File sharing services provide a superior product in quality and use, with higher bitrates and no DRM encumbrances. Its basic business, if you want to compete, you need to offer a better solution than the other guy. Provide a lossless file (relative to what comes on a CD), than can be manipulated by the user as they see fit – for the same cost per song.
Oh, and make it easier to re-download lost files that were purchased.
Are you talking for the general population? No? Ok.
Yeah. It's seems to be a shame that every company in the business is hopeless incorrect, as long as what they are saying goes against what someone wants to believe.
Since iTunes began I have purchased maybe 300 songs. I might have another 200 plus songs that I have dowloaded for free but those are mostly the rare bootleg type..I despise those who feel entitled to download free music when those songs are for sales somehwre legally.
I have an 80GB ipod which is now FULL with about 19,500 songs, mostly loaded in from my CD collection. I have about 8000 plus CDs purchased over the past 22 years. I too love the idea of iTunes but I ususally want the best fidelity possible without limitations, so I woud rather buy the actual CD, packaging and all. If I dislike it, I can trade it in at a used shop for something else and my net cost for that music (already loaded in my iTunes) is still cheaper than an iTunes download, and NO LIMITATIONS on how and where to play it.
File sharing services provide a superior product in quality and use, with higher bitrates and no DRM encumbrances. Its basic business, if you want to compete, you need to offer a better solution than the other guy. Provide a lossless file (relative to what comes on a CD), than can be manipulated by the user as they see fit – for the same cost per song.
P2P is not a product and is generally not a legal business. Where the RIAA may be about highway robbery, P2P is basically just theiving in the other direction.
I don't think the point of iTunes is the albums, but allowing you to cherry-pick the song you want rather than having to buy the album.
I am more than happy with the 1863 tracks I have purchased from the iTunes store.
I don't feel restricted by the DRM at all.
I have made CD's of all my purchases, all of which therefore have no DRM on them.
I use the purchased music on the many iPods and computers that I own with no issues at all.
I stream the music to my HiFi and I'm more than happy with the 128 bit rate, in fact I compress all my music at that rate.
I do still but CD's but only when they are cheaper than the same purchase on iTunes (which does seems to be happening more and more).
There is to much 'noise' going on about 'unfair' DRM. It is very easy to make your own 'legal' non-DRM copy of the music you buy from the iTunes store on a CD. In fact you can make 7 legal copies of the album, and even more if you change the playlist round.
DOWN WITH DRM! DOWN WITH DRM! DOWN WITH DRM! DOWN WITH DRM! DOWN WITH DRM!
I say let's send Apple and the industry a message: FREE OUR MUSIC/MEDIA!
It is not an Apple issue, mate! The music industry would NOT play ball with Apple until it approved a DRM scheme. In any case, since it can be instantly circumvented I don't see the point of ranting about it. No one has found it to be a serious roadblock, other than iPods being the only devices that have the least hassle when used with iTMS. The real issue with all of these download centers is QUALITY... and a lossless system would be nice, though, Apple has little to gain from making the quality better and all other sites have a lot to lose since it will cost them dearly via financial 'penalties' imposed by the recording companies. Apple still will sell gazillions of iPods so they would not be affected nearly as much. One might have to factor MS and Zune into this,but not yet since it is not clear how the music industry views Apple and MS, together or as combatants!!! Zune? Hopefully, never
It's been time for a while now for Apple to make some improvements for the iTS.
1. Upgrade iTS song quality from 128 to 192.
2. Offer incentives for buying albums (e.g. single song purchases create discounts for buying an album).
3. (this is the big one) Offer subscriptions as an option, at $15-20/mo., with reduced costs for purchasing songs you want to keep instead of rent.
I think it's likely 1 & 2 are in the works (there's been rumors about #2 at least), but Apple has resisted #3 because it threatens their FairPlay lock-in model. (The line about there not being "consumer demand" for such a model is, IMO, bogus. Jobs knows very well that offering such an option w/ iTunes would both *create* huge demand, and subscriptions done with a popular service like iPods + iTS have the potential to be both *incredibly* appealing and popular.)
