iTunes Meets Windows in October! (1 Viewer)

[Dave Bennett]

I really don't see how burning it to an RW as an audio track and reripping it is that big of a deal unless you have a burner that isn't too speedy doing RW or if you only have 4x capable discs. It'd be nice if there was an easier way but hey atleast there is a way.

 

[George See]

I don't want I-Tunes, put me in the camp that.

A: Doesn't like the sound quality of mp3.
B: Doesn't want to support something that could lead to the death of the full length Album as an art form.

I understand my views are in the minority, maybee if we could get sound quality better than that of a CD thru a service like this i'd be more willing to give it a try, but for now i'll stay away.

 

[Joseph S]

B: Doesn't want to support something that could lead to the death of the full length Album as an art form.

That's what some may say, but Apple stated in one of the prior conferences saying that they sell almost as many albums as singles. You're more than free to purchase the album if you wish.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Not to mention that the album as an artform is pretty close to dead anyway. The days where you could count on a decent experience from beginning to end have long been coming to a close. Now it's just two singles and some filler. One could argue that it's always been this way, but if so the filler has dropped in quality.

 

[Patrick Larkin]

B: Doesn't want to support something that could lead to the death of the full length Album as an art for

I've only purchased complete albums on the iTMS. I suppose we support the full length album in different ways.

 

[Thomas Newton]

Ok, but what's wrong with the original .aiff or .wav that iTunes and the iPod handle just fine.

Nothing, but to get those, you've got to buy the CD, or to download independent artists' work from places such as that "Non-evil record label" site that someone mentioned in another thread.

One fairly obvious improvement to the iTunes store would be to add "Buy album on CD" buttons (with competitive prices). They could partner with an outfit like Amazon for fulfilling physical CD orders.

 

[George See]

Ok, but what's wrong with the original .aiff or .wav that iTunes and the iPod handle just fine.

Well nothing at all, but I already get the original .wav with the current record distribution format. I Tunes IMHO is either a step back in music quality or no step at all. I want to step forward to higher quality and/or surround sound.

 

[ChrisChap]

Dave - It is not that big of a deal to burn a cdrw then rip it back to mp3, but it is the principle of it that bothers me. If I pay for it, I should not have to do that. Also, they have not granted you a license to do that, so you are probably breaking the copyright. You may as well download the song off of a p2p network if you are going to break the copyright anyway.

 

[Dave Bennett]

Oh come on Chris, fair use is fair use. All I'm doing is converting it from a format they support, to another format so I can play it more conveniently. It's not ripping songs you legally own that is of questionable legality, it's sharing them with thousands (or depending on who you ask) even a few people. I'm not sharing my songs with anyone, I'm simply converting it from one format to another. I'm not breaking any encryption or defeating any copy protection so I can't see how anyone would see that as a copyright violation. Since I'm not defeating or going around encryption methods, I hardly see how that is a copyrgith infringment. It's really no different than me taking my old Phil Collins LP and recording it on my computer, into MP3 and the burning it to a CD. It's something I paid for and legally own all I'm doing is transforming formats. Then again, I suppose some of the people who say that is copyright infringment never made a cassette tape of a CD to play on a car tape deck :rolleyes
I agree that if you bought it you shouldn't have to deal with doing that, but they'd be signing their death warrant if they sold songs in MP3. Sure, savvy users(or just the common idiot with time on his hands ) can turn purchased songs back into MP3 but honestly, I doubt the average would.
In the end though, if you don't like the way the iTunes store works, just don't use it. I find it quite good and will continue to use it but you'll never make everyone happy and this is no exception.

 

[ChrisChap]

Dave - perhaps copyright was a poor word choice. The license issue is more what I am speaking of. I agree with you 100% that it is fair use to burn and copy something for your own purposes all you want. And it sounds like you agree with me that it sucks to have the restrictions itunes places on your ability to use the music you buy from their store. And yes, I don't like it so I will not be buying songs from itunes unless something changes.

Also, why would providing mp3 format downloads be a death warrant? What is to stop someone from sharing an AAC file? (forgive me if this is a stupid question, I truly would like to know)

 

[Dave Bennett]

Chris,
the AAC files sold by the iTunes store are protected. I know on the Mac side, you can only use them on (I think) 5 different Macs(it uses the Macs electronic serial number of the Mac to keep track of it). I assume there is some restriction on the Windows side but I can't be sure how it works. On the mac you have to Authorize the computer to play a purchased file(for example, when I got my new iMac I had to authorize it to play purchased files that I had bought on my older Powermac). Again, I've not purchased stuff on the windows version(just used it for playing files shared by my mac) so I'm not sure how this scheme is implemented in that version. If the files downloaded were unprotected AAC, then yeah it'd be no different than selling straight MP3 files.
Like I said, I can see why some might not like the store. However, it seems to be doing well and if you can live with the limits(or a bit of extra work) then I think it's worthwhile.

