I've always thought that the MPEG made a huge mistake in not calling AAC "mp4". If they had, then everybody would realise that AAC is the successor to mp3.
The problem with that is the fact that is MPEG-4 is both audio and video. I do see your point, though. When people ask me about AAC, I tell them it's "MPEG-4-based", while MP3 is MPEG-1-based. They assume a higher number is better.
Sony, Universal and Warner all balked at the idea of DRM-free music when Apple suggested it yet now sell DRM-free music on Amazon and go out of their way not to offer it on iTunes. What's up with that?
They are clearly trying to topple Apple's dominance. If the pace of digital downloads continues on it's current curve AND if enough big-name acts defect to direct sales to fans through iTunes/Amazon/direct sales... the labels have plenty to worry about.
Comments
I've always thought that the MPEG made a huge mistake in not calling AAC "mp4". If they had, then everybody would realise that AAC is the successor to mp3.
The problem with that is the fact that is MPEG-4 is both audio and video. I do see your point, though. When people ask me about AAC, I tell them it's "MPEG-4-based", while MP3 is MPEG-1-based. They assume a higher number is better.
Sony, Universal and Warner all balked at the idea of DRM-free music when Apple suggested it yet now sell DRM-free music on Amazon and go out of their way not to offer it on iTunes. What's up with that?
They are clearly trying to topple Apple's dominance. If the pace of digital downloads continues on it's current curve AND if enough big-name acts defect to direct sales to fans through iTunes/Amazon/direct sales... the labels have plenty to worry about.
Seems Amazon was lying according to emusic:
http://www.macworld.com/article/1327...03/emusic.html
I don't believe it. eMusic is not even a household name. Their figures are bull.