Interesting New Info On Apple Music Service

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 41
    macsrgood4umacsrgood4u Posts: 3,007member
    Quote:

    What they want, as far as I've been able to discern from Lars' self-righteous huffing, are royalties.



    Amorph are you saying that they don't deserve to receive royalties?
  • Reply 22 of 41
    jlljll Posts: 2,709member
    Does anyone know how Audible.com content work?



    AFAIK it has the same restrictions as the rumored music service, and even if you burn a CD with Audible content, you can't rip it afterwards.
  • Reply 23 of 41
    Would someone please rip the Billboard article and post a pirate copy here?
  • Reply 24 of 41
    nebagakidnebagakid Posts: 2,692member
    well, you know how they have consolidated the Apple ID's and the .Mac accounts? well, it is because they are going to offer some free musics to the peoples in .Mac...eh?
  • Reply 25 of 41
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by MacsRGood4U

    Amorph are you saying that they don't deserve to receive royalties?



    Of course not.



    I'm saying that Lars is an arrogant blowhard. He's an arrogant blowhard whose band has published music that lots of people have bought, he wrote or co-wrote many of them, so he deserves the same royalties anyone else in his position would get. Neither that nor fact that I agreed with him on many substantive points is relevant to the fact I wasn't able to read a single one of his lengthy screeds without laughing out loud at his posturing.



    (As an aside, I find the recent enthusiasm for punishing people economically for voicing their opinions as private citizens to be deeply disturbing. So I really, really, don't want Lars to stop receiving the money he's earned as a professional musician, regardless of what I think of him or what he's said or how he's said it.)



    Although he never really did address the popularity the band achieved via bootleg tapes...
  • Reply 26 of 41
    screedscreed Posts: 1,077member
    Yah, someone from a band with two decades of success and millions of real revenue (as opposed to 10-14% from records sales), griping about loss of royalties never worked. Plus the fact English wasn't his first language.



    Now if it were Willie Nelson freshly raked over by the IRS... now that might of worked...





    Now as to copying tracking... one really has to wonder how Apple will implement this.
    • There might be a tag that counts off number of copies.

    • Does copying to another part of the hard drive on the same (host) computer count?

    • Perhaps iTunes would do the tracking rather something internal to the file.

    • They could use MAC (LAN hardware) addresses to distinguish unique computers.



    Screed
  • Reply 27 of 41
    macsrgood4umacsrgood4u Posts: 3,007member
    Gotcha!
  • Reply 28 of 41
    brussellbrussell Posts: 9,812member
    I'm interested in how they're going to handle the iTunes integration. I think it would be so cool if you could view every single track of music by all these labels directly from iTunes, and perhaps have a 20 sec. sample of each.



    But I wonder how they'll handle that much music - presumably millions of files, if they go for the entire catalog. iTunes needs some kind of more hierarchical file system, so you can dig down into directories like Jazz - 1960s - Bebop - Charlie Parker. Or whatever. As it is now, either the entire list would have to be divided up into tons of different playlists, or you'd have massively huge numbers of tracks in a small number of playlists. Neither seems ideal.
  • Reply 29 of 41
    macsrgood4umacsrgood4u Posts: 3,007member
    MacOS Rumors is reporting that the Billboard article for Premium members has no additional info then what is published on the regular site, which is info similar to the WSJ article. Guess we'll have to wait for Monday for a possible leak prior to the 10 AM PDT unveiling.
  • Reply 30 of 41
    jante99jante99 Posts: 539member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by MacsRGood4U

    MacOS Rumors is reporting that the Billboard article for Premium members has no additional info then what is published on the regular site, which is info similar to the WSJ article. Guess we'll have to wait for Monday for a possible leak prior to the 10 AM PDT unveiling.



    Apple must hate it when major news outlets come out with rumors about their products. They cannot bully them into taking the information off the site.
  • Reply 31 of 41
    nebagakidnebagakid Posts: 2,692member
    oh man, Apple must be really really really pissed off right now, WSJ, billboard, all those people who are talking about the deals, too bad Jobs didn't say "and if you dont mind, dont tell anyone about this, please!"
  • Reply 32 of 41
    macsrgood4umacsrgood4u Posts: 3,007member
    Most of what has been published has been around for a while. The news about the Eagles and No Doubt is new. But there are still lots of things to be unveiled. And don't forget the new iPods, iTunes update, iPod update, etc. Apple is probably not too concerned since the real specifics are still waiting to be revealed. There will be plenty for SJ to talk about.
  • Reply 33 of 41
    cubedudecubedude Posts: 1,556member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BRussell

    I'm interested in how they're going to handle the iTunes integration. I think it would be so cool if you could view every single track of music by all these labels directly from iTunes, and perhaps have a 20 sec. sample of each.



