Napster Tries Again

intheory writes "As it states on the site, The Cat is Almost Back. Napster, following a singificant delay, beleagured by legal and ethical rhetoric, reappears as a pay-to-play service. With some similarities to Apple's iTunes, will Napster regain its place as the premiere music distribution service? Additionally, the man behind the magic, Shawn Fanning, receives a thoughtful write up." I'm pretty wary of the new Napster, as the only thing it seems to share with its predecessor is the name.

Napster incompatible OS

[inertia187]

Here's what I got whilest using my TiBook:

We're sorry, Napster is not currently compatible with your operating system.

Napster is currently compatible with Windows XP/2000. Windows 95, Windows NT and the Mac OS are not supported at this time.

If you are planning on using Napster on this computer, the service will not be compatible and you should discontinue registration. If you will use Napster on a different computer, with a compatible operating system, please continue.

What and odd thing to say. They also don't even mention Windows 98, which in all the stats pages I've seen, is currently between XP and 2000 in popularity. Well, good luck to them.

Their website is a joke

[gpinzone]

They have zero information on what kinds of files will be available and what quality they will be. I suppose the 5 tracks for free will discourage most people from continuing the service. Only thing that would worry me is that they already have your credit card number.

Re:You have iTunes Music Store beta

[Schnapple]

Microsoft's Windows 9x operating systems aren't that great for much other than running legacy DOS apps.

Yeah but it is supporting Windows 95. I think the original poster found it odd that 98/ME was excluded, seemingly specifically. How 95 could be better is anyone's guess.

Strange...

[Enucite]

That's exactly what I was expecting when I signed up (Linux/Firebird)... but everything went through just fine.

As far as the service... Well, I'll probably end up getting the 5 free tracks on a friend's box (since I don't have Windows) and then never using it again--barring the release of a Linux client. *laughs*

I figured it's worth a try just to find out how it works and what restrictions they have, then if the topic ever comes up I can speak from experience.

Re:The REAL Napster

[updog]

Yes, now I wonder if Napster paid for product placement in the movie Italian Job?

It did seem like a commercial for Napster while watching the movie, but we said "Naaah, Napster isn't around anymore."

So, did Napster pay to be in this movie (knowing they were coming back), along with Mini, Dell, Pepsi, etc etc?

Re:Won't work

[Fancia]

Not necessarily. In places like Taiwan, piracy used to be so rampant that it was hard to buy legit CDs. Now, however, companies have started putting out CDs which, while not as cheap as the pirated versions, are of a reasonable price; and this is causing piracy to lower significantly.

Re:It's not Napster.

[MikeMo]

iTunes did not die out. It is exceeding all expectations. They recently announced 10 million downloads in 4 months http://pub143.ezboard.com/fthemagazinenfafrm11.sho wMessage?topicID=809.topic. That's extraordinary, any way you measure it. Sure, it's less than the *really* incredible rates they started with, but it is still far in excess of all the other sites combined.

Will Metallica support this Napster?

[overbyj]

After reading this story, I thought I would go check out BuyMusic.com and see if anything has changed. Low and behold on the front page is a banner advertising the Metallica album. Funny that they were one of the most vocal bands against P2P and Napster in particular.

I find it quite ironic that they are now giving in and have St. Anger available on BuyMusic.com (nevermind that the album completely blows but that discussion is for another day). I wonder if they will be on the Napster? Since both sites use the draconian DRM so well implemented in WMA, this should make them happy. Now that can sell a few copies of songs off that crappy album and increase their profits from $10 gazillion to $10 gazillion plus a few bucks.

Read the Terms and Conditions before you sign up!

[CaptRespect]

If you are thinking of signing up make sure you read the terms and conditions first. It limits what you can do with the songs quite a bit. Some highlights are:

--You may burn each Purchased Track to a CD up to five times as part of any particular playlist of songs. A "playlist" is a discrete group of Purchased Tracks that are arranged together in a particular order. Once you have burned a Purchased Track to a CD, you agree not to copy, distribute, or transfer the track from that CD to any other media or device. --

and
---If you are using the version of the Service that is accessible from Microsoft Corporation's Windows Media Player 9 Series, you will only be able to burn or transfer Purchased Tracks using the Windows Media Player. In addition, if you are using the version of the Service that runs in Microsoft Corporation's Windows XP Media Center Edition 2004, certain features that are available in the Service will not be available in the "distance viewing" experience. --

also --You may copy each Download to up to two additional personal computers that you own (i.e. a total of 3 copies). You may not share Downloads with anyone else. Napster automatically renews your rights to all of your Downloads at the beginning of each Subscription Month (as defined below) so long as your subscription remains current. This means that in order to play any Download after the end of a Subscription Month, you must log on to the Service so that Napster can renew your rights for those Tracks. The Client will count the number of times that you play a Download, including while you are offline, for royalty accounting and analysis purposes. --

I guess that's what all that Digial Right's Management stuff is in WiMP 9.

Anyone know what "distance viewing" is?

Shawn Fanning

[nate nice]

Shawn Fanning is an idiot. This is not a troll. He releases a PTP system that is so inherently unthought out and stupidly illegal and try to make a go of it. He wrote a program in VB that was what it was because he couldn't implement anything more complex. Sure, some of the beauty of Napster was its simplicity. But this is also the reason we are in a jam with PTP systems like we are today. Without Napster we would not have the RIAA court cases. We would have Gnutella systems, Bit Torrent etc free from lawyers and everyone would be happy.

Napster was a lowest common denominator PTP system. It stole MP3's. Many people thought of simple systems like this that the masses could use but most knew better than to damage PTP credibility before this. Writing a Napster program in VB would take a few days at best. Not that his idea wasn't what counts, it is and simple is usually better. But in his case there was no way around it. Napster was made to steal music. At least with Hotline and similar technologies you could say it had other purposes and in some cases make other purposes for it.

Napster has caused so many problems with legit PTP systems. My problem with it was it was so flagrant. It was a dumb mans PTP system and it brought attention to other areas that otherwise didn't want it.

Now, I probably sound like I am hating on Napster because now it's harder for me to steal things. Well, it's not harder for to steal things so you can rule that out. But, I know systems are being monitored closely now and the general public knows what a PTP system is, well sort of. I download some music I don't own. I use free software so I don't need to pirate that. But now I can get a huge fine if I D/L a song from the wrong person. I blame Napster for this. Not for me D/Ling things, but for being so stupid, flagrant and blatantly illegal about it they fucked it up for everyone.

Choose a flavor.

[methangel]

I don't understand what all of this hullaballoo about "legal" music vending methods is.

I mean, it is nice that we can now download music at the behest of our checking (or credit card) accounts. On the other hand, the majority of consumers are still in the mindset of "try before you buy." For ten bucks an album, I want some damn liner notes. Do any of these services provide them online? I don't think they do.

I strongly feel that 10.00 for a bunch of digital bytes, and without any liner notes is an astrociously high price. The company's only real expense for the distribution is the bandwidth. They should adjust the prices accordingly. Now, I do understand that the labels get a cut of the proceeds, I really think they need to revise how big of a cut they get for something that is not physical...especially if they want to be on top of the game.

Again, I know I am kind of ranting here, but I think that all of these music-service startups is like a bad dream. It reminds me of the "DotCom" bubble in the sense that only the services that provide THE BEST experience will survive. Read: Apple.

Napster's old reputation precedes its new offering. So, with that kind of stigma, most people that want to legally get music probably won't want to be associated with a name that has had a bad reputation in the past.

Re:okay, so what's new?

[l33t mn!ml]

I recommend you peruse the taped-live launch broadcast. Napster 2.0 will really have some amazing features. For the cost of one CD ($9.95) you will have access to all 500,000 of their songs for a month. As far as I can tell, you can do whatever you want with them, although at the end of the month the files need to have their license updated by logging on to the network. Furthermore, songs are organized in such a manner that whatever you download, you can get recommendations from the editors, other users, etc. and you can also be more proactive and see what other people have downloaded who have your taste. You can also search for songs by their Billboard ratings each season of each year going back decades. What's more, you *only* pay for each song, each album, or the ability to listen to any song on their server. I think the premium membership is the best deal by far since in essence you are purchasing the license to every song in their catalog. I couldn't imagine the time and money it would take to acquire this many songs illegally! And to have them all be labelled correctly and consistently. The way I see it, they are trying to go the amazon.com way and create the ultimate music mecca, and let users gradually migrate to them until they own the digital music empire.