Microsoft Prepares Reply To iTunes

[Ed Hansberry]

<a href="http://news.com.com/2100-1027-1009794.html">http://news.com.com/2100-1027-1009794.html</a><br /><br />Anxiously waiting for 99¢ music downloads that you <i>own</i> and can easily transfer to your Pocket PC or other music player?<br /><br />"While Apple Computer grabs publicity for its new 99 cent music download store, Microsoft is quietly preparing for a counterattack by improving its own technology for supporting subscription music services."<br /><br />Sound good so far? Read on. "Microsoft is betting that new security enhancements planned for later this year could make renting music, rather than owning it, more attractive to consumers."<br /><br />Wrong. Microsoft's DRM team clearly doesn't get what consumers want. You would think they would take a look at the ebook market where Palm Digital Media, formerly known as Peanut Press, is cleaning their clock, both in sales and fulfilling customer wants. It is only anecdotal evidence, but I can count on one finger the number of people I know that regularly buy Microsoft Reader format ebooks protected with DRM5. I can't count the number of people I know that use Palm Reader. No "Passport" required, no activation and most importantly, no hassles. Now they want me to <i>rent</i> my music?<br /><br />I don't think so. :evil:

[sgyee]

Microsoft is on this "renting" kick. They think that consumers want to rent or lease everything. (Look at the auto market - leasing isn't for everyone!).

Case in point - Microsoft recently sent me an email in regards to this wonderful $299 deal (the Microsoft "Action Pack"), in which you get:

Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Enterprise
SQL Server
Exchange
Win2k Advanced Server
and 10 licenses of the following:
Windows XP Pro
Office XP Pro
Visio 2002 Pro
Mappoint 2003
Frontpage 2003
Project 2003
Outlook 2003
Publisher 2003

Actually, if one reads the EULA, you only get the rights to the licenses while you pay your $299. You're renting them for 1 year....that's it.

Link is here: http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=150526

[Gerard]

BWAH HA HA HA HA!!! Keep DReaMing Microsoft. Good grief. I be stickin' to µbook of late, as lots and lots.... and lots of stuff is available in HTML and TXT format, and µbook reads it in a ZIP, and prettier than MS Reader to boot.
Now they want to further control how I listen to music, not just read? Must be a joke. I think this one's right up there with the eCrapper scam. They'll invest way too much effort in getting this launched, then realise from feedback that people are a bit smarter outside the offices in Redmond and actually know how to use a line-out if need be to copy their CD content into whatever compressed format they prefer. Maybe they are trying to tap into the vast AOL member market? ;)

[SteveNYC]

They think that consumers want to rent or lease everything.

Unfortunately, the more accurate statement is probably "Microsoft wants consumers to rent or lease everything".

Their desire (and that of many other corporations) is to have as much as possible based on a constant revenue stream. So they are constantly pushing these subscription-based services. You need only look at what Microsoft did to corporate customers when they went to Software Assurance 6.0 which forced companies to move to a subsciption based model.

My agency immediately purchased all the licenses we'd need (Before SA 6 went into effect) for the next several years just to avoid the hassles of constantly revisting the issue. My boss was not happy about the cost (approximately $2 million) but the savings of not having to keep going back to Microsoft were too high to ignore.

[Scott R]

Unfortunately, the more accurate statement is probably "Microsoft wants consumers to rent or lease everything".
Precisely. When I first spotted this news item earlier today, I thought they were planning on going with more of a monthly subscription but get X number of MP3 downloads included type of deal. But I guess they aren't even planning on let you keep those downloads for good, just have them be playable for a certain amount of time? The former I could live with (assuming the price was right), the latter I could not.

Scott

[WyattEarp]

Obviously Microsoft doesn't listen to it's customers. They are only making their own lives easier. Renting of all things is just another form of control they wish to have. Forces updates and keeping track of customers unwillingly. Soon you won't be able to modify any settings to fit your own needs. If you can't own it, it's not worth having in the first place.

[Scott R]

Hold the phone! (No pun intended). Ed's using his PPC coupled with a Nokia 3650 (Symbian) device? Say it aint so.

Scott

[XmanHP548]

As a PowerMac owner and user, I have bought from the Apple iTunes store and it is a great buying experience...Priced reasonably and fast downloads. And after you download the song, the restrictions placed on the file are minimal. Steve Jobs continues to be a creative genius! 8) He trusts the computer user to not pirate or steal and empowers us.

On the other hand, MS staggers along trying to implement Draconian DRM restrictions and subscriptions. How pathetic. Gates and Balmer are like the nutso emperors that resulted in the fall of the Roman empire. Like Rome, MS has had its day, but this restrictive "subscription" DRM blah blah blah is going to rot their pathetic company to the core. I'm gonna love watching the ******** go down in flames too! :twisted:

[Ed Hansberry]

Hold the phone! (No pun intended). Ed's using his PPC coupled with a Nokia 3650 (Symbian) device? Say it aint so.
The 3650 is not Symbian, or at least it bares absolutely no resemblance to the OS the P800 has. This phone rocks! So much better than my old t68.

Now, 5 demerits for the OT drift. :wink:

[TawnerX]

How long do you think till somebody post a crack for the DRM5?

:roll:

[carlosgp]

A crack for DRM5 books? It's out now. Read http://members.lycos.co.uk/hostintheshell/

[Paragon]

Well, I see no problem with Microsoft's idea of renting me music. I will use the service the same amount that I use Microsoft Reader. :) ZERO I doubt I'm alone.

What I don't understand is how a company can be so successful, and yet totally misjudge their customers on issues such as this??? Geeez...it's not like we haven't been vocal about our feelings on DRM. Are they that arrogant that they think they can force us into renting. It's not like they are the only player in the field, and can easily control the issue. We have many other choices. To quote someone famous. "They are fools, and idiots!"

Dave

[Scott R]

The 3650 is not Symbian, or at least it bares absolutely no resemblance to the OS the P800 has. This phone rocks! So much better than my old t68.I know next to nothing about the Symbian OS, but I do know that the 3650 runs it. Specifically, it runs what they call Symbian Series 60. The P800, I believe, runs Symbian UIQ. I think Series 60 and UIQ are the names of the GUI layers.

