Big changes to itunes coming

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 08, 2009 3:10 AM GMT
    Michael J. MillerOne big change was the announcement that all the music on iTunes would now be available in "iTunes Plus," the DRAM-free 256-bit (and slightly more expensive) version that Apple introduced last year. Schiller said that as of today 8 million songs will be available DRM-free today, with all 10 million songs in the library available in this format by the end of April.

    There's also a big change to the pricing model. Since it started al l the basic songs on iTunes have been sold for 99 cents, but starting in April, Apple will add new options for 69 cents and $1.29. Schiller says more songs will be offered at the lower price than the higher one, but you know this is something that record companies wanted, in order to charge more for current music.

    The keynote wrapped up with Tony Bennett singing "The Best is Yet to Come" and "I Left My Heart in San Francisco," appropriate for the venue.


    http://blogs.pcmag.com/miller/2009/01/apple_intros_new_macbook_apps.php
  • CSPYNY

    Posts: 187

    Jan 08, 2009 3:13 AM GMT
    I like the DRM free stuff. Might encourage me to buy from iTunes instead of Amazon.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 08, 2009 3:16 AM GMT
    cspyny saidI like the DRM free stuff. Might encourage me to buy from iTunes instead of Amazon.


    The only thing that worries me though is the price increase! icon_cry.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 08, 2009 6:59 AM GMT
    I wish they'd offer a subscription service. I don't know if the price drop would cause me to buy more music, I usually only buy from iTunes if I can't find the music elsewhere (eMusic, etc.).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 08, 2009 7:38 AM GMT
    Steve Jobs knows his stuff.

    As always, Apple rules with a superior product.

    With Itunes...they rock.
  • vindog

    Posts: 1440

    Jan 08, 2009 8:04 AM GMT


    If they started offering 320bit rates, I'd be down, but until then I want my music as loss-less as possible. 320 is no wav file, but its better than that BS they call 192.


    blech.....



    i guess its a step closer
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 08, 2009 11:48 AM GMT
    The price increase does not bother me for new songs. Lets face it guys what product in this day and age can you get for $1.29 that can last you for years? Yet people want music for free. They are willing to spend outrageous amounts for a beer or coffee that will be pissed away within hours, but hesitate about spending money on music that lasts for years. Consumer behaviour has always fascinated me.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 08, 2009 3:29 PM GMT
    Well, there's more to it than that.

    I did a website for a country music superstar, Toby Keith, for three years.

    Lots of times, the artist gets next to nothing in the share amount of the CD sales.

    With Toby, he started his own label and told Dreamworks to have a nice day.

    Like the auto makers, the record labels have fought public demand at every angle, even when it slapped them in the face.

    There is nearly zero cost to digital distribution. Folks want one song, or two songs, from an album, and...they want fair use rights, without all the grief of DRM that doesn't work right, isn't portable, and is a royal pain. Amazon, Walmart, and Itunes, all get what the consumer wants: fair use.

    Up until a few decades ago, music was part of the village. It was free. Now, there is value in talent, clearly, but, 19.95 for a CD is obscene, so, the record labels created their own issues years ago by pissing off their clientele.

    Some of the older groups have founds a great business model, in that they give their music away, but, sell out concerts / road tours, and laugh all the way to the bank.

    The music model is such that, often, the folks most interested, have the least ability to pay, so, they find a way, if the cost is to prohibitive.

    The record labels are finally realizing that their role is one of marketing, but, that they shouldn't be so greedy, or they'll be deemed not useful, and the artists will find other outlets. Many already have.

    The Internet has released the death grip of broadcast media, and the record labels so any group can get online as simply as hitting youtube. The good old days are over for the labels.

    Here's a kid, 17 years old, who is in the top 20 downloads on youtube. He's been on national media. This probably could not have happened as recently as five years ago.



    No one would deny artists a living, but, the greed and power and intimidation of the record companies is going to go.

    The record labels fought technology (same as the movie houses did on video tape and digital recording) and LOST.

    I, too, am bewildered sometimes by consumer behavior. Folks will spend $8.00 on a drink, but, they'll sqawk at gym fees. Folks will spend 100s on killing their health with tobacco, but, won't eat right. They'll spend money on plastic surgery, but, won't eat right, nor exercise. Instead..., they'll pay money to have a "happy ending" in a convoluted massage. Go figure.

    If I've learned any ONE thing, having a degree in computer science, working commercial broadcast news for 11 years, and being around gay folks, is that folks are NOT logical, nor do they utilize common sense.
  • Timbales

    Posts: 13993

    Jan 08, 2009 3:39 PM GMT
    I'm still a cd guy. I don't have a hook-up for my iPod in my car, yet.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 08, 2009 5:33 PM GMT
    Timberoo saidI'm still a cd guy. I don't have a hook-up for my iPod in my car, yet.


    I have over 800 CDs that I never listen to now that I have ripped them into my computer. What does one do with 800 CDs? Damn music business. The only ones I see keeping forever are the classical CDs.
  • vindog

    Posts: 1440

    Jan 08, 2009 7:09 PM GMT
    SurrealLife said
    Timberoo saidI'm still a cd guy. I don't have a hook-up for my iPod in my car, yet.


    I have over 800 CDs that I never listen to now that I have ripped them into my computer. What does one do with 800 CDs? Damn music business. The only ones I see keeping forever are the classical CDs.


    sell them. buy more CDs. Rip.



