Home > Multimedia, AV > Apple Wins Big with iTunesApple Wins Big with iTunes Eugenia Loli 2003-05-12 Multimedia, AV 73 Comments“It’s too bad 97 percent of you will have to wait until the end of the year to check out Apple’s new iTunes Music Store. It flat out rocks!” Read the article at KnoxNews. About The Author Eugenia LoliEx-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli 73 Comments 2003-05-12 7:16 am Can anyone tell me how the DRM workswhen you buy a new Mac? I assume thatyou cannot create further copies on aMac that the songs haven’t been licensedfor.So will you loose some rights when yourold Mac dies? 2003-05-12 7:27 am How is itunes different than the pay version of mp3.com? 2003-05-12 7:30 am I really hope, that iTMS will become the “industry standard”, but I can’t help about thinking those “98%” who will be left out. I’m a Mac (iBook with Jaguar etc.) owner. Does that make me one of those “2%”? Nope. I don’t own a credit card. And I don’t live in the States.The reason why Napster was so popular, is that, they didn’t care how much money did you make in a year, if you had been to the army etc, which iTMS indirectly asks in a form of needing a credit card.(They don’t ask those things in the States? Well, that’s nice, but in a a-bit-too-much-socialist state like Finland, they do.) 2003-05-12 7:49 am As I understand it, the necessity of a credit card and living in the US is a temporary drawback. The service will be expanded, but Apple felt there was enough incentive to go ahead and launch now, instead of later. Other forms of payment and international ordering should be appearing in the near future. 2003-05-12 8:21 am They launched this on telstra over a year ago. I dont c anything much new here.Seems once again.. mac users think as soon as its on apple (and not yet on microsoft.com) then its new.Its not new.*yawn* 2003-05-12 8:22 am Enough cheap advertising already. We know perfectly well that Mac owners will swallow pretty much anything from Apple and rave about it for months afterwards, however it’s fair to assume that there are reasons the other 97% of the world don’t use Macs. Pointlessly advertising a service which is “new” only in the sense that it’s now integrated with their (bundled, free) music player. Hmm, does that remind you of anything? 2003-05-12 8:29 am The DRM is bound to your iTunes Music Store Account and NOT to your Mac. If you change your computer you “disable” the DRM in your old system and “enable” it on your new system (there is a menu in iTunes for that). And everything will play again.Ralf. 2003-05-12 9:03 am I like the idea and if it comes to Windows/Linux… I feel like going for it… especially the part of burning “my” music to CD is good enough for me to pay for it…I hope once they open the service (if they ever do) for Europe, they’ll add european music (techno and the stuff…)…Rgrds,-fredo 2003-05-12 9:46 am It’s less than 3%. Here in europe we can browse the music store. We can listen to the 30 first second of the song. But can’t buy songs. For that I would need to cheat Apple and say I live in the USA.browsing the music store is fast, seraching works well. listening is a bit lengthy.ludo—http://www.opendarwin.org 2003-05-12 9:58 am Let’s get out of the Reality Distortion Field for a moment.Pay music is nothing new.Most computer users on the planet cannot afford $1/song.Most computer users cannot afford to purchase iTunes (for Windows).Most computer users don’t care about iPods and other aspects of Apple’s Luxury Computing Hub.Besides, how much does Apple pay you to datamine your music listening habits? 2003-05-12 10:05 am So I buy loads of music, and if my hard drive dies I have to buy it again?“But you can back it up” – I shouldn’t have to. Lots of music takes up lots of space. Backing up lots of stuff takes lots of time. Hardly convenient. Isn’t that what they’re aiming for?Apple know I paid for the music. What’s stopping them? 2003-05-12 10:17 am It is only available to 25% of Mac users as most Mac users don’t use OS X. Yeah, they really buy everything Apple tells them too. Most Mac development is done in small companies and is much better than windows software. (Yes I have used most major versions of Windows for 2 years each.)Evey time a PC manufacturer copies something Apple did (Palms, wireless networking, firewire, etc.) they say Apple is an idiot and they slam Apple when they now chose to wait until the market was ready and are successful. These kinds of people just hate Apple because they were scammed by Microsoft and want others to be in bondage too. 2003-05-12 10:30 am Since when Palm = PC?Especially since Apple markets it as part of the digital hub?And which is in more bondage – using software from one same company or using software, hardware and services from one single company? 