Getting back on topic (kind of)...Another nice thing I think I remember reading Jobs say a while back was that he allowed for "family" licensing for some of his products, allowing for people to install one copy of an app on multiple computers owned within that same family. Don't remember any details beyond that (Like the Symbian OS, I have little to no first-hand Mac experience). I don't think you'll catch Gates doing that any time soon.

Scott

[denivan]

this is just sad...there are enough alternatives available
to renting music : radio for instance... there are so many radio stations
available by genre (also on the pc) that renting music would be down right stupid...

I just want to purchase hassle free music, that can be played on my ipaq for a fair price...is that so much to ask for ?
I wonder if iTunes music will be playable on pocketpcs in the future, I sure hope so...it would hit
Microsoft where it hurts (the wallet)...suits them for being so arrogant to force their ideas on to us...the consumer

Ivan

(posted from ipaq, sorry for bad lay out)

[klinux]

Yup, among many of my PCs is an iBook. I have not bought music from any of the other services but when ITMS (iTunes music store) came out, I bought $24 worth of music right away. Their DRM allows fair usage. If I or anyway want to crack it, it would be easy - just convert the format to MP3. However, Apple does trust that the majority of users do not to want do that.

To me, hackers and pirates will steal no matter what DRM is there. The difference is that Microsoft will let those few bad apples (no pun intended) ruin the user experience for everyone by only allowing 'renting' and Draconian DRM. It is a shame because I actually think WMAv9 VBR is good codec.

[n4cer]

The big misconception here is that Microsoft is the one selling or renting music. They aren't. They are simply providing greater support in their DRM technology for different business models.

Companies like pressplay are the ones that sell/rent the music as they have for the past year or 2 both within WMP's web-GUI and through a normal web browser.

It is up to the 3rd party companies to decide whether to keep providing their current subscription service, modify it, or change it to a no-subscription, music store. Microsoft's DRM already supports the subscription and direct-sale models. They are adding in greater functionality to allow more freedom with content's transfer to portable devices with subscription services. It is still up to the 3rd-party distributors to figure out what business model is best for them.

[Paragon]

...and Microsoft has nothing to do with any of it....they are simply along for the ride. Providing only what they have been ask to.....Yeah right! :)

Dave

[kagayaki1]

MS was built on the revolution of licensing intellectual property, instead of selling it like so many others did (and still do?) in the early 1980s. However, if they take the same approach with music (essentially this is what it is), they will fail.

Is anyone else NOT suprised that it was a computer company (Apple) that successfully did what the music industry never could do? Is anyone suprised that MS is again lagging behind?

[n4cer]

...and Microsoft has nothing to do with any of it....they are simply along for the ride. Providing only what they have been ask to.....Yeah right!

For the most part, yeah.
The music/movie industries want ways to protect their content, so MS provides that. The tech is open enough for the content provider to decide exactly what rights to give the consumer. The content provider can be really strict with the amount of rights given and likely not get many customers because of it (as seen with most PC music services currently), or they can provide a looser level of restrictions that allows a reasonable amount of freedom for the consumer. This is entirely up to the content provider and the amount of rights the have from the record labels/artists.

MS' part in it is to act as a portal to those services (at least the ones that plug in to WMP) rather than be the content provider. They make money from device manufactures and platform vendors licensing the Windows Media Technologies and incorporating them into their hardware/software. They also make money from Windows server sales because the content providers need Windows for the encoding and rights management services. Last, they make money from their own Windows client OSes because consumers (or device manufacturers in the case of the Windows Embedded OSes) buy those for extensible consumer-level support of the Windows Media Technologies.

[WyattEarp]

It's the music industry (music companies that is) who is in control of how music is distributed. They are the only ones making any real money out of the deal. They use pirating as an excuse to further restrict the users rights on sharing music. When in actuality it is the consumer who has purchased less music due to the lack of talent, quality, content, etc. in music being put out by the industry over the last decade. But they will never admit to that so let's just blame pirating and restrict people from listening to music unless they pay for it. And since outside companies go along with it to also make a quick buck it makes them no better. The whole thing just stinks and we the consumers end up paying for it all.

[doctor_mouse]

I, for one, would love to rent. I own just 2 DVDs, but rent extensively from my local Blockbuster. Yeah, of course, it'd be nicer if someone cracks DRM5. Oh yeah!

[ombu]

New iPods are going to be ready for PCs soon, I think (just my thoughts) iTunes too, it's the first step, it's working and it could be redirected any time in the future, if there's money for this market, Jobs (he's Pixar too) knows how to pick his slice, time will tell.

Regards.

[Ed Hansberry]

I know next to nothing about the Symbian OS, but I do know that the 3650 runs it. Specifically, it runs what they call Symbian Series 60. The P800, I believe, runs Symbian UIQ. I think Series 60 and UIQ are the names of the GUI layers.

Yup. Quick google verifies it. my biggest pleasure is with the hardware. The camera is nice, BT works great and reception has been good. there are some niggling software issues like one voice command per contact (so I had to make 3 for my wife and 2 for some others) and neither BT nor IR allows multiple contact beaming. I also can't BT send files to my iPAQ - IR only.

Thanks for the clarification on the OS. :)

On this topic though, it appears I am in the majority on the whole renting and DRM thing. We need an animated GIF delivering a big rasberry with spittle flying all over the place for this kind of thing. :D Someone email one to the @pocketpcthoughts.com addy. My email ID is ed. :way to go: I'll get it on the emoticon page early next week.

[roberto_torres]

The ideal solution would be if some company (maybe Real) comes out with a method that works similar to Palm Digital Media, and like Palm reder books plays on different OSs.

Downloading music you purchase and using your credit card number to unlock it would be ideal and unlike MS DRM you won't be tied to an specific device or PC. This way if you share the music you would have to share your credit card number, something must don't want to do.