Apple's a la carte model is a great idea, and by no means should be discontinued. But they need to expand their model. They've took a hesitant step down that road with Season Passes for tv shows in iTS, now they need to take the full step.... before MS gets its act together and starts sells nano-sized Zunes, with their free 1 month of unlimited music.
Yes it is NOT Apple but the music companies who are the bad guys here. I used to be in the record business, Retail first and then for a few labels and they got pissy when cassettes were first coming out and got huge. Their promo line was "HOME TAPING IS KILLING THE MUSIC INDUSTRY," so just imagine their initial response when CD burning began.. With cassettes they ended up getiing a royalty and that is why they still want more, like a piece of the iPod which I hope they never get. Universal is getting a piece of Zune sales so by now they probably made about three dollars . This would set a really bad example. They should get a cut of music sales and NOT HARDWARE sales.
I used to have no issues with Apple's DRM until I moved in with my girlfriend. We're both big music fiends and like to listen to stuff from eachother's collections. Unfortunately, she can't listen to my iTMS songs on her machine without deactivating her iTunes account and then logging into mine.
I mean, really. We're using the network sharing features built right into iTunes, not doing anything illicit at all. Shouldn't those songs be accessible to everyone on the network, just for the purposes of listening?
I'm more partial to buying used CDs either from ebay or local stores. That way I can rip 'em at any rate I like and stash them somewhere as a backup or just sell 'em off to buy more.
I've bought a few songs through iTunes, but not many and usually because it was the only good song on the album.
I really suspect that there is going to be a great push this year to demonstrate the need for Media Players to have and pay a sold called "Piracy Tax" upfront on each player sold.
Microsoft has led the way with a paltry $1 per Zune sold to be given to Universal. Now the studios are going to drum up any research they can to show the need to collect their royalties upfront.
It's going to be interesting. Will Apple cave and add $20.00 to every iPod in this naked money grab by the studios?
Does anyone doubt who commissioned this study by Neilson?
Everyone knows that Apple makes the money on the iPods, not with iTMS. The huge selection of media and music are what make the initial purchase attractive, along with the peer pressure of owning the latest and greatest of any consumer product. iPod still rules in that space.
Unfortunately, she can't listen to my iTMS songs on her machine without deactivating her iTunes account and then logging into mine.
I mean, really. We're using the network sharing features built right into iTunes, not doing anything illicit at all. Shouldn't those songs be accessible to everyone on the network, just for the purposes of listening?
There's something funky going on with your setup. You shouldn't have to deactivate one account to listen to another.
Each computer can be activated for multiple iTunes accounts. When you first try to play a DRMed song, you have to enter the iTunes user-name and password for the account under which that song was bought. As long as that account hasn't already been activated on 5 machines, iTunes will then be activated for that account and will be able to play any song bought under that account without having to enter any more passwords.
To get back on topic: the news story is from the Brit rag The Register, which is famously anti Steve jobs and Apple. Their data is clobbered together from half facts and hyped with blaring (and often misleading) headlines. Their fake news (apologies to Jon Stewart) has caused Apple's stock to drop almost $3 today. Which I'm sure was their intention.
I don't think the research article is very accurate.
There will always be a small minority who buys a lot and the vast majority who buys a little.
How much of this decline has to do with the state of the music industry?
No good music - no sales.
I think it has more to do with two other issues.
There is more content available for free now for iPods
- Podcasts
- tons of free video online
- DVDs ripped to iPod format
Convenience
A digital download is convenient until your HD dies or you need to switch computers or you get a second iPod, etc. etc. etc. CDs are easy to rip and you can sell them after you rip them.
Digital will win in the long run but until we all have automatic backups(Time Machine) and Bonjour dejour(Mac OS X) the vast majority of users are stuck trying to get things working right in Windows hell.