2003-05-12 11:03 am From: genaldarHow is itunes different than the pay version of mp3.com?I’m assuming you mean “iTMS” in place of “iTunes”. The content is different, and mp3.com has advantages in portability, freedom, and uptime of the service (for now, at least). I’ll be interested to see how this develops.From: OoSyncAs I understand it, the necessity of a credit card and living in the US is a temporary drawback. The service will be expanded, but Apple felt there was enough incentive to go ahead and launch now, instead of later. Other forms of payment and international ordering should be appearing in the near future.I’m not holding my breath, considering the same things were said about iPhoto albums & prints, localised Sherlock channels, localised LDAP configurations (for Address Book), various .mac things, etc. That said, I really do hope so.From: Glenn SweenyThey launched this on telstra over a year ago. I dont c anything much new here. Seems once again.. mac users think as soon as its on apple (and not yet on microsoft.com) then its new. Its not new.This isn’t pay per play. This is pay per download, where you download once and keep.It’s not new, you’re quite right. It does what is uncommon for Apple; rather than being too early or too late, it’s at that point where the components are right and the time is ripe. It has a shot at being hugely successful for Apple beyond the Macintosh world.From: fredo I hope once they open the service (if they ever do) for Europe, they’ll add european music (techno and the stuff…)…Ditto here, for Australian bands. Even better if that content is made available to all iTMS users regardless of continent (no good reason not to).From: MichaelMost computer users on the planet cannot afford $1/song. Most computer users cannot afford to purchase iTunes (for Windows). Most computer users don’t care about iPods and other aspects of Apple’s Luxury Computing Hub.These are all strawman arguments until iTMS comes out internationally, until we know what pricing (if any) iTunes for Windows will be available at, and until we have concrete sales figures for iPods and Macintoshes in the long-term after the launch of iTMS.From: Anonymous“But you can back it up” – I shouldn’t have to. Lots of music takes up lots of space. Backing up lots of stuff takes lots of time. Hardly convenient. Isn’t that what they’re aiming for? Apple know I paid for the music. What’s stopping them?For every “if my hard drive dies” question, an equally valid “if the CD is majorly scratched” question can be asked for bought music or software. Many people copy & compress CDDA on to their computers after buying CDs, which is a form of backup. Putting aside the separate cost of optical media in the equation, why is this acceptable one way but not the other? Who’s to say ‘backing up’ to disc *can’t* be convenient, the same way that ripping from is?Further, I understand the deal with the content owners is pay-per-download. You download, you pay. Doesn’t matter if you’ve downloaded before. Perhaps that will change in the future.From: Ben HuotIt is only available to 25% of Mac users as most Mac users don’t use OS X. Yeah, they really buy everything Apple tells them too.Unfortunately. The first sentence of the article should have started as “It’s too bad 99-percent of you will have to wait…”, once you factor in MacOS X 10.1.5 or later required, and lack of international availability.From: Ben HuotEvey time a PC manufacturer copies something Apple did (Palms, wireless networking, firewire, etc.) they say Apple is an idiot and they slam Apple when they now chose to wait until the market was ready and are successful.You noticed that too, huh? 2003-05-12 12:06 pm http://macnet2.com/more.php?id=338_0_1_0 2003-05-12 12:07 pm About a million dollars in one week, not too bad. People are already saying, “its nothing new”, “its a total failure”.Well what is new is that as far as a music service goes, this one actually makes money. You can’t really say that about the others and the integration and ease of use is better than anything out there. I can see why Apple chose to replace MusicMatch on the PC with iTunes. 2003-05-12 12:31 pm If you are outside the US, I dont think you can cheat by saying you live in the US as you will need a credit card address over there. 2003-05-12 1:29 pm Yo, Digitaleon! Thanks mate, for trying to clear up some of the hype surrounding most of anything Apple does now a days. This “Yo Mac! vs “No Mac” crap tends to cloud over the issue like fresh manure on a nicely plowed field. And which is simply: how, with what quality, and at what price will we get our digital music in the future?Apple should be (and is being) applauded by all for finally having shown a way to do it right. They have apparently gotton the message through to the (music) industry, that the hey,ho days are over, and if they (Warner, Universal, EMI etc) want to survive long term, they will have to face and swallow some realities of how the consumer wants the beef!And the consumer will need to understand that QUALITY music cannot be had indefinitely for just the price of a raw CD, and most certainly not without a functioning industry to keep them quality new tracks a comin´.. 2003-05-12 1:29 pm As far as I am concerned this is a non-event. I mean a buck for a low quality AAC encoded song? Please! A milion in one week doesn’t mean squat. It’s the following months that will make or break the service. There is no way they will sustain that level once the initial ‘wow’ factor wears off. 2003-05-12 1:36 pm I prefer folk and celtic music. I find the selectionpoor. I have no complaints otherwise with the service. 