iTunes Music Store: the real reason for success...

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited January 2014
I just found this quote from a Wired.com article:

Quote:

Not only are iPod-toting OS X users generally moneyed, but they have been more or less locked out of the file-sharing jamboree, thanks to a shortage of good, workable clients for the Kazaa and Gnutella networks.

Von Lohmann said the store's customers are living on a relatively isolated island in the sea of computer users -- and their inability to access file-trading networks may have been one of the reasons the big record companies embraced iTunes.

"It's very exciting for the 5 percent of us who use Macs," he said. "But I don't think it will have an impact on the enduring popularity of P2P."



So true. I think this is one huge reason for all the excitement and apparent success of the iTunes Music Store on the Mac: we simply have no viable alternative. My experiences with P2P programs on the Mac (Neo, Acquisition, Limewire, Direct Connect) have been so incredibly frustrating compared to what Napster used to be and what Kazaa/Kazaa-Lite probably is (judging from its immense popularity in the PC world) that I've all but given up on the whole P2P experience on my Mac.



It is quite incredible - and sad - that in a way the RIAA's wildest dreams are being fulfilled on the Mac platform simply because we have close to no choice.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 18
    cygsidcygsid Posts: 210member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by cygsid

    I just found this quote from a Wired.com article:





    So true. I think this is one huge reason for all the excitement and apparent success of the iTunes Music Store on the Mac: we simply have no viable alternative. My experiences with P2P programs on the Mac (Neo, Acquisition, Limewire, Direct Connect) have been so incredibly frustrating compared to what Napster used to be and what Kazaa/Kazaa-Lite probably is (judging from its immense popularity in the PC world) that I've all but given up on the whole P2P experience on my Mac.



    It is quite incredible - and sad - that in a way the RIAA's wildest dreams are being fulfilled on the Mac platform simply because we have close to no choice.




    forgot to give a link to the quoted article: http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,58706,00.html
  • Reply 2 of 18
    murbotmurbot Posts: 5,262member
    I have never NOT been able to find anything with Aquisition/Limewire.



    I mean, um this one friend of mine, he's never not found what he's looking for. Yeah. He told me about it.
  • Reply 3 of 18
    paulpaul Posts: 5,278member
    Quote:

    Matt Graves, a spokesman for Listen.com, a rival subscription-based service, noted that the licenses Apple has signed with the big-five record labels aren't exclusive. Listen.com and some of the other subscription-based services already offer for download the same catalog of music as the iTunes store, Graves said. (However, subscribers typically pay an additional charge for songs that can be burned to CD.)



    In addition, Listen.com provides access to a much wider range of music than the iTunes store, Graves said. Although a lot of that content can be heard as streams only, the service is better for someone exploring music than the free, 30-second clips at Apple's store, he said



    guess he hasn't heard about THIS



    also
    Quote:

    Listen.com charges $10 a month for unlimited access to its music collection, plus another $1 for each track burned to a CD



    from here



    This article is funny too: Smut Trading Outstrips Tune Swaps and so it is on topic... from that article:

    Quote:

    "It's not free, but it's 99 cents a song, pretty doggone close,'' Jobs said yesterday.



    "What they (Apple executives) don't understand is that 99 cents ain't free. It's a lot more than free. It's 100 percent more than free," Rosso said.



    (its a lot more than 100%... more like ?!!)

    Quote:

    "ITunes looks great -- I especially like the chance to preview so many songs before I listen to them," added one Mac owner. "But for my porn, I'll stick with Kazaa."



    I wonder how he gets Kazaa on his mac?!
  • Reply 4 of 18
    chychchych Posts: 860member
    Geez, I can never find anything I want on the limewire network (acquisitition incl)... Direct Connect seems to work for me. Kazaa can suck it, when I want to download movie X, which is named as X, I get movie Y, argh!
  • Reply 5 of 18
    paulpaul Posts: 5,278member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by chych

    Geez, I can never find anything I want on the limewire network (acquisitition incl)... Direct Connect seems to work for me. Kazaa can suck it, when I want to download movie X, which is named as X, I get movie Y, argh!



    www.vcdquality.com
  • Reply 6 of 18
    frawgzfrawgz Posts: 547member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by cygsid

    So true. I think this is one huge reason for all the excitement and apparent success of the iTunes Music Store on the Mac: we simply have no viable alternative. My experiences with P2P programs on the Mac (Neo, Acquisition, Limewire, Direct Connect) have been so incredibly frustrating compared to what Napster used to be and what Kazaa/Kazaa-Lite probably is (judging from its immense popularity in the PC world) that I've all but given up on the whole P2P experience on my Mac.



    Kazaa's highly overrated. I've only had mildly more success with it finding things I can't find on Limewire. It doesn't even come close to Napster when it comes to finding obscure titles.



