"Track unavailable" WTF??? Why even show it if you can't buy it? The more I look at some of the other music sites, the more I realize a web-browser isn't the place to buy this sort of thing. Apple, Napster and Musicmatch are the only 3 of the bunch that have it right in that respect. Apple's going to win this fight, despite being slightly more expensive than some.
Actually, being a person who has used all these services, I'd rate the WalMart store as much easier to buy from than MusicMatch, which is worse than Napster. WalMart doesn't have all the useless Napster features, so it's easier by default.
selection is important, but I as an apple supporter realize that with this "apple" lifestyle comes at a cost. I won't support the MS format, iTunes +apple+ iPod + AAC is true download nirvana and if to stay in this level of consciousness costs me 11 extra cents per song, well bring on more iTunes downloads. Hey i bought a car that didn't have the best mileage, geee. I may look but, i would check iTunes first, if they didn't have the song i needed then on to the other sites including walmart.
Walmart puts more pressure on the other sites than on apple, who is more scared?, napter, .buy or apple? In 6 months consolidation will occur. Also ease of use, seemless integration, cool-factor will win. Steve understands this business and his model well thought out and will be successful and will persist. I don't think SJ is worried about walmart
I don't think so. 6 months from now, many of them will have closed their doors. There's no need for consolidation in a business like this because there's no physical stock to consolidate.
WalMart is just another creeping tentacle of Microsoft, jumping into the fray to cement WMA as the dominant file format. Steve should be afraid. Microsoft is saturating the market.
MacObserver posted a good editorial about the WalMart music store. 10 burns period, one computer, if you don't play the song for 120 days you lose it? Hahahaha. Who wants to take bets on how long WalMart keeps selling songs?
If you don't listen to it within 120 days of download, then the DRM kills the file. Kind of an odd rule. This service sucks. You can only burn a song 10 times and can only play them on the machine you download to. Yuk. The service is junk.
If you don't listen to it within 120 days of download, then the DRM kills the file. Kind of an odd rule. This service sucks. You can only burn a song 10 times and can only play them on the machine you download to. Yuk. The service is junk.
when do you burn a song more than 10 times for legal purposes?
when do you burn a song more than 10 times for legal purposes?
Normally never. But since you can't transfer the DRM'ed file to a new computer, I could see someone doing it a few times more than usual to make sure they could get to the song if their computer kicks the bucket.
Here's the thing with these other services, as long as users have iPods they can't use those services anyway. And since Apple dominates the mp3 player market there is, at least at his time, no reason for Apple to lower prices or to be at all concerned with these upstart services. Until the time the iPod loses its dominance, I don't forsee any kind of change by Apple.
Here's the thing with these other services, as long as users have iPods they can't use those services anyway. And since Apple dominates the mp3 player market there is, at least at his time, no reason for Apple to lower prices or to be at all concerned with these upstart services. Until the time the iPod loses its dominance, I don't forsee any kind of change by Apple.
i think the big problem with this is it begins to form myths...... I've already heard many people say the iPod is too closed and proprietary, that it only plays songs you pay 99 cents for an download that it doesnt support MP3 and only strange AAC. That it isnt very compatible.
i think the big problem with this is it begins to form myths...... I've already heard many people say the iPod is too closed and proprietary, that it only plays songs you pay 99 cents for an download that it doesnt support MP3 and only strange AAC. That it isnt very compatible.
not good.
Good points Applenut. I'm hearing the same things. The problem is that AAC is assumed to be an "Apple" format so ignorant writers cannot help but to dig into their anti-apple rhetoric about "non-standards" and "proprietary" formats etc.
Part of the blame is shouldered upon the owners of AAC themselves. MPEGLA only handles licensing but probably not promotion. At any rate WM9 is kickin AAC's butt for recogition. Next years DVD players will support MP3, and WM9 but AAC support is few and far between. That's sad. Someone's dropping the ball here.
