 11 by robathome · · Score: 1
      In short, they suck, because the industry sucks. They have to offer DRM to appease the suits.

      I don't quite understand why everyone gets all up in Apple's shizznit about FairPlay. You do realize that once you have the FP-protected track on your machine, you can burn it to CD. Then, you can rip that track right back off your shiny new CD-R into whatever format you so choose, 100% DRM-free.

      So yes, Apple supplies tracks that are DRM-protected. And even though we all know that all DRM schemes are the tool of Satan and his minions, at least Apple, ITMS, and FairPlay allow you to fairly freely media-shift that content. I know it's heretical to suggest to the /. crowd, but to me this seems like a pretty even balance. You can't just redistribute the AAC files, but by a trivial jump through the CD-R hoop, you can play ITMS content pretty much anywhere.

      As to another point you made, if your software is telling you what to listen to, and you're obeying it, I somehow don't think that's Apple's fault.

      --

      At 3 A.M. you can see people's auras; at five you can see their contrails...
    2. Re:Our Counter Goes Up To 11 by davido42 · · Score: 1
      I agree that FairPlay is one of the more benign DRM systems around, but the problem is that "most people" are barely able to use their barely functional machines to begin with. Then DRM layers on another piece of inconvenience, which translates to bewilderment and frustration to many non-technical users. Case in point: a person of my close acquaintance (who shall remain mercifully nameless) wanted to switch from using a workstation to a laptop as her main iTunes host. Well, this was fortunately covered in the iTunes use cases, so it was managed almost, but not quite, automatically, so while the end result was successful, the intervening few minutes of despair caused me mild trauma, as the local "expert" (cough cough, but uh, I play one on TV!). Oooh ooh I sense a PTSD lawsuit coming on!

      Anyway, the moral is: anything that makes the user experience even slightly more confusing or inconvenient is to be avoided. Your suggestion about users being able to burn their FP tracks to CD is fine, but keep in mind that this is beyond the capabilities of the majority of users.

      Case 2: I was testing my download service with a friend who is a non-technical user. He had major trouble following my written download instructions, which basically only describe downloading and unzipping a few zip files to get the mp3's (no DRM, should be simple right?) Unfortunately, this is par for the course. Moral: bring back my vinyl man!

      --

      BitWorksMusic.com -- odd tunes for odd times

    3. Re:Our Counter Goes Up To 11 by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 1

      It sounds like your zipfiles were more effective means of DRM than iTMSs Fairplay.

      At least Fairplay has been tested a billion times over now.

    4. Re:Our Counter Goes Up To 11 by davido42 · · Score: 1

      At least he didn't share the files with anyone else! :-)

      --

      BitWorksMusic.com -- odd tunes for odd times

  34. Call me cynical but... by trash+eighty · · Score: 3, Funny

    the billionth song was Coldplay i.e. someone cool (i suppose still) and "hip", what a shame it wasn't Uncle Pete's Rog Tog Bimbo Rambo Band or some horrific 70s country music. I mean, that would not have looked as cool in the press release would it? ;)

    1. Re:Call me cynical but... by maxume · · Score: 1

      Cool, hip? The word you are looking for is popular. Hipsters would never allow themselves to like something that more than 2 or 3 other people have ever heard of. Except 'Since You Been Gone', but I digress.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  35. Timing the Counter by macaroo · · Score: 1

    I am familiar with several individuals that tried to time the purchase and down load of several iTunes with the on line counter. I wonder what was the exact time of the winning purchased? A couple of forums I read stated that the song was purchased in the mid or late afternoon. The story says evening. Inexact science at best!

    1. Re:Timing the Counter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A couple of forums I read stated that the song was purchased in the mid or late afternoon. The story says evening. Inexact science at best!

      Did it occur to you the people in the forums may have been in different time zones?

  36. And I'm proud to say.... by whoda · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    ...that I haven't purchased a single one.

    I do love the sample's at the iTunes store though. It makes it easier to decide what songs to acquire thru cheaper means.