[TawnerX]

We are taking these so seriously as if there are big names artists already signing up.

what happen if only eminem shows up? I wouldn't touch it with 10 ft poles even if they pay me and it doesn't use DRM.

my point: show me the music first, then I might think about using it. Hell I even pay for it if it is really good.

as far as I am concern, this music thing could be as stink as microsoft reader. no good content, lousy player, broken everything. Microsoft couldn't force anybody to use it even free.

I'll take my pMVP and head to the net hunting for new and up coming artist that put their work for public thanks.

[Scott R]

as far as I am concern, this music thing could be as stink as microsoft reader. no good content, lousy player, broken everything. Microsoft couldn't force anybody to use it even free.Don't be so sure about what MS can and can't force you to do. Didn't you hear? The armed forces are equipped with PPCs now. ;)

Scott

[Foo Fighter]

Rent music? No thanks, Microsoft. I prefer to OWN my digital audio bits, thank you very much. So far I've purchased 7 songs from the iTunes music store. The experience was excellent, fast, easy, just one click. Boom! Downloads right to my iPod. No MS DRM crap for me! :evil:

[Janak Parekh]

...and Microsoft has nothing to do with any of it....they are simply along for the ride. Providing only what they have been ask to.....Yeah right!
For the most part, yeah.
The music/movie industries want ways to protect their content, so MS provides that. The tech is open enough for the content provider to decide exactly what rights to give the consumer. The content provider can be really strict with the amount of rights given and likely not get many customers because of it (as seen with most PC music services currently), or they can provide a looser level of restrictions that allows a reasonable amount of freedom for the consumer. This is entirely up to the content provider and the amount of rights the have from the record labels/artists.
It's not so open-and-shut; there is two-way interaction. Witness how Apple negotiated much more generous licensing terms from the music industry. Quite frankly, I was wondering if MS would come up with a good form of competition to Apple's iTunes service. They haven't. Apple currently has a clear road ahead to release iTunes for Windows and clean up this market. Note the consumer excitement in what iTunes provides -- the consumer isn't stupid, and I think this MS model will go the way of PressPlay & co.

my point: show me the music first, then I might think about using it. Hell I even pay for it if it is really good.
From what I've heard from friends with Macs, the iTunes store has fantastic variety.

--janak

[n4cer]

For MS to do that, they'd have to become the content provider. They don't want to be a content provider. They've provided APIs long ago to integrate into WMP. The content providers haven't taken advantage of what's there.

[marconelly]

The 3650 is not Symbian, or at least it bares absolutely no resemblance to the OS the P800 has.

Nokia 3650 Symbian phone unveiled:
http://www.infosync.no/news/2002/n/2270.html

[ricktakagi]

Hold the phone! (No pun intended). Ed's using his PPC coupled with a Nokia 3650 (Symbian) device? Say it aint so.
The 3650 is not Symbian, or at least it bares absolutely no resemblance to the OS the P800 has. This phone rocks! So much better than my old t68.

Now, 5 demerits for the OT drift. :wink:

Actually I think it is Symbian series 60? I have the same phone and have downloaded apps under the symbian section at handango....

[n4cer]

Just to add:
There is a way MS could do it without becoming a content provider, but it would involve standardizing the whole process of purchasing music and creating a standard front-end that the providers plug into behind the scenes. This would require many compromises on the part of the content providers, and may be hard to get widespread cooperation.

The only other way is for MS to go in direct competition with pressplay, etc.

[mv]

How long do you think till somebody post a crack for the DRM5?

:roll:

Isn´t already cracked??

[Hau Wei]

Rent my music? Fat chance.

I'd rather buy the CD. It'd be more value for money. Not to mention much better quality! What's Microsoft thinking?

I really hope they'd re-consider their business model.

[welmoed]

Good grief. You'd think they would get a clue from the DIVX debacle that Circuit City was in a few years back.

--Welmoed

[GoldKey]

Microsoft is on this "renting" kick. They think that consumers want to rent or lease everything. (Look at the auto market - leasing isn't for everyone!).

Case in point - Microsoft recently sent me an email in regards to this wonderful $299 deal (the Microsoft "Action Pack"), in which you get:

Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Enterprise
SQL Server
Exchange
Win2k Advanced Server
and 10 licenses of the following:
Windows XP Pro
Office XP Pro
Visio 2002 Pro
Mappoint 2003
Frontpage 2003
Project 2003
Outlook 2003
Publisher 2003

Actually, if one reads the EULA, you only get the rights to the licenses while you pay your $299. You're renting them for 1 year....that's it.

Link is here: http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=150526

If they broke it down differently, ie instead of 10 licenses, just give me one of the OS and Office, Frontpage, Visio, etc. I would gladly pay 1/10 the price per year. So for $30/year, I get the OS and all the office applications. In that case, leasing would be much cheaper than buying.

[kagayaki1]

How long do you think till somebody post a crack for the DRM5?

:roll:

Isn´t already cracked??

Come on guys, read the rest the thread. There's already been some pretty good comments.

[darrylb]

I for one would like to know Microsofts execution strategy for their music service. I dont listen to the same music for years and years (well sometimes I do), but often I only listen to a CD for a few months and then move on to something else.

If you are like me you will probably have over a hundred CDs in your collection - most of which you probably dont listen to much anyway. Have you ever tried selling your old CDs 8O ? It is hardly worth the effort for the meager price you get.

We also need to remember that when we buy a CD we dont "own" the music anyway - merely the right to listen to it - all intellectual property remains the property of the owner/creator/record company :?

At the end of the day the primary benefit of having a CD is the convenience of being able to "rip" the music to digital format. If Microsoft or Apple or whoever provide it in digital format for low cost this is beneficial as it saves us storing the CD and ripping the music ourselves.

The core of what I am trying to say here is Microsoft and Apple are not doing anything new, they are simply providing a new distribution method. The key to it is the execution. Apple have executed well, and Microsoft is ... well.... Microsoft.

Not all the Microsoft does is evil, but they do often get it wrong, and come in heavy (or draconian) - at the end of the day they need to turn a profit for their shareholders like any other company. Most of their products and services are profitable (with exception of xBox - and possibly Pocket PC), so I am interested in seeing how they work this.