2003-05-12 2:14 pm I agree with don-giuseppe. You would think people, like us, who are interested in computing more than the average person, would be pleased to see computing make little steps forward like this. And it pleases me that it will be coming to Windows later this year. And, I hope internationally. Those of you who bash everything in sight – you make me suspicious of you.I think the big thing here is the music industry is starting to get a grip on its own insanity and freefall. The deal they made with Apple could be the model to stop this insanity. I don’t mean because of Apple itself, but if the model takes off as the best way to stop the insanity. 2003-05-12 2:25 pm I’m going have to disagree with you on the quality of 128 kbps AAC. When I first downloaded iTunes 4, I tried ripping a song in 128 kbps AAC. I was so amazed by how much better it sounded than my 192 kbps MP3s, that I have now proceeded to rerip my entire CD collection to AAC. I would definitely choose AAC over much higher bitrate MP3 any day. 2003-05-12 2:59 pm Why does no one use Ogg to encode music? Why doesn’t players support it? 2003-05-12 3:07 pm Is it really hard for any codec to sound better than mp3? mp3 is terrible. Even at 192. It is designed to get rid of all frequencies above 15000 and below 40 no matter how high you encode at, even 320. You will never get sound by filtering out that much of it. Try vorbis. I encode at 64kbps and it sounds better than 192 mp3. And I’m a sound engineer who doesn’t put up with crap sound. 2003-05-12 3:07 pm 1) It’s only pretty recently that there is an ogg/vorbis library available that you could use on an portable music player. AFAIK there is still no thorough specification, only code.2) No marketing department for ogg/vorbis. What’s better? A sexy alanis morissette saying how apple’s new offerings bring her closer to the public. Or a fat bearded bastard from slashdot that yells “Ogg/Vorbis is better because it’s oopen, you stupid microsoft slave!” (microsoft slave, apple slave, companyY slave, whatever..)3) No DRM. Like it or not, it is needed if you want to offer a music download service. Atleast if you want to offer mainstream music that the majority of the public knows and likes. 2003-05-12 3:19 pm From: Michael“Most computer users on the planet cannot afford $1/song.”Lots of people pay more than $1.00 per song already. Take a look at the latest cds and do the math, of course that is why people have slowed down in buying cds.As an example though, Bob Dylan’s “Love and Theft”I paid around $20.00 Canadian for it around 6 months ago.12 tracks at $20 = 1.67 per trackhttp://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00005NI5Y/qid=105275…Amazon.com has it for 12.99 US Dollars12 tracks at $12.99 = 1.08——————————American Idol Season 2http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00008MNYR/ref=pd_frw…$13.49 at Amazon.com13 tracks at $13.49 = 1.04——————————Marilyn Manson – Golden Age of Grotesquehttp://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000092ZVV/104-800565…$13.99 at Amazon.com14 tracks at $13.99 = 0.99 (actually 0.99928571, most cash registers will round up to $1.00)——————————The point, people are already paying $1+ per song, they just don’t work it out because when buying a cd they buy a preset collection. $1 a son might not be so bad since you can make your own collection. 2003-05-12 3:28 pm Get out of reality distortion and read this:http://www.macnet2.com/more.php?id=338_0_1_0_M 2003-05-12 3:36 pm A million downloads a week equals a million bucks a week or around $50 million a year. That may sound a lot but it is absolute chicken feed in reality and nowhere enough to be profitable.It sounds like another crazy Jobs pan to sell more Apple hardware rather than diversify into other businesses.Talk about micro-niche marketing – iPod owning, credit card holding, OSX Mac owning, US based music lovers with broadband connections – maybe 100,000 people in total.This will be a typical Jobs stunt – lots of publicity, lots of initial interest and then no follow up.Microsoft will then adopt a similar service which will make a fortune.Bill Gates is a brilliant and ruthless businessman, Steve Jobs is a dreamer. 2003-05-12 3:37 pm that all the people on here than are makeing like this is not a big deal or that is sucks and are spreading FUD are p2pers.damn criminals. 2003-05-12 3:43 pm Such a person would understand this phenomenon. Appreciate it, too.Musicians, your coffee’s burning. Wake up. Go learn how to play music instead of sell it. Then, maybe people will actually want to buy it. 2003-05-12 3:58 pm Thanks MacNet for your two plugs so far. We get the idea. If you’re not satisifed with your Apple products you can kindly donate them to me :o). 2003-05-12 4:06 pm I love itunes but I don’t have the money for a mac…So when I read that iTunes was being ported to windows I looked around for a similar project for linux. (After all OSX is closer to linux than to windows)I found xtunes (aka sumi) but it seems there has been very little activity in a while and the files have been removed from sourceforge.Did sumi become closemi?In that case I’ll just have to wait for Yammi and Juk to mature… 2003-05-12 4:08 pm i think iTunes Music Store is great idea.“Ogg/Vorbis is better because it’s oopen, you stupid microsoft slave!” (microsoft slave, apple slave, companyY slave, whatever..)Actually the best thing about Ogg vorbis it sounds better than MP3, the opensource thingy is only a nice plus 2003-05-12 4:23 pm > So I buy loads of music, and if my hard drive dies I> have to buy it again?>> “But you can back it up”> I shouldn’t have to. Lots of music takes up lots of> space. Backing up lots of stuff takes lots of time.