  37. Contribution of iTMS to iPod success seems small by adam1101 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Jobs anounced last month that they've sold 42 million iPods, so they've sold on average less than 24 songs per iPod. Even the lowest capacity Shuffle holds 120 songs. If we assume an average capacity of 2GB (500 songs) per iPod (the majority of sales are probably the cheaper low capacity units), less than 5% of the aggregate iPod capacity is filled with iTMS songs.

    This seems to contradict the oft repeated claims that the iPod ties you to iTMS, or that iTMS is a major contributor to the iPod's success.

  38. So if he was the 1 billionth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    he still only was the 111011100110101100101000000000'th visitor in binary, which is not very exciting

  39. Re:Contribution of iTMS to iPod success seems smal by Tyler+Eaves · · Score: 1

    Apple does not make money on iTMS.
    Apple DOES make money on iPods.

    --
    TODO: Something witty here...
  40. 10 iPods? by Easy2RememberNick · · Score: 1

    Is the idea to make a ring of iPods around your waist? How very Luke Skywalker-ish!

  41. In other news..... by stunt_penguin · · Score: 1

    Word is that Mike Myers has been hired for the next macworld conference, presumably to appear onstage and exclaim

    "One BILLION DOWNLOADS"

    Or not.

    --
    When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
  42. It figures. by sammy+baby · · Score: 2

    "Speed of Sound," by Coldplay.

    Figures.

    Fucking Coldplay.

  43. Elitism Ho! by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

    It really bites some folks asses that most folks just flat out don't want to listen to some no-name indie band doesn't it?

    --
    Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    1. Re:Elitism Ho! by davido42 · · Score: 1

      Hey man, bite your tongue! I have 10's of fans! .. and a few aren't even my relatives.

      --

      BitWorksMusic.com -- odd tunes for odd times

  44. pandora by heklim · · Score: 1

    legal, free, why not?

    1. Re:pandora by davido42 · · Score: 1

      Pandora's a good idea, but I have admittedly been too busy to try it, so that's my lame excuse. Guess I'd better get to surfin...

      --

      BitWorksMusic.com -- odd tunes for odd times

  45. Ironic Song Title by WolfZombie · · Score: 1

    Is it just me or is "Speed of Sound" an ironic title to hit this magical 1 billion milestone with?

    1. Re:Ironic Song Title by xzqx · · Score: 1

      It's just you.

  46. About 60 cents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    About 60 cents according to CDbaby.com

    Sound like a large percentage? Its not. Say you are dang lucky and sell 10 songs. That's what, $6 bucks? Enough for lunch for several months perhaps to write and record the song.

    There is no money in the music business. None, period. Everyone can download as much music as they want for free off of myspcae and limewire. I have yet to sell even a single song. That is why I myself have chosen to give my music away for free. Its just not there. Its the big lie. Anyone who wants to argue otherwise can write their own music and produce it and show me a balance sheet that proves otherwise.

    50cFF
    http://rootpassword.com/

  47. Re:first post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least the story on Digg shows up before it does on CNN, unlike slashdot.

    Slashdot is turning into "Yesterdays (or even older) news, for nerds that don't matter."

  48. Re:first post by heinousjay · · Score: 1

    Yeah, you can tell there's Digg people in this particular thread by the quality of the posts...

    --
    Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
  49. Re:That... by nogginthenog · · Score: 1

    Most probably he slit his wrists.

  50. Audiophile? by o_miljac · · Score: 0

    Hardly.

  51. Re:Do they included refunded purchases in that tot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have you ever considered the possibility you are a hard to please whiner who drives up the cost of everything for the rest of us?

  52. Meanwhile on eBay... by Sfing_ter · · Score: 1

    For Sale, $10,000 worth of iTunes music...
    Starting at $10,000.01 ...

    --
    A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
  53. Jefferey Rowland on iTunes by wave-E · · Score: 1
  54. Re:Contribution of iTMS to iPod success seems smal by gstoddart · · Score: 1
    This seems to contradict the oft repeated claims that the iPod ties you to iTMS, or that iTMS is a major contributor to the iPod's success.

    Well, to the first, I've got an iPod, but all of my music comes of CDs I've bought. So, no, you're obviously not tied to iTMS if you have an iPod, even though people seem to be completely mistaken about that.