Admittedly, they have been too strict on the music thing so far, but if Apple got a reasonable deal, then whats to say the MS wont press the music industry for something similar.

Lets give them a chance to see if they get it right or not - then bag them for it :twisted:

[kaiden.1]

I think that MS is trying to bully their way into making this a successful venture. I mean everyone prctically runns windows ans those of us that do are really stuck with what MS decides to do. Monopolies were never good for anyone.

DIVX failed; and this will fail too! But that won't happen until they have thrown a lot of money at it trying to sell it to the public that has for years stored and cherished albums. If there is one thing that the american public is serious about, it's music. This sounds like some behind the desk corporate thinker trying to score business points who is really out of touch with the public. I can hear him saying to himself; "I would do it!" only to find out that the dork doesn't really listen to music at all.

I won't even sniff at the idea of renting music. In fact I don't even use MS media player. You can bet that what ever the renting thing is, it would only allow you to play it on their software. Some MS media player thing. How pathetic!

I bought an IPOD! 8) It is the greatest MP3 Player I have ever seen. It is the bomb! I love it! 30 gig! 8O I have recorded every CD I own and am still trying to figure out how to fill up the memory. Unbelieveable!

Apple comes out with something that is working and making money. It is designed for the consumer and end user. That is why it is working. MS hasn't done a damn thing about music for the end user. I guess that the 16 million that Apple made in the first 16 days is too big of a carrot and MS is lusting after it. Apple has the interests of the consumer at heart and as a result they are making a good profit. Good for them. On the other hand MS waits until they see money showing up and then they are interested in it for themselves. :twisted:

I guess that the real thing about renting is this: When you take "choice" away from people; you are taking away their "FREEDOM" and that is the bottom line on why we so much hate and dispise the idea of renting. No one likes things forced on them. MS is trying to play that game of force and control. It is the bully way of doing something. This is why it will not work. It has nothing to with how much money you throw at it; it has everything to do with principles. Corporations don't understand Principles very well.

The only time that I rent anything is if it is in my best interests, not MS or anyone elses. And I certainly don't like it when someone else trys to tell me how I'm going to run my lifestyle. :twisted:

Apple will win this one and MS will think that they did!

[bjornkeizers]

Unfortunately, the more accurate statement is probably "Microsoft wants consumers to rent or lease everything".

Yeah, exactly. I'll rent music shortly after hell freezes over. Same thing with software. If I pay for it, I want to own it. Period. I'm not renting *anything* and certainly not from those evil bastards in redmond!

As a consumer, I feel companys these days are infringing on my basic rights. I want to be able to borrow a book, copy a DVD or listen to my music whenever *I* want and as long as *I* want to.

I've never bought a CD in my life, but I did invest in a decent MP3 player last year, [Archos Jukebox Recorder, 10 GB] and I've been getting all my music from Kazaa for free ever since. I'm not about to pay for it, the way companys are treating me lately [music industry, software industry, ebook industry, MPAA [ http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,108133,00.asp ] and I'm certainly not going to rent anything. Not now, Not EVER! It's time we consumers stood up and made ourselves heard!

[darrylb]

I've never bought a CD in my life, but I did invest in a decent MP3 player last year, [Archos Jukebox Recorder, 10 GB] and I've been getting all my music from Kazaa for free ever since. I'm not about to pay for it!

This is the exact problem that the music industry is trying to stamp out.

&lt;don flameproof suit>
If it is good enough to listen to, it is good enough to buy. People spend time and effort making music and it is not fair to them when we rip them off by not paying for their work. None of us would like it if we didnt get paid for the work we did.
&lt;/don flameproof suit>

[Steven Cedrone]

I've never bought a CD in my life, but I did invest in a decent MP3 player last year, [Archos Jukebox Recorder, 10 GB] and I've been getting all my music from Kazaa for free ever since. I'm not about to pay for it, the way companys are treating me lately [music industry, software industry, ebook industry, MPAA [ http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,108133,00.asp ] and I'm certainly not going to rent anything. Not now, Not EVER!

To me, you've gone from Fair Use, to stealing...

It's time we consumers stood up and made ourselves heard!

Since you don't buy anything, or rent anything, how can you call yourself a consumer???

Just my .02

Steve

[Ed Hansberry]

I for one would like to know Microsofts execution strategy for their music service. I dont listen to the same music for years and years (well sometimes I do), but often I only listen to a CD for a few months and then move on to something else.
You may be their intended audience. maybe I am pickier about my music or just more intense about it. I listen to music for years. Some of my favorite CD' are 10 years old. Enya, Cranberries, Tori Amos, Mazzy Star, etc. some have new stuff out and I own most of that too, but my old old ones, even back to the late 80's aren't collecting dust. In fact, I would willingly pay $1 for early-mid 80's stuff. No renting!

[Ed Hansberry]

I've never bought a CD in my life, but I did invest in a decent MP3 player last year, [Archos Jukebox Recorder, 10 GB] and I've been getting all my music from Kazaa for free ever since. I'm not about to pay for it, the way companys are treating me lately [music industry, software industry, ebook industry, MPAA [ http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,108133,00.asp ] and I'm certainly not going to rent anything.

You mean the way they are treating honest people that actually purchased their music. :roll:

[Gremmie]

Unfortunately, the more accurate statement is probably "Microsoft wants consumers to rent or lease everything".

Yeah, exactly. I'll rent music shortly after hell freezes over. Same thing with software. If I pay for it, I want to own it. Period. I'm not renting *anything* and certainly not from those evil bastards in redmond!

As a consumer, I feel companys these days are infringing on my basic rights. I want to be able to borrow a book, copy a DVD or listen to my music whenever *I* want and as long as *I* want to.

Not EVER! It's time we consumers stood up and made ourselves heard!

The consumers must ensue into a bloody revolt against the bourgeoisie! :roll: Come on dude, basic rights? If you don't want it, don't buy it (or did you ever?).