> Hardly convenient. Isn’t that what they’re aiming for?>> Apple know I paid for the music. What’s stopping them?You’re joking, right?Let’s say you buy a “real” CD. While sitting in 6th grade study hall complaining to everyone how much work it is to burn a CD, you accidentily leave your new N’Sync CD sitting under your chair when you run off to lunch.Whoops! Well, you’ve got your receipt, why don’t you go to Wal-mart and demand they replaced your CD you lost and didn’t back-up (since it would have taken “lots of time” to back it up)? Wait, you mean they laughed at you? Just because its automated doesn’t mean they need to hold your hand and pay for your bandwith usage over and over. 2003-05-12 4:30 pm learn how to form a proper analogy.there is a big difference from getting another CD in stock (which costed money to manufacture) to getting a copy of a small 128bit mp3 of whatever you downloaded. 2003-05-12 4:48 pm learn some economic logic fool. you buy something. you use it you like it. you lose it becasue you are to lazy to back it up (or in the case of physical devices take insurence out on it) why should you get an automatic replacement? get back into the real world and out of the P2P world you are in criminal…..I hope the FBI kicks in your door for copyright infringment. 2003-05-12 4:48 pm Since Apple users are dumb enough to pay ridiculous amounts of money for ridiculously inferior hardware and then pay the full price for every 0.1 update to their “sexy” OS, Jobs figured that it makes perfect sense to sell them something else that is already available for free – digital music. Such an idea will only work with dumb apple users and will never fly with Windows and especially Linux users, iTunes or no iTunes.Before you get all politically correct and start BSing about how copying music is illegal, let me point out that there is a huge difference between law and justice. No musicians deserve the money they are making. They are not healing anyone, not feeding anyone, not saving any lives, not even taking the garbage out. All they do is use drugs, have casual sex and show off their over bloated egos on MTV. For whatever music they produce – $100K per year is more than generous. They should be making money from concerts or through royalties from occasions when their music is used by others to make money, such as radio, movies or dance clubs. For personal use by regular people music should be free. That would be fair. What happened to the concept of art for the sake of art? What happened to just wanting to share your creation with others? Why does Metallica want to grab money from some poor student who is already in debt up to his ears with loans? Why in the IT world people write entire operating systems and share them with other for free but artists can’t do the same? The answers are: GREED, GREED, GREED and GREED.Well, technology is straightening it all out as we speak. Today music “industry”, tomorrow Hollywood. 2003-05-12 4:57 pm every 0.1 update for apple is a MAJOR release. you like paying for windows? where you pay full price for minor revisions like win98se? or win3.11? how about windows 95 a,b,c? how about the soon to be released XPse? (I am guessing on that but given the long time between xp and longhorn I am willing to bet)face it you have no argument. 2003-05-12 5:01 pm the PC fanboys start screeming. I wish people would base their egos on things like their skills and selfesteam rather than the success of an OS or a platform. 2003-05-12 5:10 pm Bravo debman!Now please make the same case for Apple’s hardware. I’d love to hear that one. (I can smell some nonsence about the non-existent PPC970 coming up) 2003-05-12 5:14 pm I don’t have to wait for anything.Apple never once announced that it has any interest in supporting the Linux community.That and I’ve already got all my CDs encoded into a superior audio format, ogg, which I transport around in a removable harddrive. This is the way I have been doing these things for years. But its nice to see Apple provide a solution for the rest of you. 2003-05-12 5:29 pm th haters are out in force today.(chuckling silently.)Its a hobby to some folk here to trash anything that has ‘mac’, ‘apple’ or’jobs’ in a thread.The service is a neat feat of software coding. 2003-05-12 5:36 pm So many people are saying that Apple hasn’t created anything new/good/important/etc. here. There have been (pay) music services before, but none have had near the popularity of Apple’s. Whatever you think about the Mac OS/Apple you have to admit that they are a driving force in the industry. Apple introduced a third generation display engine and now Microsoft has one slated for Longhorn. They decided to scrap all legacy ports and now USB is by far the most common connection technology. Maybe it is how fanatic mac fans are about their company; maybe Apple is just able to pull technologies together in a way that others can’t. No matter what, when Apple introduces something like this, it becomes important.Do I think that Apple’s iTunes Music Service is all that. Hardly! I think that AAC at 128kbps knocks out too much of the high end frequencies (making symbol crashes sound poor), that there are a lot of songs that aren’t available, that there is no concrete information on what happens if my computer goes AWOL and I need to reformat, etc. It is by no means perfect, but it is important and SUCCESSFUL.Even if it isn’t available to you/a good value to you it will be the product that opens up the floodgates. Others will try to copy it and Apple will tweak their service to remain competitive. Even with its shortcomings, I can’t wait for it to come out for Windows. I have a 60GB hard drive just waiting to be filled with iTunes. 