    Repeat
  • Timbales

    Posts: 13993

    Jan 08, 2009 7:43 PM GMT
    SurrealLife said
    Timberoo saidI'm still a cd guy. I don't have a hook-up for my iPod in my car, yet.


    I have over 800 CDs that I never listen to now that I have ripped them into my computer. What does one do with 800 CDs? Damn music business. The only ones I see keeping forever are the classical CDs.


    buy lovely cd towers from IKEA
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 08, 2009 7:51 PM GMT
    SurrealLife saidThe price increase does not bother me for new songs. Lets face it guys what product in this day and age can you get for $1.29 that can last you for years? Yet people want music for free. They are willing to spend outrageous amounts for a beer or coffee that will be pissed away within hours, but hesitate about spending money on music that lasts for years. Consumer behaviour has always fascinated me.

    I have a theory. *Note: Hypothetical musings to follow. For my scientific sources, please consult my rectum*

    The treatment of music is due to the public perception of it, specifically that you hear it on the radio, the internet, or in some cases TV for free, minus the cost of the respective machine. Since you can hear it for free, the perception is that the music itself is for free. When you buy the CD, you're paying for the manufacturing and shipping costs; when you go to the concert, you're paying for the use of the venue. When music is digitized, there is no tangible product and this lack of tangibility leads to the perception that the actual song is not something to be valued monetarily, and many people use this justification, consciously or not, to download free music; the RIAA's multitude of anachronistic missteps only fuel the justification.

    To use your specific comparison to beer and coffee, those drinks always have cost money, the free crap coffee at various venues such as motels and auto repair shops notwithstanding, so there is no sense of misguided entitlement to the products. Since the consumer is in the habit of having to purchase those products even at absurd prices, since there is no real equivalent of coffee radio or liquor TV the idea of free entitlement doesn't really come up unless you happen to rent a room at a particularly stingy motel that doesn't even offer Folger's packets.

    Ultimately, though, it comes down to the fact that if people can get something for nothing at little-to-no risk and less trouble, most would try. The internet provides a way for music to be transferred that meets those criteria, so people try to get something for nothing, the occasional computer virus be damned. If there were a way to "pirate" a pint of Guinness over the net, I'd have more bottles of stout than I'd know what to do with, and I'd be far from the only one; Starbucks would likely go out of business within months.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 08, 2009 8:54 PM GMT
    i still can't convince myself to buy mp3s. it doesnt sit right.

    i never buy CDs either...

  • groundcombat

    Posts: 945

    Jan 08, 2009 8:57 PM GMT
    vindog said
    SurrealLife said
    Timberoo saidI'm still a cd guy. I don't have a hook-up for my iPod in my car, yet.


    I have over 800 CDs that I never listen to now that I have ripped them into my computer. What does one do with 800 CDs? Damn music business. The only ones I see keeping forever are the classical CDs.


    sell them. buy more CDs. Rip.



    Repeat


    Keeping the rip of CDs you've sold is illegal. You're stealing music.
  • vindog

    Posts: 1440

    Jan 09, 2009 2:14 AM GMT
    Please explain how purchasing a CD then selling it for 1/4 of the price you bought if for is stealing. Seems like just a used product to me, which people do for every item imaginable besides food, perishables, etc.



    How is that stealing, but buying bulk of products to mark up for sale not stealing?



    Interesting....I'm sure the records companies say it is stealing, but I do not believe it is. Unless I'm missing something....









  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2009 4:13 AM GMT
    vindog saidPlease explain how purchasing a CD then selling it for 1/4 of the price you bought if for is stealing. Seems like just a used product to me, which people do for every item imaginable besides food, perishables, etc.



    How is that stealing, but buying bulk of products to mark up for sale not stealing?



    Interesting....I'm sure the records companies say it is stealing, but I do not believe it is. Unless I'm missing something....

    He means copying the CD, then selling it. I don't understand it either.








  • vindog

    Posts: 1440

    Jan 09, 2009 8:00 AM GMT
    Buffyfan84 said
    vindog saidPlease explain how purchasing a CD then selling it for 1/4 of the price you bought if for is stealing. Seems like just a used product to me, which people do for every item imaginable besides food, perishables, etc.



    How is that stealing, but buying bulk of products to mark up for sale not stealing?



    Interesting....I'm sure the records companies say it is stealing, but I do not believe it is. Unless I'm missing something....

    He means copying the CD, then selling it. I don't understand it either.










    I know what he meant, but don't understand the logic
  • CSPYNY

    Posts: 187

    Jan 09, 2009 4:30 PM GMT
    Buffyfan84 said
    cspyny saidI like the DRM free stuff. Might encourage me to buy from iTunes instead of Amazon.


    The only thing that worries me though is the price increase! icon_cry.gif


    You do have a point. Amamzon is still staying at $.99.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2009 6:40 PM GMT
    The logic is that buying a CD does not give you the legal right to create an exact digital copy of the CD and then transfer ownership of the CD to someone else. My recollection is that fair use does allow for making a copy for personal use, but that copy needs to be either destroyed or transferred to the new owner of the CD. To keep the copy after transferring ownership of the CD is legally no different than stealing the music off P2P. Losing money on the CD doesn't negate the illegality of making and keeping the ripped copy.
  • vindog

    Posts: 1440

    Jan 09, 2009 6:43 PM GMT

    OK....so its their made-up version of stealing, not that it actually is stealing.


    at least in my opinion.