    BUT, since I (and probably a lot of others) don't buy their songs on-line, that means that the people who are buying songs from the iTunes store are doing it in higher proportion. I would imagine the segment of people who would buy their music online do drive the sales of iPods as they buy the player so they can populate it from the music store.

    Just because every single owner of an iPod doesn't seem to buy a lot of tracks, I don't think it's a leap to say that a non-trivial amount of iPod owners are motivated by the iTunes store.

    Heck, the guy at my local convenience store was complaining after Christmas that he'd bought an MP3 player for his daughter for, and she hated it and couldn't figure it out. Another customer had told him you couldn't use an iPod without a Mac. When I corrected him, and said you could, he returned the MP3 player she didn't like and bought her a Nano. Last I checked with him, she loved the device, and was buying stuff from the on-line store -- because that was what she wanted in the first place. For them, the music store was one of the main reasons for buying the device, that and they had a bad experience with the other MP3 player they had tried.

    For the people who don't want to go through the process of ripping CDs, or didn't already have a library of music ripped, I bet the iTunes music store is a huge selling point. It just doesn't have to be for all of the users for it to be a screaming success. The fact that they've sold one billion freakin' tracks says so.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  55. I find it hard to believe that it was coldplay by stolen-powerbook · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Doesn't it seem like a very well-placed gimmick that Coldplay was the 1 billionth song downloaded. Don't they have some agreement with apple already? Seems a bit too convienent.

    --
    http://www.myspace.com/stolen_powerbook http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&it em=7
    1. Re:I find it hard to believe that it was coldplay by 40000 · · Score: 1

      A bit too convenient that Chris Martin's daughter is named Apple? Was that part of the contract?

    2. Re:I find it hard to believe that it was coldplay by Zoologico · · Score: 0

      What? You've never heard of corporate sponsorship? STAPLES Center? Ford Field? Now there's corporate child sponsorship. Chris Martin agreed to name his daughter Apple, and Jobs agreed that Coldplay would be the billion download.

  56. Why does this always happen... by 4x5 · · Score: 0

    So I wonder just how many credit cards he needed to max out to win? (mind you he comes from one of the richest counties in all of the US)
        Thankfully his 2 million dollar house and seventy-thousand plus dollar mercedes benz makes him poorer than me.

  57. Re:Contribution of iTMS to iPod success seems smal by dtsazza · · Score: 1
    less than 5% of the aggregate iPod capacity is filled with iTMS songs.
    Yes... but what percentage of the aggregate iPod capacity is filled with any songs?

    iPods have been exceptionally well-marketed (to the masses, at least), and many people want them solely for the status they confer. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a vast amount of iPods actually sitting unused, and many more that hold a mere handful of songs.
    --
    My, that was a yummy potato!
  58. they should do better... by DeveloperAdvantage · · Score: 1

    For such a huge milestone, that's kind of a lame prize. Why don't they do something like give him free downloads for life?

    --
    FREE - Java, J2EE and Ajax Audiobooks for Software Developers - www.DeveloperAdvantage.com
  59. The fence is gone.... by bodland · · Score: 1

    I'd be happy to actually get paid ::something::::sometime:: in the twenty years I have been making music.

    If I can get 1000 people to purchase 1000 songs of our tunes on iTunes that is $650 bucks that I didn't have...

    If I can get 10% of those people to buy our CD from CDbaby that is another $500 we didn't have.

    Music is such a difficult way to make money I have given up any expectation to be in the "black" in my lifetime. But you do what you must to try and set yourself up to actually make soem money. Actually for musicians this is the best time. Cheap technology, quality instruments and a public that has a continuous high demand for NEW music. In another 30 years we will look abck on these years in awe just as we do when stereo LPs became a standard and 4 track tape machines were invented.

    What is dismaying is that so many people have simply given up on the connection between artist and listener because of big labels, big money, big media etc, etc...so here is service that is setting the music business on a new course and one that in my book levels the playing field a little more for those artists who have no expectation of a "corporate handout" in the guise of a "contract". People need to realize there is no going back. Music listening now requires more energy and attention by the fan to sift through the dizzying array of choices. Staduim rock concerts and FM as the major inlfuences of buying habits are gone, gone, gone. One to One interaction, small clubs, independant releases, blogs and online serivces like iTunes are now the major influence in the music industry.