2003-05-12 5:44 pm we are not in the real world, we are in the internet, where things can be copied for no cost! The song just doesn’t disappear from apple’s servers, it can be replaced easily.Why would it matter whether you or Apple backed it up (even though it’s not really backing up since it’s there anyways)? 2003-05-12 5:45 pm quick you better get your tinfoil hat! 2003-05-12 7:30 pm Admiral Horror: Congratulations! You have created your own personal set of ethics regarding what recording artists should paid, etc. Talk about reality distortion.Mac.Net: The guy had a bad support experience, so now AAC sucks and everything sucks. By the way, Apple Customer Service, according to a very recent poll done by Consumer Reports (for their magazine), Apple has the highest customer satisfaction rate, far surpassing Dell, Gateway, HP etc.This is not meant as an endorsement of Apple. Rather, it is just a remark about those who, for some irrational reason, hate Apple. 2003, this year, is a bad year for you. OS X is blooming and they’ll have another major update later this year. Their new notebook lineup is a huge success. There are brand new iPods for Mac and Windows people. They have a great beta browser in Safari. They have leapfrogged PowerPoint with KeyNote. They continue to open more stores. They signed up the Big Five recording labels and have started their music service with huge success and will be available for Windows later this year. They have updated all the iLife applications and their high end video applications. And, hopefully, later this year, we will see the beginning of Apple’s processor problem resolved.Yes, a very bad year for you haters 🙂 2003-05-12 8:09 pm There is no reality distortion whatsoever. All I am saying is that people have been copying digital music for free, people are copying digital music for free and people will be copying digital music for free. It is as real as it gets and while it might be illegal, it is certanly not morally wrong. If you fail to see something as obvious as that, then I am not surprised you’ve been suckered into buying Apple hardware.P.S. Btw, later this year Apple is launching a world wide online manure ordering and delivery system. Make sure you subscribe to that as well. 2003-05-12 8:10 pm we are not in the real world, we are in the internet, where things can be copied for no cost! The song just doesn’t disappear from apple’s servers, it can be replaced easily. I didn’t know bandwith is available at no cost.. 2003-05-12 8:40 pm oh my god. you need toget some sence man. you buy something you own it. it is a thing that you must care for. if you do not protect it then you must buy a new one. PERIOD. it does not matter if you should be able to replace it “for free” becasue the internet allows for such things. that is just not how the world works.and if you don’t consider the internet the real world you are sorely mistaken. it is not 1990 any more there are rules and businesses. grow up. 2003-05-12 8:44 pm if you think taking things that do not belong to you and you call it moral you are a corupt person and I wish you 20 years behind prison and $500,000 in fines. 2003-05-12 8:57 pm On a contrary debman, I am a very moral man who also sees the difference between the laws (made by imperfect humans and hence inherently imperfect) and justice. In 99% of the cases following the law implies making sure justice is served. In 1% of the cases it’s the opposite. I am able to see those cases and do whatever possible in order not to contribute to the injustice. Just as an example: in some countries if a wife cheats on her husband it is lawful to stone her to death. Ask yourself now if you think it is just.I don’t wish you anything bad. I wish you that your mac, as inferior as it is, always works well and brings you alot of joy. After all that’s what life is all about.RegardsP.S. I assume you meant “in prison” or “behind bars”. What would I be doing “behind prison”? 2003-05-12 9:20 pm I have not only a mac but a PC running XP and a laptop runing Debian.anyway. so you legitemize theft (not fair use) by saying copyright is imoral? the DMCA is imoral but not copyright.I remember back in the early days of the DMCA that we were angry about how this bastardised copyrights and hurt the people. now you and your ilk have taken to the same type of extreamism that the DMCA was born under but in the other direction.you can act like you are all high and mighty because you do not wish bad things on me, and I am glad becasue I have not done anything wrong. you however are a thief and I do not see prison for you as being bad but rather being just and right. 2003-05-12 9:37 pm It’s ok, some day you’ll grow up and stop being a teenager. You acne will clear up, you’ll get out of your parents’ basement, you’ll start having some success with females and most importantly you’ll be able to finally think like and adult. Finally you won’t be thinking that something is right or wrong just because mommy, daddy or TV said so but you’ll be able to think, analyse and draw conclusions on your own. 2003-05-12 10:12 pm about me and about the world. think what ever you like, just promis to send me a copy of your prison biography. 