However, getting on a topic that doesn't sounds like a Marxist revolution, a good point was made earlier, what market is Microsoft trying to get into? They aren't famous for the retail front, they are famous for innovative licensing; someone pointed out that the API's are available for outside retailers to create plug-in's for shopping music via Media Player. I agree, this doesn't sound like a good consumer-ended idea, but they should try to promote outside companies to sell music via Media Player.

Also, I am curious about the politics of DRM, Microsoft's revenue is not from media (yet), they may be able to receive substancial subsidies from massive music companies by supporting DRM, I suppose it's possible these subsidies and investments may be able to qualify the use of DRM.

[ctmagnus]

Have you ever tried selling your old CDs 8O ? It is hardly worth the effort for the meager price you get.

Actually, the local place here pays $3CDN/CD regardless. I found that out after I took a bunch of CDs to Calgary to sell there, where you get $2/CD if the store wnats it.

[Jeff Rutledge]

Have you ever tried selling your old CDs 8O ? It is hardly worth the effort for the meager price you get.

Actually, the local place here pays $3CDN/CD regardless. I found that out after I took a bunch of CDs to Calgary to sell there, where you get $2/CD if the store wnats it.

Hey ctmagnus, where did you take them? I have a pile of CD's I put into the "What was I thinking? Oh yeah, I was in high school" category that I wouldn't mind unloading.

Thanks!

[ctmagnus]

I've never bought a CD in my life... I'm not about to pay for it,

You don't even have (a) favorite artist(s) that you'll support unconditionally? :jawdrop: :shocked!:

(and by unconditionally, I mean shelling out ~$20 for the ~ one CD the average artist releases ~ every three years.)


but I did invest in a decent MP3 player last year, [Archos Jukebox Recorder, 10 GB]

You poor, disillusioned fool! The Nomad Jukebox 3 is where it's at, if you're going to head into the size of Archos products.*


*Just my $.02.

[ctmagnus]

Have you ever tried selling your old CDs 8O ? It is hardly worth the effort for the meager price you get.

Actually, the local place here pays $3CDN/CD regardless. I found that out after I took a bunch of CDs to Calgary to sell there, where you get $2/CD if the store wnats it.

Hey ctmagnus, where did you take them? I have a pile of CD's I put into the "What was I thinking? Oh yeah, I was in high school" category that I wouldn't mind unloading.

Thanks!

Here, Off The Wall. There, Tramps at Macleod and Southland. I've also tried Tramps at Kensington and Crowchild.

[Jeff Rutledge]

Here, Off The Wall.

I didn't notice you were in Golden. Good thing you were paying attention. :mrgreen:

There, Tramps at Macleod and Southland. I've also tried Tramps at Kensington and Crowchild.

Great. I'll load up the car and free up a couple shelves in the storage room. Thanks for the tip! :way to go:

[ctmagnus]

Here, Off The Wall.

I didn't notice you were in Golden. Good thing you were paying attention. :mrgreen:

There, Tramps at Macleod and Southland. I've also tried Tramps at Kensington and Crowchild.

Great. I'll load up the car and free up a couple shelves in the storage room. Thanks for the tip! :way to go:

You should be forewarned that they may discriminate against some of your older stuff. My sister handed me a buch of older stuff she didn't want anymore, and I managed to sell one of those CDs at Tramps, out of all of them.

[Crystal Eitle]

I have a theory - Information Wants to be Cheap. I don't buy the "Information Wants to be Free" thing, mostly because Information also Wants to Pay the Rent.

I think though that what is happening here is with the advent of CD Burners, and stacks of CD-Rs that are so cheap as to be practically free, people are realizing that record labels are ripping them off. It doesn't cost anywhere near $17 to produce a CD, even factoring in packaging, yet somehow record companies feel justified in charging consumers that. It ain't right.

The absurdity of record companies' pricing schemes is thrown into even starker relief when shopping at a store like Target, where you can get DVDs for $8-$15. How is it that a movie, which is several orders of magnitude more expensive and difficult to create than an album, and which has more data on the disc, using newer technology, is so much cheaper than a record?

If record companies want to see their sales-slump woes come to an end, they should try an experiment. Right now they are pretending the laws of supply and demand don't exist. The law of supply and demand dictates that if your products aren't selling for a given price, you need to lower the price.

I'd like to see CDs priced at around $5 apiece, and certainly no more than $10. I predict they would go flying off the shelves. I myself would buy bushels at that price. I actually prefer buying music on CDs to getting it electronically. I like having the packaging, and I like seeing the CD boxes on my shelf and browsing my collection.

But right now I feel resentful every time I go to a record store and shell out $17 for a new CD.

I still buy music, but I'm not happy about it :evil:.

[Jeff Rutledge]

You should be forewarned that they may discriminate against some of your older stuff. My sister handed me a buch of older stuff she didn't want anymore, and I managed to sell one of those CDs at Tramps, out of all of them.

Thanks for the heads up. I guess I'll roll the dice and see how many I can unload for how much $$$.

[jeff]

I think though that what is happening here is with the advent of CD Burners, and stacks of CD-Rs that are so cheap as to be practically free, people are realizing that record labels are ripping them off. It doesn't cost anywhere near $17 to produce a CD, even factoring in packaging, yet somehow record companies feel justified in charging consumers that. It ain't right.

The cost of the materials in selling entertainment are negligable. Your $17, or $12 if you know where to shop, has to pay everyone involved in the production of the CD. The musicians who create it, the recording studio costs, the ad people, the guy who comes up with the cover art, the shipping companies, and the retailers all need money.

The absurdity of record companies' pricing schemes is thrown into even starker relief when shopping at a store like Target, where you can get DVDs for $8-$15. How is it that a movie, which is several orders of magnitude more expensive and difficult to create than an album, and which has more data on the disc, using newer technology, is so much cheaper than a record?

Because DVDs are based on theatrical releases which have likely already recouped the production costs. A DVD is just gravy for most movies. CDs are the starting point for musicians to try to earn money on the work. Touring helps a bit, but those are usually used to push merchandise and more CD sales.

