The Beatles catalog comes to Apple's iTunes

18911131419

Comments

  • Reply 201 of 377
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Perhaps this deal is bigger than we thought. I hadn?t realized that no digital service had access to The Beatles.
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rob55 View Post


    BTW, have you ever used the feature in iTunes where it'll convert to 128k on the fly and copy those files to your iDevices? I've seen it but haven't tried it yet. Just curious. Perhaps I'll give it a shot this weekend.



    I don?t listen to enough music on the go to warrant the need. I prefer to keep my files as is, which range from 256kbps AAC to ALAC at about 1Mbps. A couple years ago I replaced everything I had that was under 256kbps.



    What would be nice is a way to choose a different bit rate. For instance, convert all audio to 256kbps for those using ALAC. Of course, this is more easily done by converting in iTunes and then moving your ALAC files off iTunes as backups. Still, an option would be welcome.



    PS: Even the last two generations of the iPod Shuffle can play back ALAC.
  • Reply 202 of 377
    Are 2 kinds of People on Earth



    Those who think there are 2 kinds of People on Earth



    And those who know better



    .



    Can say same about The Beatles



    Some are Experienced



    Others were just born too late



    .



    Won't waste the time (nor AppleInsider's bits/bytes) trying to explain the Historical and Cultural Significance of The Beatles to those who don't Get It? and/or Don't Care? cause apparently they're recent Windoze Switchers and their brains are still full of confusion and shit.



    Grasshoppers - stay on The Path - perhaps one day you'll find Enlightenment



    Good Luck



    .



    And - Think Different?



    THAT, like Apple, is the metaphor of The Beatles - what they "represent/symbolize"



    (ok, ok ... not to be a total hardass ... do a Wiki/Google search on all those listed in that TV Ad, you'll instantly learn a LOT about History and People of Significance, and probably more than you were taught at your Skool in Gumpstump USA)



    .



  • Reply 203 of 377
    We are arguing apples to oranges here. You can't hear what I hear, I can't hear what you hear. We don't have the same hearing and we don't listen to music the same way. I listen to most of my music in the car, you don't. Average headphones don't bring out all the highs and lows that excellent speakers do.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mobycat View Post


    This I don't understand. People complain about Sirius/XM sound quality. I understand on a home system. But in a car? The sound of the car itself I would think would render the argument moot. Most of us don't listen to music in our car when the car isn't running (let alone driving down the road or highway).



    How loud do you play your music that you can tell the difference?



  • Reply 204 of 377
    Whatever you think about the huge announcement as a way to unveil this deal, I think that the big news is the fact of an agreement at all after years of reluctance. There are some great negotiators in there along with all the other tech and design wunderkinds.
  • Reply 205 of 377
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mobycat View Post


    This I don't understand. People complain about Sirius/XM sound quality. I understand on a home system. But in a car? The sound of the car itself I would think would render the argument moot. Most of us don't listen to music in our car when the car isn't running (let alone driving down the road or highway).



    How loud do you play your music that you can tell the difference?



    Some cars have a silent cockpit so you don't hear all the road and engine noise. Now add an excellent sound system to that car. Could easily become the best place to listen to your music.
  • Reply 206 of 377
    dfilerdfiler Posts: 3,420member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Wovel View Post


    There were several clues in their message and they made it fun. Damn them for being good at marketing..



    The real problem is people that over-invest themselves in forthcoming Apple announcements. It is Ok to be interested in seeing whats coming, maybe even a little excited. Getting angry because every announcement from a massive corporation does not appeal to you personally is sick and sad.



    The real problem?



    There is over investment on both sides of this nonsense. Fixating one one side or the other just proves that one is too personally involved to see things clearly.



    Either way, it is perfectly reasonable to state an opinion that Apple under-delivered on their one sentence of hype.
  • Reply 207 of 377
    Anyone not recognizing the significance of The Beatles going digital, particularly on iTunes, is really lacking cultural sense. All of the young ones on here can't comprehend that there were 300,000 (!!!!) waiting at an AIRPORT for them. They're album releases were complete cultural events, like New Years Eve, etc.



    I suppose you guys are more interested in GaGa or Kanye. I pity you.
  • Reply 208 of 377
    Maybe Devine's indiscretion allowed Yoko to twist SJ's arm--
  • Reply 209 of 377
    dfilerdfiler Posts: 3,420member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mobycat View Post


    This I don't understand. People complain about Sirius/XM sound quality. I understand on a home system. But in a car? The sound of the car itself I would think would render the argument moot. Most of us don't listen to music in our car when the car isn't running (let alone driving down the road or highway).



    How loud do you play your music that you can tell the difference?