2003-05-12 10:35 pm My latest update on OS X Update gave me iTune 4 with the look-it-up-and-buy-it features. I won’t be using them… but… 2003-05-12 11:46 pm I dig your posts usually. What % of the market does Apple have? And what % of the world runs Windows?Is your question answered yet? 2003-05-13 1:18 am and one os-x box.immediate gratification for a particular song, with no SUBSCRIPTION?i don’t have no gripes. 2003-05-13 2:23 am Most people simply don’t have the money to participate in Apple’s Luxury Computing strategy. No amount of Mac fan gladstanding will change this simple economic fact.This year, 2003, in spite of Apple’s alleged successes, they are still losing market share. Instead of delivering computers that compete on price, Apple delivers computers with features most people really don’t care about.And contrary to Apple’s advertising campaigns, maybe most computer buyers aren’t teenage drug girls or socialites that sip caffe latte with the dalai lama?Until Apple delivers the things that count in computing — price and performance — none of their Luxury Computing fluff is going to matter. 2003-05-13 3:20 am there is a big difference from getting another CD in stock (which costed money to manufacture) to getting a copy of a small 128bit mp3 of whatever you downloaded.You’re right. Because they are screwing with CD’s now I refuse to put new ones in my computer. Some of them just never come out.Also, when I buy an album for $12 with 4 good songs out of 12 I spent $3 per song. When I buy it online it’s still $0.99. Great deal huh?You seem like a smart boy. You can figure this out. 2003-05-13 3:24 am Talk about micro-niche marketing – iPod owning, credit card holding, OSX Mac owning, US based music lovers with broadband connections – maybe 100,000 people in total.Considering that in the first week we’re discussing here Apple also took orders for 110,000 new iPods you’re grossly mistaken.At an average of $400 per unit that’s $44 million into the bucket on top of the music sales. 2003-05-13 3:44 am Captain Horror, this is not about Apple or Macs. It is part of a solution to a big problem. Stealing is illegal and usually (and in this case) is morally wrong. Most philosophical and theological systems of belief agree that stealing food and medicine, if their is no other alternative, is not morally wrong. I don’t think music downloads fit into that category.Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should do it. As far as I know, we only go around once in this life. That said, it would be nice to live it without entering the sleaze zone. 2003-05-13 3:53 am It would seem so.Also, by Admiral’s reasoning, Microsoft should make its money on consulting fees and everybody in the world should download Windows off the Internet and not pay a dime. Those programmer people don’t really contribute much to society, after all. Certainly not as much Admiral, who advances the moral education of the likes of the rest of us. 2003-05-13 4:19 am That is the point I was this business is designed to sell iPods not make money from selling music and is very likely to fail. Microsoft will probably introduce a similar service worldwide in a few months via Media Player 10 offering a choice of encoding methods and bitrates (MP3, WMA, AAC). You won’t need an iPod or a Mac. MS has far more marketing muscle and cash than Apple and will prevail – even if it takes years. 2003-05-13 4:58 am Really good flamefest! Love the pompous, self-righteous, sneers from the Admiral and the hell and damnation, rot-in-prison-you-child-molesting-mp3-stealing-twisted-sicko-you, being flung right back! Great stuff guys.Anyway, I’m on debman’s side in this to a point. I do happen to think that it’s obscene what some people in the entertainment industry make for what they provide. And it’s not just musicians but actors, athletes, etc. However, why do these people make so much money? Because people pay the price – whether it’s by purchasing the CD, the DVD, the ticket, or the beer that was advertised during the game. And that happens to be THEIR CHOICE. No one is putting a gun to their head and forcing them to go to that movie or buy that CD. Is this MORALLY offensive or wrong? Sickening to see what we as a society value maybe but it’s not the artist’s/athlete’s/actor’s moral issue.So, who decides what someone is allowed to make? if the Admiral’s boss decides that he isn’t worth what he was paid this year by $20,000 dollars it’s morally ok to come and take his car? I think even the Admiral might agree that this would be wrong. So, if you think that football players are over paid for their value to society don’t go to the games, don’t watch the games on TV, don’t buy the products that support the industry, but don’t go stealing their $10,000 dollar stereo, their rolex, or one of their 50 SUV’s. Same thing goes for the music industry. If you have a moral problem supporting someone’s outrageous lifestyle then don’t buy their stuff. Stealing can’t be morally justified by saying that the person makes too much money. Everyone (who isn’t) complains about rich people but everyone wants to be one. Me included So I agree with debman that admiral ‘s justifications are lame but I don’t wish jail time on the old sea dog, a nice virus courtesy of Kazaa that wipes out his 30,000 song MP3 collection would make me chuckle though! 