Comments
Originally posted by torifile
"Track unavailable" WTF??? Why even show it if you can't buy it? The more I look at some of the other music sites, the more I realize a web-browser isn't the place to buy this sort of thing. Apple, Napster and Musicmatch are the only 3 of the bunch that have it right in that respect. Apple's going to win this fight, despite being slightly more expensive than some.
Actually, being a person who has used all these services, I'd rate the WalMart store as much easier to buy from than MusicMatch, which is worse than Napster. WalMart doesn't have all the useless Napster features, so it's easier by default.
Walmart puts more pressure on the other sites than on apple, who is more scared?, napter, .buy or apple? In 6 months consolidation will occur. Also ease of use, seemless integration, cool-factor will win. Steve understands this business and his model well thought out and will be successful and will persist. I don't think SJ is worried about walmart
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM.
Originally posted by NOFEER
In 6 months consolidation will occur.
I don't think so. 6 months from now, many of them will have closed their doors. There's no need for consolidation in a business like this because there's no physical stock to consolidate.
Originally posted by NOFEER
I don't think SJ is worried about walmart
WalMart is just another creeping tentacle of Microsoft, jumping into the fray to cement WMA as the dominant file format. Steve should be afraid. Microsoft is saturating the market.
Originally posted by ShawnJ
Presumably, they wouldn't sell "explicit" tracks so that hurts selection even more.
Originally posted by Placebo
another reason they piss me off... family atmostphere...god damn wal-mart despite their nice prices on everything.
Originally posted by PS5533
another reason they piss me off... family atmostphere...god damn wal-mart despite their nice prices on everything.
Huh. That was interesting.
Originally posted by HOM
Who wants to take bets on how long WalMart keeps selling songs?
120 days?
Originally posted by Telomar
120 days?
If you don't listen to it within 120 days of download, then the DRM kills the file. Kind of an odd rule. This service sucks. You can only burn a song 10 times and can only play them on the machine you download to. Yuk. The service is junk.
Originally posted by Yevgeny
If you don't listen to it within 120 days of download, then the DRM kills the file. Kind of an odd rule. This service sucks. You can only burn a song 10 times and can only play them on the machine you download to. Yuk. The service is junk.
when do you burn a song more than 10 times for legal purposes?
Originally posted by applenut
when do you burn a song more than 10 times for legal purposes?
Normally never. But since you can't transfer the DRM'ed file to a new computer, I could see someone doing it a few times more than usual to make sure they could get to the song if their computer kicks the bucket.
Originally posted by applenut
when do you burn a song more than 10 times for legal purposes?
Usually people only do it if their mentally handicaped or something.
Originally posted by DanMacMan
Here's the thing with these other services, as long as users have iPods they can't use those services anyway. And since Apple dominates the mp3 player market there is, at least at his time, no reason for Apple to lower prices or to be at all concerned with these upstart services. Until the time the iPod loses its dominance, I don't forsee any kind of change by Apple.
i think the big problem with this is it begins to form myths...... I've already heard many people say the iPod is too closed and proprietary, that it only plays songs you pay 99 cents for an download that it doesnt support MP3 and only strange AAC. That it isnt very compatible.
not good.
Originally posted by applenut
i think the big problem with this is it begins to form myths...... I've already heard many people say the iPod is too closed and proprietary, that it only plays songs you pay 99 cents for an download that it doesnt support MP3 and only strange AAC. That it isnt very compatible.
not good.
Good points Applenut. I'm hearing the same things. The problem is that AAC is assumed to be an "Apple" format so ignorant writers cannot help but to dig into their anti-apple rhetoric about "non-standards" and "proprietary" formats etc.
Part of the blame is shouldered upon the owners of AAC themselves. MPEGLA only handles licensing but probably not promotion. At any rate WM9 is kickin AAC's butt for recogition. Next years DVD players will support MP3, and WM9 but AAC support is few and far between. That's sad. Someone's dropping the ball here.