I'd like to see a combination of this service and Apple's service. Unlimited listening to whatever you want while you're a member with permanent copies of songs for the Apple $1/$10 arrangement. There's a lot of stuff I'd like to listen to now and then, but really don't have a desire to own. And it allows for a better sampling experience when searching for new stuff to own.

The main issue for both services is the available library. Apple's is much better than Pressplay, but still has some big holes. I noticed the Foo Fighters weren't even on there. I guess that will all work itself out if any of these things prove profitable for the record companies.

[Crystal Eitle]

I think though that what is happening here is with the advent of CD Burners, and stacks of CD-Rs that are so cheap as to be practically free, people are realizing that record labels are ripping them off. It doesn't cost anywhere near $17 to produce a CD, even factoring in packaging, yet somehow record companies feel justified in charging consumers that. It ain't right.

The cost of the materials in selling entertainment are negligable. Your $17, or $12 if you know where to shop, has to pay everyone involved in the production of the CD. The musicians who create it, the recording studio costs, the ad people, the guy who comes up with the cover art, the shipping companies, and the retailers all need money.

But that doesn't explain why new vinyl is only $8-$10. Vinyl costs more to produce than a CD, and also has the same costs you mentioned, artists, designers, etc. You can go to an indie record store and pick up the new White Stripes album on vinyl for $10, or on CD for $17. Where is the logic in that????

I know there are more costs in a CD than the actual physical media, but I am still convinced the record companies have a lot of room to slash prices, but refuse to do it out of greed or stubbornness.

Remember when CDs first came out? They were several dollars more expensive than a vinyl LP, because the technology was new. Well now the technology isn't new anymore, and it's cheap as dirt, yet the price hasn't gone down accordingly. It ought to. Record companies should try pricing CDs cheaper - the accompanying surge in sales would be more than enough to recoup the costs of paying the musicians, studio time, advertising, etc. etc.

[docnilay]

I dont listen to the same music for years and years (well sometimes I do), but often I only listen to a CD for a few months and then move on to something else.
If you are like me you will probably have over a hundred CDs in your collection - most of which you probably dont listen to much anyway. Have you ever tried selling your old CDs 8O ? It is hardly worth the effort for the meager price you get.

As Ed H. mentioned above, I too like some of the "vintage" stuff on CD. Granted, having 400+ CDs means I don't listen to each one of them often, but sometimes its like strolling down memory lane... ripping most of them onto my iPod and having "shuffle" play surprise me is very nice.

If I were to "rent" music that expired when I stopped paying for it, some of those old happy (and some melancholy) moments won't be relived... that's what the music is about, the moments, the memories. (Ok, Sappy mode OFF).

My connection with these audio bits of memory are much better off in my own posession, on my shelf or hard drive, not something that I have to drive down the street and rent at a local blockbuster... (or in this model, go on-line, find, and "rent").

- Nilay

[bjornkeizers]

To me, you've gone from Fair Use, to stealing...

You are absolutely correct. I am stealing. Why? Because I'm not going to pay 20-25 euro for a CD which has maybe one, two tracks on it that I like. I don't own a CD player, so I have to rip the tracks to MP3 anyway. Which they won't allow me to do [copyright protection and all that] When I do get the tracks ripped, I can throw away that CD because it's become useless to me.



Since you don't buy anything, or rent anything, how can you call yourself a consumer???

Just because I don't buy music doesn't mean I steal *everything* I have a stack of games taller then myself, everything legal [I own exactly two burned copys out of 250 games that I own] and I allways buy DVD's instead of ripping them. Why? Because a DVD has added extras that make it worth the price. The added content, the sound options, the better image quality.. that's the key to winning consumers. But DVD's aren't cheap, and I would love to be able to copy a DVD to take with me, instead of the expensive, rare original. But they won't let me.

You don't even have (a) favorite artist(s) that you'll support unconditionally? (and by unconditionally, I mean shelling out ~$20 for the ~ one CD the average artist releases ~ every three years.)

That is correct. I mostly listen to whatever's popular and I have a nice collection of 80's music [yes, a definate child of the 80's! 8) ] Whenever I hear a song on the radio or on the 'net that I like, I d/l a copy on Kazaa. I'm not going to hunt down a CD or record that may or may not even exist, just to get a single song.. To date, I have not purchased, recieved or even borrowed a single music CD, and I'm not about to change that. The only way I'd pay for my music is if I could buy the tracks for say.. 2 cents, through a Kazaa-like system, and then actually own the music to do with as I please.

You poor, disillusioned fool! The Nomad Jukebox 3 is where it's at, if you're going to head into the size of Archos products.*

*shrugs* It does everything I need. It's more like a 10 gb harddrive with a screen than it is an actual MP3 player. I also use it to store backups.. and sensitive information. It's a great device.

[cam87513]

You poor, disillusioned fool! The Nomad Jukebox 3 is where it's at, if you're going to head into the size of Archos products.*


Everyone knows that the Zen is the only way to reach mp3 nirvana

[helloboys]

Well, I guess I'll be the one dissenting voice in this thread.

What would you rather? ~$6000 to fill up a 30GB MP3 player (based on Apple's pricing), or $180 a year with the ability to swap in new music as you want (based on Pressplay's current pricing)?

I suppose it's whether you want to permanently hang on to a lot of your music, really. I know a lot of people tend to go through phases, and may end up swapping a fair bit of music in and out. Having to pay for each transaction tends to add up.

I have an iPod though, so I guess I'll be locked into Apple's music store, regardless of what I want. Nevermind that I'm in Australia, where neither Pressplay or Apple are currently in service.

Let the :agrue: resume.

[jeff]

But that doesn't explain why vinyl is only $8-$10. Vinyl costs more to produce than a CD, and also has the same costs you mentioned, artists, designers, etc. You can go to an indie record store and pick up the new White Stripes album on vinyl for $10, or on CD for $17. Where is the logic in that????


Where do you buy CDs? New CDs are nowhere near $17 around here.