To get back on topic: the news story is from the Brit rag The Register, which is famously anti Steve jobs and Apple. Their data is clobbered together from half facts and hyped with blaring (and often misleading) headlines. Their fake news (apologies to Jon Stewart) has caused Apple's stock to drop almost $3 today. Which I'm sure was their intention.
What are the odds that these story releases are the result of market manipulators? I'd like to see the top stockholders who coincidentally shorted shares in Apple today...
The quality difference between 128kB AAC and a CD might not be clear with the apple iBuds, but even my cheap little Altec Lansing portable stereo or factory car stereo shows the difference. It sounds flat.
And for the record, I am far from an audiophile; I'm about as tone deaf as they come.
CDs just offer a better value proposition if you aren't in the "Must Have it Now" category.
It's time for Apple to ditch the DRM and bump up quality. They will still have plenty of sales without it, but if they really want to set the trends and kill products like Zune out the gates, it is time.
Comments
As has been stated by others –
File sharing services provide a superior product in quality and use, with higher bitrates and no DRM encumbrances. Its basic business, if you want to compete, you need to offer a better solution than the other guy. Provide a lossless file (relative to what comes on a CD), than can be manipulated by the user as they see fit – for the same cost per song.
Oh, and make it easier to re-download lost files that were purchased.
Are you talking for the general population? No? Ok.
Since iTunes began I have purchased maybe 300 songs. I might have another 200 plus songs that I have dowloaded for free but those are mostly the rare bootleg type..I despise those who feel entitled to download free music when those songs are for sales somehwre legally.
I have an 80GB ipod which is now FULL with about 19,500 songs, mostly loaded in from my CD collection. I have about 8000 plus CDs purchased over the past 22 years. I too love the idea of iTunes but I ususally want the best fidelity possible without limitations, so I woud rather buy the actual CD, packaging and all. If I dislike it, I can trade it in at a used shop for something else and my net cost for that music (already loaded in my iTunes) is still cheaper than an iTunes download, and NO LIMITATIONS on how and where to play it.
Well said.
As has been stated by others –
File sharing services provide a superior product in quality and use, with higher bitrates and no DRM encumbrances. Its basic business, if you want to compete, you need to offer a better solution than the other guy. Provide a lossless file (relative to what comes on a CD), than can be manipulated by the user as they see fit – for the same cost per song.
P2P is not a product and is generally not a legal business. Where the RIAA may be about highway robbery, P2P is basically just theiving in the other direction.
I don't think the point of iTunes is the albums, but allowing you to cherry-pick the song you want rather than having to buy the album.
I don't feel restricted by the DRM at all.
I have made CD's of all my purchases, all of which therefore have no DRM on them.
I use the purchased music on the many iPods and computers that I own with no issues at all.
I stream the music to my HiFi and I'm more than happy with the 128 bit rate, in fact I compress all my music at that rate.
I do still but CD's but only when they are cheaper than the same purchase on iTunes (which does seems to be happening more and more).
There is to much 'noise' going on about 'unfair' DRM. It is very easy to make your own 'legal' non-DRM copy of the music you buy from the iTunes store on a CD. In fact you can make 7 legal copies of the album, and even more if you change the playlist round.
So what is the problem?
Ian
DOWN WITH DRM! DOWN WITH DRM! DOWN WITH DRM! DOWN WITH DRM! DOWN WITH DRM!
I say let's send Apple and the industry a message: FREE OUR MUSIC/MEDIA!