2003-05-13 6:57 am People fucking NEED music, it’s not optional, maybe for alot of people it’s not, but for many of us it’s damn near impossible to live without it.They’re (the RIAA) overcharging my own spiritual enrichment. 2003-05-13 6:59 am now that my mindless bantering is done, you may contiune with your programmingIgnore me. 2003-05-13 1:05 pm That is the point I was this business is designed to sell iPods not make money from selling music and is very likely to fail. Microsoft will probably introduce a similar service worldwide in a few months via Media Player 10 offering a choice of encoding methods and bitrates (MP3, WMA, AAC). You won’t need an iPod or a Mac. MS has far more marketing muscle and cash than Apple and will prevail – even if it takes years.It would have to be WMA for technical and marketing reasons (like Microsoft would use someone else’s standard). Which, again, means that your existing devices won’t work (which is the same as Apple’s problem). The difference is that Apple already has a kick-butt player in which they have included support for their DRM tech.Microsoft has marketing muscle, to be sure. But Microsoft needs the media giants more than they need Microsoft. I wiould be very, very surprised if Microsoft launches a pay-per-download music service that has all the major labels before next year.I see two key questions surrounding a Microsoft service (if it ever gets off the ground)– how user friendly will it be? Microsoft has yet to design any great products in the media arena. WMP is garbage to look at and garbage to use. If that’s the best they can do Apple shouldn’t be worried– would you really trust Microsoft with your credit card information? I wouldn’t, even before the Passport fiasco of the last week. But if you’re that much of a chump be my guest. 2003-05-13 3:01 pm Fflewddur, Fflewddur, FflewddurThank you for the only meaningful reply on the issue I’ve brought up. Please understand though, I am not advocating stealing any cars, rolexes or stereos. Never ever I’ve said anything along those lines. Owners of those things paid the full price for them, they are their property and stealing those object is absolutely out of question as far as moral values go. However, I do advocate listening to the digital music for free by individuals for their personal, non-profit enjoyment.Some people brought up comparison of copying digital music to copying software. Can you even compare the amount of work, knowledge, experience and education it takes to develop WindowsXP and to record “Oops, I farted again”? Now, compare the $$$ a software developer and an artist make.Thanks for not condemning me to hell, I didn’t kill any babies after all. And I doubt that I’ll be getting any viruses from Kazaa, being a sysadmin for a number of years and knowing a thing or two about how viruses work and which file types can be infected 😉Best regardsAdmiral Horror 2003-05-13 3:20 pm Some people brought up comparison of copying digital music to copying software. Can you even compare the amount of work, knowledge, experience and education it takes to develop WindowsXP and to record “Oops, I farted again”? Now, compare the $$$ a software developer and an artist make.Most software is not the size of Windows XP (thank god). Most software is much smaller. Do you think Jasc should be compensated for Paint Shop Pro? A major album can cost over a million dollars to produce. Shouldn’t they be compensated for that?Your average software developer probably makes more than your average artist. Now, your average FAMOUS artist can make quite a bit. But then, how many millionaires came out of Microsoft alone? A family friend is the guy who wrote Photoshop and sold it to Adobe. He made millions off that. It happens….I think the software to music analogy is a good one. 2003-05-13 8:40 pm Any artist who’s CDs can be found in a music store makes a lot more money than and average or even above average software developer. And a software developer works 8 hours a day every business day, something you can hardly say about artists.Of course when I was talking about artists I was never talking about people who get together in the evening twice a week to jam in someone’s garage. Those are hobbyists, not professionals and no one wants their music anyways, free or otherwise. 2003-05-13 9:30 pm I would expect to make more money if I were travelling constantly doing appearances or touring. That’s simply more hours put in on the job. Travelling isn’t fun, even if you get to be on tv (and asked the same stupid questions over and over and over all while pretending to enjoy it).The chicks would be nice though – I’ll give that to musicians (even the poor ones!)Of course the musicians do all the touring, playing local clubs, selling their CD’s after the show. Most don’t make it big, just staying small-time, with a few cities that have more than a handful of fans (This is actually the big hope and dream for internet music – whether it’s the Apple music store or something else – that these bands will get noticed and can sell records without a big label contract).Before you start talking about “average” perhaps you ought to consider how many (serious – trying to make a living) musicians there are compared to the number who make it big. It’s not ‘all or nothing’ in the music business like you make it out to be. 2003-05-13 9:41 pm For those musicians freely copied music is a free publicity. Nobody will pay money to download a song they never heard by a band they never heard of. But if it’s free people might try it, like it, become a fan, buy a CD, t-shirt or tickets to the next concert. 