I've wondered about the vinyl thing, too. The way I figure it, it's analagous to the movie/DVD relation, Theatrical Release:DVD::CD:Vinyl. The CD is the main release that they're trying to turn the profit on, vinyl is just an extra. Record companies probably know exactly how many copies of an album they'll sell on vinyl, so there aren't as many shelf space and return concerns, and as a result they'll price it at exactly the amount which will turn a profit. Not coincidentally the price of a new release CD is usually the same $10-$12 as the vinyl version. I'm guessing that $10-$12 is the minimum price the stores can charge so everyone gets paid, knowing those first few shipments of new releases will all get sold. The extra $4-$5 for older CDs is the cost of having it sit on the shelves.

Could it be less expensive? Probably in the case of rock CDs, definitely for new rap CDs. But I don't think the prices are too far out of whack as they are, compared to other forms of entertainment.

[Kati Compton]

But that doesn't explain why new vinyl is only $8-$10. Vinyl costs more to produce than a CD, and also has the same costs you mentioned, artists, designers, etc. You can go to an indie record store and pick up the new White Stripes album on vinyl for $10, or on CD for $17. Where is the logic in that????

And don't forget the TV ads that STILL charge more for CD than for CASSETTE! As in, $26 for 2 CDs or $18 for 2 cassettes. I can't think of ANY valid justification for that.

At one point most CDs were in the $10-$15 range, more often in the $10-$12 range. I think, though, that's when the big mega-stores like Best Buy were trying to put little music shops out of business. But I certainly bought a lot more CDs then.

[bjornkeizers]

And don't forget the TV ads that STILL charge more for CD than for CASSETTE! As in, $26 for 2 CDs or $18 for 2 cassettes. I can't think of ANY valid justification for that.

Well, CD's are more modern. They sound better and are easier to use then cassettes. They're also more desirable: people want cd's instead of crappy tapes. There's no such thing as a 40-cassette changer for your car. And new car radios often come without a tape player.. so obviously, the CD's are more popular and therefore, justify a higher price...

Sad but true.

[Jason Dunn]

Yeah, exactly. I'll rent music shortly after hell freezes over. Same thing with software. If I pay for it, I want to own it...I've never bought a CD in my life, but I did invest in a decent MP3 player last year, [Archos Jukebox Recorder, 10 GB]...

I'm curious about these comments. You appear to feel that software is working buying, but music is not. Yet music is worth having and listening to, but only if you don't have to pay for it. Why the difference? What make you want to pay for software, but not music?

[darrylb]

You poor, disillusioned fool! The Nomad Jukebox 3 is where it's at, if you're going to head into the size of Archos products.*


Everyone knows that the Zen is the only way to reach mp3 nirvana

The **BEST** MP3 player is a Pocket PC 8)

[ctmagnus]

You poor, disillusioned fool! The Nomad Jukebox 3 is where it's at, if you're going to head into the size of Archos products.*


Everyone knows that the Zen is the only way to reach mp3 nirvana

Yeah, but the has an Archos Jukebox. If somebody absolutely wanted something that size, I'd have to recommend an NJB3.

Personally, I find my NJB3 to be rather hefty at times.

[ctmagnus]

The **BEST** MP3 player is a Pocket PC 8)

But PPCs still can't hold 40GB of [audio] data at at time (at least not on there own), whereas the latest standalone MP3 players can.

[darrylb]

The **BEST** MP3 player is a Pocket PC 8)

But PPCs still can't hold 40GB of [audio] data at at time (at least not on there own), whereas the latest standalone MP3 players can.

But I dont have 40 Gb of MP3's. Besides, using WMA takes up less space, and with 4Gb CF cards here or around the corner - how much do I need?

Can your MP3 Player play movies? What about all the other stuff. I already have a cell phone and a PPC - I dont need another device..... :D

[ctmagnus]

But I dont have 40 Gb of MP3's. Besides, using WMA takes up less space, and with 4Gb CF cards here or around the corner - how much do I need?

I don't have 40GB either. With my musical tastes, I won't fill up my 20GB anytime soon. And don't even get me started on reencoding all my music to wma, just so I can carry one fewer device.

Can your MP3 Player play movies? What about all the other stuff. I already have a cell phone and a PPC - I dont need another device..... :D

No, it can't. But then, I prefer watching movies on a larger (26" or larger) screen.


A lot of the reason I bought the NJB3 was features that my 3670 didn't have, today's highest-end PPCs still don't have, and we probably won't see in PPCs anytime soon. I realize it is somewhat redundant carrying around a standalone MP3 player when I can use my iPaq for that purpose, but I prefer to encode my music at higher bitreates, which PPCs choke on. Plus, my NJB3 has an optical line in and two line outs. My pocket PC (and I'm sure yours, too) doesn't have those. So it appears we come from two separate camps when it comes to situations such as this. :)

[darrylb]

I don't have 40GB either. With my musical tastes, I won't fill up my 20GB anytime soon. And don't even get me started on reencoding all my music to wma, just so I can carry one fewer device.


You can get converters (MS do one as part of their Plus package - or whatever it is now called). :mrgreen:


A lot of the reason I bought the NJB3 was features that my 3670 didn't have, today's highest-end PPCs still don't have, and we probably won't see in PPCs anytime soon. I realize it is somewhat redundant carrying around a standalone MP3 player when I can use my iPaq for that purpose, but I prefer to encode my music at higher bitreates, which PPCs choke on. Plus, my NJB3 has an optical line in and two line outs. My pocket PC (and I'm sure yours, too) doesn't have those. So it appears we come from two separate camps when it comes to situations such as this. :)

Do you use the inputs/outputs? I have a poxy car radio (factory supplied) that my music gets piped through, I someimes use headphones (but not much). The distortion through the car makes high bitrates pointless anyway :D

At least you thought through your purchase - which more than I can say for myself sometimes :oops:

[bjornkeizers]

I'm curious about these comments. You appear to feel that software is working buying, but music is not. Yet music is worth having and listening to, but only if you don't have to pay for it. Why the difference? What make you want to pay for software, but not music?