    But I wonder how they'll handle that much music - presumably millions of files, if they go for the entire catalog. iTunes needs some kind of more hierarchical file system, so you can dig down into directories like Jazz - 1960s - Bebop - Charlie Parker. Or whatever. As it is now, either the entire list would have to be divided up into tons of different playlists, or you'd have massively huge numbers of tracks in a small number of playlists. Neither seems ideal.




    iTunes has some sort of hierarchical file system.



  • Reply 34 of 41
    david rdavid r Posts: 135member
    If the songs are in a hidden/invisible directory, how am I going to make a back up of my song? I don't want to burn the songs as audio, it's a waste of CD space. I wonder if you are allowed to redownload a song once you buy it.
  • Reply 35 of 41
    brussellbrussell Posts: 9,812member
    Ah yes, I'd forgotten about the browser because I never use it. I guess that's how they'll do it. It'll still be a ton of artists within each genre if they use the whole catalog. Maybe they'll increase the number of columns available in browers view.

    Quote:

    Originally posted by CubeDude

    iTunes has some sort of hierarchical file system.







  • Reply 36 of 41
    screedscreed Posts: 1,077member
    They could adopt the full columns view from the finder (just keep going right as you get more and more specific). As for the size of the catalog, I assume it would pull information from a server as the user browses and hopefully cache that information. (e.g. Click on Jazz, iTunes pulls all Jazz artist names, click on Charlie Parker, iTunes pulls all of his Albums, etc. etc.)

    Let me restate that, it could a be lot like the Finder's Columns view, right down to the 20 sec. preview pane. Hm...



    Screed
  • Reply 37 of 41
    cubedudecubedude Posts: 1,556member
    Maybe it will integrate with the Finder and iTunes.
  • Reply 38 of 41
    torifiletorifile Posts: 4,024member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by David R

    If the songs are in a hidden/invisible directory, how am I going to make a back up of my song? I don't want to burn the songs as audio, it's a waste of CD space. I wonder if you are allowed to redownload a song once you buy it.



    It sounds to me like they're going to use something like audible.com's method. You have an account and a library associated with that account. You can download copies of the books you purchased at will because they're in your library. So redownloading songs isn't a problem. Also, audible.com has a three computer limit. What it does is that when you try to add an .aa file (audible's file format) for the first time, it asks you to provide a username/password for that file. It queries the audible server and then unlocks the file so it can be added. After that, it can be copied to your iPod (or any iPod that's linked to your computer). You can also have multiple audible accounts through iTunes. It's rather seemless and a very good and fair system.
  • Reply 39 of 41
    sebseb Posts: 676member
    Regarding the UI for the .music or whatever it will be called, my guess is iTunes 4 will integrate a new view similar to the way the movies pane in Sherlock works. That way, you'll be able to do searches for songs/artists/albums/genres etc.



    Plus, you should be able to get a little info on the songs/albums/artists as well as a preview and possibly a link to the video (if one exists) via Quicktime - that would be cool.



    I could be completely wrong of course.
  • Reply 40 of 41
    mac writemac write Posts: 289member
    I was thinking (then realized I am not ripping ) that I am forced to RIPP on my mom's iMac since I have a problem when ripping songs on my Beige G3. I get that cracking sound.



    Then I realized I would be downloading then on my Beige G3.



    for my I need to move the files every couple years between HD's (when I replace them as they fail etc).



    I will be storing all my Music on the Beige G3, and either playing via RCA out to my Stereo, or via Renveous.



    but over the years (10-15+) your going to go through more then 3 Mac's.



    As for the LAN just use renvous for listening to the music on a seperate computer.



    I will be a almost daily backing up my HD to my backup HD, and then to CD every 3-4 days (well the Music will be archived to CD 1 maybe 2 times).



    I can't wait for Monday my TV is waiting (Radeon Video out to TV, and RCA Audio out to TV)
Sign In or Register to comment.