    Every disadvantage of file sharing services Jobs named applies also to the Windows world. Once I experienced downloading a fully tagged song within seconds on the iTMS, I could barely imagine going back to scrounging for fast, complete downloads on Limewire.
  • Reply 7 of 18
    nebrienebrie Posts: 483member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by frawgz

    Kazaa's highly overrated. I've only had mildly more success with it finding things I can't find on Limewire. It doesn't even come close to Napster when it comes to finding obscure titles.



    Every disadvantage of file sharing services Jobs named applies also to the Windows world. Once I experienced downloading a fully tagged song within seconds on the iTMS, I could barely imagine going back to scrounging for fast, complete downloads on Limewire.




    Get the K++ edition of Kazaa (doesn't work in Virtual PC). Tons, tons better. Kazaa only takes a sample of computers, therefore sucks, K++ keeps searching on.
  • Reply 8 of 18
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,268member
    Wired is full of shiza.



    I just deleted Kazaa off my PC because of the 120MB of freakin Spamware they install. It's a virus in the worst sense of the way.



    Hackneyed articles like this are based on the supposition that the average PC user is a wanton thief . Of course Kazaa isn't going to see a change. Downloaders are looking for more than music. As a matter of fact smut as the link shows above outnumbers music in demand from what i've seen.



    When it comes for PC I will be installing iTunes 4 on my Mother's PC and deleting any spamware inducing app she has.
  • Reply 9 of 18
    There are so many flaws in that statement - it assumes that p2p is a legit legal way to get music and everyone and their grandma pirates their music - that is not the case.



    Second - It assumes that people would much rather hunt down their music or that one song they heard on the radio instead of browsing a (soon to be bigger) selection while listening to samples of the songs and downloading them in a snap of the fingers at a quality 10X better than that of kAzAa while paying less than they would for a soda for legal music.. Pure BS. Long live ITMS
  • Reply 10 of 18
    dviantdviant Posts: 483member
    Can't they just say "iTunes Music Service is a success" without making excuses? Puh-leease.



    People who think mac users have "no choice" as far as dl'ing pirated music are just clueless. Between Gnutella, OpenNap, Hotline, Carracho, and FTP flavors of piracy there is no shortage of available downloads, or pent up desire fueling the success of iTMS.
  • Reply 11 of 18
    taztaz Posts: 74member
    Personal opinion. Its a legal way to get songs. They dont charge monthly fees like others. The biggest success in my opinion is that you can do either song or album, coupled with a great interface. Its just a good combination. I guess Wintel people just cant understand simplicity and ease of use.
  • Reply 12 of 18
    Sorry I can't find the 'correct' thread for this, so let it die if you want.



    Just mentioning after all the hubub about now webcast Apple as put up the event if you want to 'relive' one of their biggest moments in current history.



    http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/specialmusicevent/
  • Reply 13 of 18
    cubecube Posts: 142member
    Acquasition works better than kazza at my powerbook! I get faster downloads and find everything i want. (I have a pc to) Its simply amazing and locks so mutch nicer!



    The trick is to schare allot! Then you arent kicked off the good servers



    Max
  • Reply 14 of 18
    ast3r3xast3r3x Posts: 5,012member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Cube

    Acquasition works better than kazza at my powerbook! I get faster downloads and find everything i want. (I have a pc to) Its simply amazing and locks so mutch nicer!



    The trick is to schare allot! Then you arent kicked off the good servers



    Max




    although acquisition is nice, it is DEFINATLY not better then kazaa...the most annoying 'feature' about acquisition that cripples it is that u only can connect to 5 networks at a time, i emailed him and he gave a reason, but i wasn't impressed
  • Reply 15 of 18
    cubecube Posts: 142member
    Hey your wrong!!!



    Just at this momen Iv´m conected to 32 networks!!!



    Just share alot and giv it som time when you start upp and it ROCKS.



    MAX
  • Reply 16 of 18
    If you have an older version of Acq (like I do) it will connect to up to 12 hosts. PM me your email address and I can email you the old version (it's shareware folks and unregistered) but at least in the older version it's not crippled to so few hosts.



    The reason he gives is he doesn't want it ot crowd up the network etc and be seen as a 'hostile' client. I don't give a rats butt about the network. I need more hosts so I can find the files I want faster.
  • Reply 17 of 18
    thuh freakthuh freak Posts: 2,664member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Not Unlike Myself

    The reason he gives is he doesn't want it ot crowd up the network etc and be seen as a 'hostile' client. I don't give a rats butt about the network. I need more hosts so I can find the files I want faster.



    well, if each of the 5 people you are connected to is connected to 4 other unique people, it would only take a few degrees to cover the whole internet. if you connect to a large amount, like 10+, then you are going to connect to a person, who a few levels around some other node is already connected to you. then you are repeating a lot of traffic, and gnutella is pretty request heavy without redundant traffic. if other clients realize that acquisition is the reason that so many people are connected repeatedly, then they could stop accepting connections from it. and then it could get cut off from the network altogether.
  • Reply 18 of 18
    thuh Freak you must be the guy who programed Acq.



    You are right (of course) but like I said...



    But I honestly see way more results with the old version (with 12 hosts) instead of 5 on the new one.
Sign In or Register to comment.