Steve Jobs Announces (some) DRM-free iTunes

Fjan11 writes "Steve Jobs just announced that starting next month on you can buy higher quality 256Kbps AAC encoded DRM-free versions of iTunes songs for $1.29. Upgrades to songs you've already bought will be available at the $0.30 price difference. Currently EMI is the only publisher participating, accounting for about 20% of the songs available." There's also reports from Reuters and ABC News. The deal excludes the Beatles. You can also read the official press release from Apple if you still think this a late joke; this story confirms earlier speculation.

Comments

Yay.

[HerculesMO]

More money for something that costs Apple less to support.

Sorry, I'm still not seeing a deal. This actually makes it MORE expensive than a CD... and you get no album art either.

Re:Satrie? or are you a whiner-clown?

[cayenne8]

"I'm not sure if your post is meant as satire or not....Lossless compared to What?...if the music sounds the way the artist meant it, and the artist is satisfied then that's the music. What you are buying is not "missing" anything the artist wanted you to hear. You are getting full value."

Nope...I was dead serious.

Well, at this point, the best fidelity available really to get a recording how the artist wants me to have it..is CD quality. I am saying that is the established norm, at this time, for non-degraded music. All bits are there. At this point in time, consumer-wise, this is the lossless standard by which others are measured as lossy copies (mp3, lossy AAC).

No need in being a 'smart ass' with trying to argue about only live reproduction is the only 'true' way to get true lossless sound, etc. I think most people know what I'm saying when I say I want lossless formats with no DRM. Why would you argue against it? Why not make buying a song or album online with the same quality as a CD as easy as a 128 or 256+ bit version without DRM?

Some people out there DO enjoy good (accurate as possible within physical and monetary restraints) sound reproduction...they also have been in the job market for more than 2 years, and have plenty of disposable cash to purchase said equipment. CD's have been easily available over the years providing this same level of quality and data. Why do you think someone is a 'tard for wanting the same level of data/sound quality online unencumbered by DRM?

Some people CAN easily afford something more than an iPod to listen to music on...and I think many of us would whole heartedly jump on the pay for download if we could get our music online with the same quality and ease that we can get it from a CD?

I mean really...if they can go from 128 bit with DRM, to 256 without DRM for a little price boost, then what is keeping them from going full blast lossless AAC? It seems it would be easy to offer a download in the format you prefer, and therefore open themselves up to the full market out there rather than limit themselves by only offering 1 or 2 formats.

I so far, rip my CD's to a media box with FLAC. I can run some scripts...convert those to mp3's...for portable or car play. If you're satisfied with the lessor levels of product..fine. However, there is nothing inheritly stupid about wanting the finest possible for sale online. Many of us out there can afford 'toys' where it does make a difference, many of us care about how things sound.....

Heck for that matter...some poeple would rather spend a little extra and have as good as possible, rather than half assed.