It is not an Apple issue, mate! The music industry would NOT play ball with Apple until it approved a DRM scheme. In any case, since it can be instantly circumvented I don't see the point of ranting about it. No one has found it to be a serious roadblock, other than iPods being the only devices that have the least hassle when used with iTMS. The real issue with all of these download centers is QUALITY... and a lossless system would be nice, though, Apple has little to gain from making the quality better and all other sites have a lot to lose since it will cost them dearly via financial 'penalties' imposed by the recording companies. Apple still will sell gazillions of iPods so they would not be affected nearly as much. One might have to factor MS and Zune into this,but not yet since it is not clear how the music industry views Apple and MS, together or as combatants!!! Zune? Hopefully, never
1. Upgrade iTS song quality from 128 to 192.
2. Offer incentives for buying albums (e.g. single song purchases create discounts for buying an album).
3. (this is the big one) Offer subscriptions as an option, at $15-20/mo., with reduced costs for purchasing songs you want to keep instead of rent.
I think it's likely 1 & 2 are in the works (there's been rumors about #2 at least), but Apple has resisted #3 because it threatens their FairPlay lock-in model. (The line about there not being "consumer demand" for such a model is, IMO, bogus. Jobs knows very well that offering such an option w/ iTunes would both *create* huge demand, and subscriptions done with a popular service like iPods + iTS have the potential to be both *incredibly* appealing and popular.)
Apple's a la carte model is a great idea, and by no means should be discontinued. But they need to expand their model. They've took a hesitant step down that road with Season Passes for tv shows in iTS, now they need to take the full step.... before MS gets its act together and starts sells nano-sized Zunes, with their free 1 month of unlimited music.
I mean, really. We're using the network sharing features built right into iTunes, not doing anything illicit at all. Shouldn't those songs be accessible to everyone on the network, just for the purposes of listening?
I've bought a few songs through iTunes, but not many and usually because it was the only good song on the album.
Microsoft has led the way with a paltry $1 per Zune sold to be given to Universal. Now the studios are going to drum up any research they can to show the need to collect their royalties upfront.
It's going to be interesting. Will Apple cave and add $20.00 to every iPod in this naked money grab by the studios?
Does anyone doubt who commissioned this study by Neilson?
Unfortunately, she can't listen to my iTMS songs on her machine without deactivating her iTunes account and then logging into mine.
I mean, really. We're using the network sharing features built right into iTunes, not doing anything illicit at all. Shouldn't those songs be accessible to everyone on the network, just for the purposes of listening?
There's something funky going on with your setup. You shouldn't have to deactivate one account to listen to another.
Each computer can be activated for multiple iTunes accounts. When you first try to play a DRMed song, you have to enter the iTunes user-name and password for the account under which that song was bought. As long as that account hasn't already been activated on 5 machines, iTunes will then be activated for that account and will be able to play any song bought under that account without having to enter any more passwords.
There will always be a small minority who buys a lot and the vast majority who buys a little.
How much of this decline has to do with the state of the music industry?
No good music - no sales.
I think it has more to do with two other issues.
There is more content available for free now for iPods
- Podcasts
- tons of free video online
- DVDs ripped to iPod format
Convenience
A digital download is convenient until your HD dies or you need to switch computers or you get a second iPod, etc. etc. etc. CDs are easy to rip and you can sell them after you rip them.
Digital will win in the long run but until we all have automatic backups(Time Machine) and Bonjour dejour(Mac OS X) the vast majority of users are stuck trying to get things working right in Windows hell.
To get back on topic: the news story is from the Brit rag The Register, which is famously anti Steve jobs and Apple. Their data is clobbered together from half facts and hyped with blaring (and often misleading) headlines. Their fake news (apologies to Jon Stewart) has caused Apple's stock to drop almost $3 today. Which I'm sure was their intention.
What are the odds that these story releases are the result of market manipulators? I'd like to see the top stockholders who coincidentally shorted shares in Apple today...
And for the record, I am far from an audiophile; I'm about as tone deaf as they come.
CDs just offer a better value proposition if you aren't in the "Must Have it Now" category.
It's time for Apple to ditch the DRM and bump up quality. They will still have plenty of sales without it, but if they really want to set the trends and kill products like Zune out the gates, it is time.