 

[MickeS]

It works the same in Windows. You can have 3 computers authorized to play the song.

I think it's an OK restriction since I can burn them to a CD and play them wherever I want, just like I could a real CD.

I've now bought 2 very mainstream albums, but I still really wish they'd have more obscure artists on there. Not a lot there that I want to buy.

 

[Dave Bennett]

I think the store has a decent selection, definiately lacking in some genres, and unfortunately lacking a few cds that I've actually tried to buy locally but can't find(but I don't really want enough to warrant buying them online unless i could have them instantly). I'll probably get the new Sarah McLachlan CD since it's 9.90 there versus 11.99 at Worst Buy. Even if you don't buy stuff from the store, the free song samples are a great way to sample stuff, and they also have some nice exclusives, and other content(they have a few music videos scattered throughout the store too).
Still the catalog is pretty good. I was amazed to see EVERY Steely Dan album was there. I actually purchased the two albums by them that I didn't have using iTunes(Countdown to Ecstasy and Katy Lied for those interested ). I enjoy the store but I think the one thing that might keep me from using it is if Hybrid SACDs become more common. I'd rather spend a few bucks more for a Hybrid (preferably multichannel) SACD than an iTunes downloaded album. However, since I'm sure alot of iTunes consumers don't even know what an SACD is, then I don't think that will put a big dent in their sales

 

[Thomas Newton]

Also, why would providing mp3 format downloads be a death warrant?

It wouldn't.

The songs on iTMS are generally all available on non-copy-protected CDs. All you need is for one of the buyers to make and distribute MP3s, and it does not matter how much DRM you slap onto the iTMS tracks -- the song will be out there.

You can convert iTMS files into unprotected MP3s, with some loss in sound quality. Again, it takes only one person who knows how to make the MP3 for the song to "escape" into the wild. All the DRM does is to inconvenience paying customers.

As for AAC vs. MP3, non-DRMed AAC is standards-based, and Apple claims it sounds better than MP3. So ideally, in the absence of some lossless (WAV / AIFF / MLP) format, Apple would provide a choice of non-DRMed AAC and MP3.

 

[Dave Bennett]

I don't think it was really up to Apple to use a DRMed format. I think the record labels wouldn't sign on to it unless there was some DRM involved, even if it is simple to bypass. Let's not forget, recently a record company employed copy protection that can be bypassed simply by holding down the Left Shift key while inserting a copy protected CD intoa Windows machine. They are more concerned with what Joe 6 Pack can do easily, not what someone with a bit of know how, intelligence, and time can do. Anyway as far as Apple being the one to choose this, I'm sure I'm probably one of the few who remember, but back when Apple first came up with iTunes (January 2001) they pushed it as a way to rip and share music(not necessarily online but to share it in some way). I bet the record companies would have balked had apple have said the music store would use an unprotected file format, which would have made the music store selection basically nonexistant.

 

[Patrick Larkin]

The Apple campaign was "Rip, Mix, Burn" - I don't believe "share" was ever part of the campaign. The record co.'s had a heart attack over that simple slogan.

The fact that Apple was able to get the Big Boys to sign onto the iTMS is remarkable. Given the fact that the other competitor's DRM policies were ridiculous compared to Apple's lax implementation. Thus, iTMS success and the others basic demise.

Face it guys, you will NEVER get downloaded music without DRM (legally, that is and isn't that the whole point of iTMS so you don't have to be a criminal?). If you don't agree with this then its off to the store to buy atoms.

There are certain albums and artists that I will settle for nothing less than the actual CD. Others, I'm happy to pay $9.99 for the bits.

 

[MickeS]

I have a question: does iTMS drop songs and albums frequently? I could have sworn that I saw that new tribute album to Dolly Parton on there recently, I'm pretty sure I even listened to some tunes from it, but now that I'm logging on to buy it, it's not there. Same with The Strokes latest album, I could have sworn that I saw it on there a while ago, then it disappeared. And now it's back again!

Anyone else noticed it? What's going on there?

 

[Dave Bennett]

I can't say I've noticed anything getting dropped, though i suppose it's possible that the label or artist may have decided to pull it.

 

[MikeDeVincenzo]

RE: Selection on iTunes...

When one considers that its been a Mac-only application until very recently, I'm actually quite impressed by the selection found on iTunes. Let's see where it stands a year from now...

 

[Patrick Larkin]

MickeS - are you doing a search for those albums or are you just looking on the sliding trays?