    The difference is immediately obvious at normal volume even with road noise. I've been a subscriber for almost 5 years. But the sound quality still sucks. It sounds worse than any mp3 or aac file in my library.



    This isn't like trying to distinguish between 128kbps and CD. The bitrate is ridiculously low per channel and it is obvious. Acceptable to many, but still obvious. For instance, talk stations sound like 32kbps mp3.
  • Reply 210 of 377
    irrelevant...



    Most, nay the vast majority of, people who want the Beatles music already have it.



    Hardly worth the back page, much less the front page.
  • Reply 211 of 377
    dfilerdfiler Posts: 3,420member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Logical View Post


    Anyone not recognizing the significance of The Beatles going digital, particularly on iTunes, is really lacking cultural sense. All of the young ones on here can't comprehend that there were 300,000 (!!!!) waiting at an AIRPORT for them. They're album releases were complete cultural events, like New Years Eve, etc.



    I suppose you guys are more interested in GaGa or Kanye. I pity you.



    Significant? Sure.



    A day we'll never forget? Hardly.



    Everyone here will probably remember this ridiculous thread more than the significance of Beatles availability online.
  • Reply 212 of 377
    The Beatles sued and basically told Apple to get out of the music business.



    The Beatles/EMI conglomerate represents corporate greed to some people.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Logical View Post


    Anyone not recognizing the significance of The Beatles going digital, particularly on iTunes, is really lacking cultural sense. All of the young ones on here can't comprehend that there were 300,000 (!!!!) waiting at an AIRPORT for them. They're album releases were complete cultural events, like New Years Eve, etc.



    I suppose you guys are more interested in GaGa or Kanye. I pity you.



  • Reply 213 of 377
    It's spooky how contemporary the Beatles photo appears - the one on the Apple's main page.
  • Reply 214 of 377
    onhkaonhka Posts: 1,025member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by michpeek View Post


    irrelevant...



    Most, nay the vast majority of, people who want the Beatles music already have it.



    Hardly worth the back page, much less the front page.



    So how many downloads would make it worthwhile?
  • Reply 215 of 377
    rob55rob55 Posts: 1,291member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post


    But when ISN'T that true? If you're willing to go to the store, grab up a CD, come home, rip it, organize it, etc.; you can say that about anything.



    OTOH, that seems like it is missing the point of iTMS.



    Well, for me, it is always the case. That's why I usually buy the CDs. I order them from Amazon, they arrive a day or two later, I rip it to iTunes (organizing only takes a moment) and then update my iPod/iPhone/AppleTV, etc. And yes, I guess it is missing the point of the music store. But then, I generally don't need to have something "right now".
  • Reply 216 of 377
    rob55rob55 Posts: 1,291member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FJRabon View Post


    It's nice, but it takes FOREVER, I did it once with my iPod and it took like 36 hours. It was an 80 gb iPod, but still.



    Wow!?! So much for that idea.
  • Reply 217 of 377
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dfiler View Post


    The real problem?



    There is over investment on both sides of this nonsense. Fixating one one side or the other just proves that one is too personally involved to see things clearly.



    Either way, it is perfectly reasonable to state an opinion that Apple under-delivered on their one sentence of hype.



    That one sentence of hype got as much attention on AI as Flash and BluRay... 216 posts and counting.



    +1 for Apple.
  • Reply 218 of 377
    Can't speak for anyone else, but I'll definitely be buying a ton of Beatles stuff to fill out my collection. I have zero interest in buying more CDs these days.
  • Reply 219 of 377
    dave k.dave k. Posts: 1,306member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Logical View Post


    Anyone not recognizing the significance of The Beatles going digital, particularly on iTunes, is really lacking cultural sense. All of the young ones on here can't comprehend that there were 300,000 (!!!!) waiting at an AIRPORT for them. They're album releases were complete cultural events, like New Years Eve, etc.



    I suppose you guys are more interested in GaGa or Kanye. I pity you.



    I am not into music and music history at all... Wasn't their music centered around what was happening in 60's? How exactly are the Beatles still relevant today? What makes them so special?
  • Reply 220 of 377
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rob55 View Post


    Well, for me, it is always the case. That's why I usually buy the CDs. I order them from Amazon, they arrive a day or two later, I rip it to iTunes (organizing only takes a moment) and then update my iPod/iPhone/AppleTV, etc. And yes, I guess it is missing the point of the music store. But then, I generally don't need to have something "right now".



    OK, and that's obviously fine.



    But wouldn't you admit that the iTMS has been at least "minimally" successful? So, obviously, a lot of people feel differently.
Sign In or Register to comment.