    The internet and digital music technology enables independent artists to baypass tradtional music buinsess models and reach out directly to listeners and build rapport on a one to one basis. That activity alone leaves "gate keeping" big media running around STILL trying to put a "gate" in front of bands hoping they will walk through. Crazy thing is artists can now simply walk around the "gate" because the "fence" is gone. The cost of entry has lowered thanks to digital music technology and distribution. Bands have their own studios now capable of producing commercially viable products and a means to reach a worldwide market. In fact because of home and project studios the very techniques and technical sound of music has changed. All the innovation in recorded music is coming not from the big studios and labels, it is coming from independents. There is so much great music being made now it is mindboggling.

    What is gone in the music industry is the control they once had as gatekeepers...the money is slowly starting to spread out across a wider range of artists and companies. WHo would of thought 15 years ago that a educational computer company would be a leader in the music industry....certainly not the RIAA, or Capitol Records....maybe Steve Jobs did...

  60. Notice the song milestones? by amichalo · · Score: 1

    I find it interesting to review a few of the dong milestones - quite meaningful...

    1,000,000,000 - Speed of Sound - Coldplay
    500,000,000 - Mississippi Girl - Faith Hill
    100,000,000 - Sumersault - Zero7
    25,000,000 - Let it snow! Let it snow! Let it snow! - Frank Sinatra

    --
    I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
    1. Re:Notice the song milestones? by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1
      I find it interesting to review a few of the dong milestones

      I'm sure quite a lot of the /. crowd is interested in that.

  61. gigs are played... by bodland · · Score: 1

    Agreed. Gigging is vital to any band. We do gig. We have yet to embark on a three month national tour...not as easy to set up as one might think. They are very expensive, obviously time conuming and really don't pay all that well for emerging artists. So we play in our region mostly. SE WIscosnin and are building a good reputation and are always welcomed back to venues we play. Right now we are hunkering in the studio to catch up on working on work for our second disk. Gigging even the 1 or 2 a month we do takes a ton of time away from recording.

    It takes a multi prong approach from lots of different directions. First is writing and recording. Online sales and promotion, gigging as much as possible, puttnig out somekind of "product" all the time, getting music in other media, TV, film. There are boat loads of paperwork to deal with with ASCAP, music licensing, distibution. etc...it all comes together slowly and also take a buzz. As ususal the good music floats to the top. But to do so it first has to be heard....either by word of mouth, gigs or from a music blog...

    One thing is for sure...it is really a lot of fun...for a longtime musician and day job computer geek..it is difficult, a sh*t load of work, but immensely satisfying to DIY. It has gotten much easier over the years...and is still as much fun as it was when I was 15. Can't beat that.

  62. Re:first post by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

    ROFL WAFFLES = ROFFLE
    http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v203/MoEntertain ment/09_1_b.jpg

    They got sold on eBay a while back.
    I'm sure someone is very proud of their purchase.

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  63. OK, so each IPOD user has only bought 23.2 songs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OK. So 1,000,000,000 songs sold. 43,000,000 IPODS.

    That means that there are only 23.25 legit songs on each IPOD. The RIAA should be able to get 43,000,000 search warrants pretty easily.

    Love to see the real numbers on the illegal/legal rips/downloads for the rest of the songs.

  64. Re:Contribution of iTMS to iPod success seems smal by Inda · · Score: 0, Redundant

    hmm. I have 140 tunes on my 2gb (1.8gb without the marketing speak) Nano at it's full. 8 of those tunes are 1 hour long each so I suppose they can count as 10 tunes each. All at around 192kbps.

    250 little photos totalling a few megabytes.

    500 tunes on average my arse.

    6 hours battery life on full volume if I'm lucky.

    And it's covered in tiny little scratches even though it's only ever lived in my key-less, coin-less pocket...