Oh don't get me wrong, music is worth paying for. But not 20-25 euros for a CD, especially when only a very small percentage goes towards the actual musicians. I just don't like paying way too much for a CD and seeing most of it go to record labels who don't even like me, the customer. I don't feel a compelling need to pay $20-25 for the latest Michael Jackson CD, who maybe sees a couple cents from that cash, and let's face it, doesn't need them anyway. I'd rather support up and coming musicians by going to concerts or buying CD's from them directly.

Now software [especially games] are definately worth buying. You're not just buying a great game, you're also doing your part for the software industry and games developers. It costs a lot of money to make a game these days, and I know that every dollar they spend in making one is worth it. Therefore, I'll happily pay my $40-50 for a new game. Just last week I bought an Xbox with a couple games.. I also own a PS2, Gamecube and a Gameboy Advance SP. I don't own a single illegal game, because I know that when I support great games developers, they will have the resources to make other great games in the future.

[darrylb]

Oh don't get me wrong, music is worth paying for. But not 20-25 euros for a CD, especially when only a very small percentage goes towards the actual musicians. I just don't like paying way too much for a CD and seeing most of it go to record labels who don't even like me, the customer. I don't feel a compelling need to pay $20-25 for the latest Michael Jackson CD, who maybe sees a couple cents from that cash, and let's face it, doesn't need them anyway. I'd rather support up and coming musicians by going to concerts or buying CD's from them directly.

Now software [especially games] are definately worth buying. You're not just buying a great game, you're also doing your part for the software industry and games developers. It costs a lot of money to make a game these days, and I know that every dollar they spend in making one is worth it. Therefore, I'll happily pay my $40-50 for a new game. Just last week I bought an Xbox with a couple games.. I also own a PS2, Gamecube and a Gameboy Advance SP. I don't own a single illegal game, because I know that when I support great games developers, they will have the resources to make other great games in the future.

But arent you just deciding who you will pay money to based on your own perceptions? What if everyone analysed where their money went after it left their hands to buy something? I dont like the Coca cola company because they sponsor XYZ (or they are too wealthy or they are snobs, or whatever), so therefore, I'll just take the coke for free....

Sure the music industry sucks and is full of fat cats who only care about their wallets, but that is not your responsibility, nor will you stop it by bouycotting them. If you want it - you should buy it - that is the way things work - and your responsibility as a consumer. If everyone adopted your stance we would be in a right mess :roll:

My apologies to Steve for assisting this thread in going off topic.....

[bjornkeizers]

But arent you just deciding who you will pay money to based on your own perceptions?

Yes, I am. Everything I do is based on my perceptions and opinions.


What if everyone analysed where their money went after it left their hands to buy something? I dont like the Coca cola company because they sponsor XYZ (or they are too wealthy or they are snobs, or whatever), so therefore, I'll just take the coke for free....

Shoplifting a coke is another thing entirely. I'm choosing to exercise my right to not give them the money, but instead to give it to others who, in my opinion, deserve it more or can use it more.


Sure the music industry sucks and is full of fat cats who only care about their wallets, but that is not your responsibility, nor will you stop it by bouycotting them. If you want it - you should buy it - that is the way things work - and your responsibility as a consumer. If everyone adopted your stance we would be in a right mess :roll:

Quite possibly. But that's not my concern. I can only spend my euros one time, and I choose to spend them in the best way I see fit. Which does not include forking out 20 bucks everytime I like a certain song on the radio.. I'll leave the moral and ethical implications to those who care about such things.


My apologies to Steve for assisting this thread in going off topic.....

This has been the most controversial topic we've had in a while :D 70 replies and counting! I love to talk about these things. Right, wrong, I don't care. I just love a good controversial topic.

[HailFire]

Personally, I think Microsoft deserves tremendous credit for consistently doing one thing right: seeing the BIG picture. Hear me out:

Technology caused the problems with the music industry and technology can solve them. The fact is that millions of people are stealing music by the second, and it's a small leap indeed from music to other forms of intellectual property, like film. Forget about payment plans and actual numbers for a second because that can all change; instead, think about what kind of technology would be necessary to prevent theft of intellectual property, because that is what Microsoft is doing, and they are right on the money.

It seems to me that the only solution to this whole MP3 debacle is on-demand programming, a system where consumers can OWN whatever music they want, play it whenever they want, and on whatever device they want to play it on. The one catch is that they don't actually possess a copy of that music; instead, it is streamed onto whatever device they use. I know this plan seems awful and consumers want something tangible for their money, but it is the answer to EVERYONE's problems.

To be more specific, consumers will purchase rights to music rather than the music itself, whether it be for a limited time or permanent. This provides several advantages.

-First, the cost to manufacture and distribute music drops dramatically as labels simply need to provide fast servers.

-Second, any artist who can afford a designated server, can begin selling and streaming their own music, making the record labels more of an advertising engine than a sales tool.

-Third, because your music is stored remotely, you have access to ALL your music on ALL your devices, as long as they can connect to the remote server.

-Fourth, this system would lend very well to video, once the bandwidth was there.

Unfortunately, for the world to see this plan in effect, we will need all-pervasive wireless connectivity and the technology to do it. There are many wireless providers, but only one company capable of providing the technology. So, in the meantime, we're stuck with ridiculous licensing schemes and the continuation of the MP3 era. Luckily, Microsoft may get the technology right just as the wireless networks emerge to support it.

[Brad Adrian]

Unfortunately, for the world to see this plan in effect, we will need all-pervasive wireless connectivity and the technology to do it...
You make some interesting points and describe a model that would work -- theoretically. Of course, pervasive wireless connectivity will never happen, because there's no way to insure a connection while doing things like driving in remote areas or hanging out in basements. Even if we're talking about ubiquitous WiFi, that's still 10 years away.

No, I still need the ability to actually copy the tunes to some form of portable device. Even though there are things I don't like about how audible.com works, they have a decent model for rights management for audio books that I'd personally use with music if it were available. You can download and store backup copies, but the files will only work on one "registered" device at a time. If you buy a new device, you kill the old registration and create a new one with the new device.