2003-05-17 8:05 am From: don-guiseppeYo, Digitaleon! Thanks mate, for trying to clear up some of the hype surrounding most of anything Apple does now a days. This “Yo Mac! vs “No Mac” crap tends to cloud over the issue like fresh manure on a nicely plowed field.[i]Cheers don I have to agree. I can read an article talking about how Apple trying to become like Sony will be their downfall and that they should return to their Macintosh roots, and then skip across the internet to another one that says if Apple doesn’t continue down this path they’re doomed.To quote from the film The Russia House: [i]”For ‘experts’ there’s no toilet deep enough!”From: Anonymous (wc.optusnet.com.au)A million downloads a week equals a million bucks a week or around $50 million a year. That may sound a lot but it is absolute chicken feed in reality and nowhere enough to be profitable.US$50m is more like a cup of water into the bucket. The difference is barely noticeable, but it is still there. As for profits, we’ll need to wait for an announcement by Apple. I’d expect one in June at the WWDC, probably as part of Jobs’ keynote. We all know he loves to get up on stage and rub good news in everyone else’s face.From: Anonymous (wc.optusnet.com.au)It sounds like another crazy Jobs pan to sell more Apple hardware rather than diversify into other businesses. Talk about micro-niche marketing – iPod owning, credit card holding, OSX Mac owning, US based music lovers with broadband connections – maybe 100,000 people in total.Of those five requirements, three of them are expected to change in the short-term. That will take the service out of the micro-niche, with a good chance for ongoing success.From: Anonymous (wc.optusnet.com.au)This will be a typical Jobs stunt – lots of publicity, lots of initial interest and then no follow up. Microsoft will then adopt a similar service which will make a fortune.Microsoft will have problems trying to launch a similar service, because of the record industry and because of their existing involvement with PressPlay. The “Big 5” currently have their bets hedged two ways: with subscriptions (eMusic, PressPlay) and with pay-per-download (iTMS). It will take time to convince them that the latter is a workable alternative, and one of the likely reasons that iTMS exists at all is because of the small market that the Macintosh commands – “limited damage” if things go wrong.The time required to convince them that this is workable will see iTunes for Windows perfected (which isn’t promising considering the ‘quality’ of QuickTime Player for Windows).The “Big 5” have already demonstrated on numerous occasions that technology companies – even the largest, like Microsoft – need them more than they need technology companies. With the ongoing anti-Microsoft hysteria from geeks everywhere spreading to those in the general populace, it could be a very tough sell for Microsoft, and going to court guarantees years of fighting, which is time they don’t have against iTunes for Windows…Given that this service really was launched “at the right time”, which is a departure from how Apple has operated in the past, I’m going to give them the benefit of the doubt for now and see where it takes them. Like I said, it has a good chance for ongoing success.From: Admiral HorrorSince Apple users are dumb enough to pay ridiculous amounts of money for ridiculously inferior hardware and < snip >I see, you’re going to post the same spiel in every discussion where iTMS is mentioned, are you? Life’s all about value judgments to you, yes?From: hmmmI don’t have to wait for anything. Apple never once announced that it has any interest in supporting the Linux community.I want to believe this will change. Apple can afford to pay to use the Qt platform for iTunes, and keep their code proprietary if they wish. The content is the driver, in this case.From: MichaelMost people simply don’t have the money to participate in Apple’s Luxury Computing strategy. No amount of Mac fan gladstanding will change this simple economic fact.That’s quite true. However, we don’t know how ‘high’ the bar will be for those wanting to participate in iTMS that are on allegedly inexpensive Windows PCs. iTunes for Windows may be free, which leads to your next comment…From: MichaelUntil Apple delivers the things that count in computing — price and performance — none of their Luxury Computing fluff is going to matter.I’ve been hearing this for a long time. However, Apple is still here today, the Macintosh is still here today, and when Apple speaks businesses across the Valley and beyond pay attention.From: DJ Jedi Jeff– how user friendly will it be? Microsoft has yet to design any great products in the media arena. WMP is garbage to look at and garbage to use. If that’s the best they can do Apple shouldn’t be worriedPerhaps, but you’ll find plenty of people that absolutely hate QuickTime Player for Windows, with a passion. iTunes for Windows will need to be so high quality that you get sunburn from using it to overcome this long-standing gripe.