    So dissapointing. I now wish I'd choosen a different MP3 player. Teach me for being a fashion sheep I suppose. Baaaaaaaaaa.

    --
    This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
  65. Consumer Culture ROCKS! by bodland · · Score: 1

    ::::WATCH THE DANCING BALL:::::

    do only as you are told....

    listen to only music that has been deemed culturally acceptable by television and large volume sales...

    Now speak...

    "BaaaaBaaaaBaaaa"

    Excellent you are now ready for fleecing.

    1. Re:Consumer Culture ROCKS! by Radiohead · · Score: 1

      Damn, I've been duped by popular culture into liking Louis Armstrong, Miles Davis, and Radiohead. I sure feel stupid now. Thanks for explaining this to me.

  66. Re:Contribution of iTMS to iPod success seems smal by Eccles · · Score: 1

    And it's covered in tiny little scratches even though it's only ever lived in my key-less, coin-less pocket...

    Have you tried toothpaste? Put a little on it and rub with your finger (not a toothbrush, the bristles itself will scratch it.) Then get a holder for it.

    --
    Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
  67. Re:Contribution of iTMS to iPod success seems smal by GlassHeart · · Score: 2, Insightful
    hmm. I have 140 tunes on my 2gb (1.8gb without the marketing speak) Nano at it's full. 8 of those tunes are 1 hour long each so I suppose they can count as 10 tunes each. All at around 192kbps.

    I wish I can put this another way, but your math stinks.

    Apple states clearly that "song capacity is based on 4 minutes per song and 128-Kbps AAC encoding". Your one-hour long tunes do not count as ten, but 22.5 ((60 min / 4 min) * (192 kbps / 128 kbps)). Each of your 4-minute 192 kbps songs would also count as 1.5 each. So, let's say you have 132 4-minute 192 kbps songs and 8 60-minute 192 kbps songs, that's 378 "Apple songs". We can make a more accurate estimate if you provide a more accurate account of the songs you're loading.

    In any case, you can argue that an "Apple song" is an unrealistic measure (it is, by the way, a bitrate reasonable enough to sell one billion songs in) or whatever else you want to complain about, but loading longer and higher bitrate songs and whining that you can't get the advertised song count really just means you either refuse to read or can't perform arithmetic.

    Also, I suggest you avoid playing your iPod at full volume to protect your hearing, not to mention get better battery life out of your iPod.

  68. Re:Contribution of iTMS to iPod success seems smal by GlassHeart · · Score: 1
    Jobs anounced last month that they've sold 42 million iPods, so they've sold on average less than 24 songs per iPod.

    What you forget is that those 42 million iPods were probably sold to less than 42 million people, and purchased songs are transferrable to any number of iPods. An average family may own three iPods, each loaded with thrice the average number of songs from your math.

    This seems to contradict the oft repeated claims that the iPod ties you to iTMS

    Rudimentary knowledge already contradicts that claim. iTunes rips CDs very well. Unlicensed music has also been widely available well before the iPod was introduced.

    or that iTMS is a major contributor to the iPod's success.

    When you're talking about a vertically-integrated solution, it's not generally useful to talk about how big a contributor each part is. The iPod doesn't win mostly on design, UI, marketing, iTunes integration, iTMS, etc., but on the whole that exceeds the sum of its parts. A component in such an integrated solution may have value ("I might want to buy a single song one day") that affects the purchase decision, even if the customer never actually bothers to.

  69. Digital Audio - Can be audiophile quality.... by bodland · · Score: 1

    Try listening to a 24bit/48 or 96 khz datafile recorded using high quality DACs.

    Flat out the frquency range and resolution is so above the dumbed down 16bit CD audio quality.

    Sony's SACD is incredible, the detail and "air" is amazing. Not siince I was in a 32 track analog studio listeing to the mix play back direct form grand master have I heard that level of detail. But that is likely dead (4 good reason beyond sound)

    If you start with 16 bit and encode a 128 Mp3 for pete's sake you are gonna hear high end attenuation. If you listen close. (warble) Plus with today's mixes being pumped up to the highest levels, bands are tossing in "garbage" into the mix to keep it musical. Distortion and noise of all kinds is introduced. Anything goes now as long as it is musical and is not fatiguing to listen to. So on high end equipment you start to hear these artificial noise floors from audio dithering and other effects like tube pre-amps, room modeling and harmonic exciters...

    We encode 192 kbit Mp3s direct from 24/48 khz master AIFF files and they sound pretty darn good on my vintage Pioneer silver face receiver running through nice AR bookshelf speakers. Not high end but better than most stuff around now a days. http://soul-amp.com/.freebies

    Also a new service touting high quality.
    http://musicgiants.com/

    Still I applaud apple. It's a new age in music. Long gone are the days of a little 45 case and the GE Wildcat portable. The quality is coming. Everyone in the recording industry tech pros are really anxious to see 16 bit depth 44.1 Khz sampling rates go away. It simply like making a sculpture and then grinding away 1/3 of it..

    1. Re:Digital Audio - Can be audiophile quality.... by AaronLawrence · · Score: 1

      MusicGiants must really do a lot of business, what with their download page:

      Server Error in '/' Application.
      - --

      Object reference not set to an instance of an object.
      Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code.

      Exception Details: System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object.

      Source Error:

      An unhandled exception was generated during the execution of the current web request. Information regarding the origin and location of the exception can be identified using the exception stack trace below.

      Stack Trace:

      [NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object.]
            MusicGiants.download.imDownload_Click(Object sender, ImageClickEventArgs e)
            System.Web.UI.ImageClickEventHandler.Invoke(Object sender, ImageClickEventArgs e) +0
            System.Web.UI.WebControls.ImageButton.OnClick(Imag eClickEventArgs e) +109
            System.Web.UI.WebControls.ImageButton.System.Web.U I.IPostBackEventHandler.RaisePostBackEvent(String eventArgument) +69
            System.Web.UI.Page.RaisePostBackEvent(IPostBackEve ntHandler sourceControl, String eventArgument) +18
            System.Web.UI.Page.RaisePostBackEvent(NameValueCol lection postData) +33
            System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain() +1292

      --
      For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. - Arthur C. Clarke
  70. IT GETS WORSE!!!!!1!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    $10,000 / $0.99 = 10,101.01

    1010101 = 85

    and you know what that means!!!!!

    '85 == the year windows 1.0 was relased.

    Don't belive Apple - its 1985 all over again!

  71. Actually, Pepsi paid for every song by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pepsi paid for every song that was redeemed on iTunes. It was in the press releases I believe.

  72. Re:Do they included refunded purchases in that tot by EightMillion · · Score: 1

    Amusingly the album 'In the Aeroplane Over the Sea' is available on eMusic.com in unencumbered mp3 format.

    Link

  73. Re:Contribution of iTMS to iPod success seems smal by jedrek · · Score: 1

    There are whole markets (like... Poland - 39 million potential Apple customers) that can't use iTMS at all.

  74. format not the point by tedivm · · Score: 1

    With all of the free downloads available now, the major point of itunes (for me at least) isn't the fact that I can download songs- again, I can do that for *free*- but rather the fact that I can download a song I like and actually help support the artist I'm downloading. I listen to some semi-obscure bands who haven't reached the point where they are selling millions of albums, or in some cases are barely selling enough to support themselves, so its important to actually support them in order to make sure they can continue making great music. So in 5-10 years, when it turns out that the format of the Ladytron song isn't supported, I'll go and download it for free knowing that I contributed to the artist whose song I actually enjoyed and wasn't just someone who claimed to be a huge fan of a band who didn't bother supporting them.

  75. Who's to say Apple hasn't considered this? by wkearney99 · · Score: 0

    Apple already knows what you've purchased and searched for.

    Who's to say Apple won't just offer you a choice to purchase a better bitrate or format? Seems like a perfectly fine to hit up the known customers with another fee.

    Better yet, pick from the list and have them burn you CDs or DVDs with the tracks on them. '

    And if they HAVEN'T thought of this already, pay up suckers.

  76. There are no sheep. by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

    Musical tastes are subjective. That means no one has the "right" or "wrong" musical preferences. Thusly there are no sheep in this regard.

    --
    Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.