Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Music Media Businesses

Napster Launches UK Music Service 172

Posted by michael from the all-jethro-tull-all-the-time dept.
amichalo writes "Napster just went multi-continent with the surprise announcement of a Napster UK on-line music service. From the website, singles at 1.09 British pounds, albums start at 9.95 pounds. Availability for other European nations not available. Apple has previously announced they would be entering the European market by the end of the year with rumors of singles priced at 1.49 Euro."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Napster Launches UK Music Service More

Napster Launches UK Music Service

Comments Filter:

  • No iPod support (Score:5, Informative)

    by Phantom69 ( 758672 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:09AM (#9214623) Homepage
    Only secure WMA downloads available. Not the greatest idea IMHO bearing in mind the popularity of the iPod.

    • Re:No iPod support (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      The RIAA isn't going to allow music stores to sell non DRM protected songs, and Apple is going to give up their hold on AAC. So there isn't a heck of a lot Napster can do about it.

      • Re:No iPod support (Score:3, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Huh, Apple does not "hold" AAC.

        AAC is *not* an Apple format.

        AAC is *not* proprietary, contrary to WMA. It has designed and put out by the same people that brought you MP3, as a improved replacement for MP3, IIRC.

        The only thing Apple "holds" is the AAC+FairPlay combo, or, if you want, they seem to have some sort of exclusive license for FairPlay. I say "seem to have" because the exact origins of FairPlay seem to be nebulous (sp?).
        • Nebulous? They own FairPlay. There's no ambiguity there. The grandfather post was basically saying that Apple isn't going to give up their hold on the AAC+FairPlay combo.

          To clarify, the RIAA is not going to allow any store (whether it be iTunes or Napster) to release songs without have a form of DRM. Since the AAC format is basically off-limits*, the only other viable alternative is DRMed WMA files.

          Also, don't pretend like AAC is some free format. It is patent-encumbered just like MP3 before it. As far as

          • Re:No iPod support (Score:3, Insightful)

            by CountBrass ( 590228 )

            Well as it's the Record Industry Association of AMERICA who gives a flying fuck what they think in Europe? Not allofmp3.com for one, who sell music at 1 cent a megabyte with NO DRM.

      • Re:No iPod support (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:36AM (#9214928)
        You are 100% correct.

        I'm posting anonymously because I'd prefer Napster to _not_ know which school I'm from - they're currently in negotiations with us. I saw what happened to the last guy who spoke up on this topic, and I'd prefer to save us the hassle.

        Both Napster and Real/Rhapsody said the _same damn thing_ when we were talking to them: basically, that the RIAA was setting pretty much all the terms, and Apple/Real/Napster2 are just middlemen. If they could offer those songs at a cheaper price, _they would_. I don't trust any of them all that much, to be honest, but I really believe that they think the pricing and DRM schemes are bad, too.

        There's also a surprisingly large amount of oversight going on by the RIAA. When we were talking about volume pricing, both Real and Napster responded that they could offer us a better deal, but they'd _need to talk to the RIAA first_.

        Don't bitch at Apple, Napster2, and Real about the crappy prices and DRM. There's very little they can do about them. The RIAA is the bad actor here. You can get easy concrete proof of this because the academic contracts for Rhapsody and Napster2 both include the same terms about "stopping IP infringement on University networks".

        Since I posted as an AC, I understand a fairish number of you won't believe I'm telling the truth. That's fine, and I don't blame you. But for the rest of you: stop blaming Napster2 for being greedy with the prices and DRM. They're definitely not the ones responsible.

        It's another thing entirely to go say "this isn't a good value", though - I'm not sure it is.

      • Sigh... (Score:3, Insightful)

        by MartinG ( 52587 )
        They need to learn that we want to but non DRM protected files. If we can't buy them we will get them for free.

        Back to kazaa etc.... :-(

    • Re:No iPod support (Score:1, Flamebait)

      by Kenja ( 541830 )
      "Only secure WMA downloads available. Not the greatest idea IMHO bearing in mind the popularity of the iPod."

      Last I saw the iPod has around a 21% market. While its been some years since I took basic math, I think that 21% is less then 79%. So would you rather provide a service to 21% of the market (never mind that Apple wont let them even if they wanted to) or to 79%?

      • Except that if they used a DRM free format, they'd have 100% of the market. But then, the evil pirates might steal their songs!!!

        Oh wait, they do already, from the vastly more popular CD format.
      • Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Re:No iPod support (Score:2, Informative)

        by Phantom69 ( 758672 )
        While I appreciate your point, I must point out the following:

        1) The latest market share information is as follows:

        Jan 2003 iPod 27% market share
        Nov 2003 iPod 31% market share:
        http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news. c fm?NewsI D=7609

        May 2004 ? Unknown yet, but Apple have recently talked about the 800,000 iPods they've sold.

        But yes, 31% is still less than 69%. I don't know if all the other 69% are capable of playing DRM'd WMA's either, and if this market share is global or UK only.

        2) We are only talki

    • Re:No iPod support (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Amiga Lover ( 708890 )
      On the other hand, since ITMS doesn't support the EU, the popularity of the iPod may fall dramatically now.

      Looks like Apple just lost half their target in the EU

      • On the other hand, since ITMS doesn't support the EU, the popularity of the iPod may fall dramatically now.

        Actually, you know what? It's the RIAA (and their english equivalents) that's been holding this up. Apple have had it ready to go for some time now.

        I submitted an article (unfortunately rejected because I think the link contained a fair degree of foresight... it was posted on the Guardian Online I think) about this. Basically the recording industry are terrified that Apple is going to turn into anot

      • According to the macrumors.com article here [macrumors.com], iTMS Europe is coming mid-June for France "and other countries", here's hoping that includes the UK!
      • 10 pounds per album, no long-lasting storage facilities (read pressed CD), no covers, no booklets with the lirics and you can't event play it on your MP3 player!!???

        I don't expect this to take over the market any time soon.
    • I think factor that is missing from this is that by US standards, everything is more expensive in the UK. If you look at it from the point of view of buying power, $1~=1GBP. Of course, this is always related to the strength of the GBP over the USD with a rate which fluctuated between $1.75-$1.95 when I studied abroad this spring in London (only the world's 7th most expensive city [BBC.co.uk] mind you). The part some US readers might fail to understand is that workers in the UK are paid in GBP and I believe

  • not competitive (Score:5, Insightful)

    by davids-world.com ( 551216 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:09AM (#9214629) Homepage
    both prices seem inacceptable - given the current exchange rate, a song should not be more than about 0.85 euros, or 1 euro max (to round it up).

    The price difference is very evident in times when the American prices at iTMS are just one click away. Ripping off customers is the wrong signal for both stores, and for the music industry. Will they ever learn?
    • My local independent chain does new CDs of classics for 5 and new releases are 10 - 12. And I should pay this new napster 9.95 to download crippled electronic versions? I don't fucking think so!

      • I'm with you. There's no way in hell I would ever pay anything approaching the price of the physical, packaged medium for an electronic approximation of the contents.

    • Re:not competitive (Score:5, Insightful)

      by swright ( 202401 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:17AM (#9214715) Homepage
      According to MacRumors.com the iTMS Europe will have songs for 1.29 Euros - but that includes a 19.5% sales tax. The [fixed] amount to be given to artists is 0.80 euro.

      Yes, more expensive than iTMS USA, but the USA price doesnt include a sales tax - apparently in states where there is a sales tax that is added on top.

      More info here [macrumors.com]
      • A song in the US iTMS from Arizona is $1.08.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
        Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • Ok, according to a human translation of the original (french) article from the macrumors site, the 0.80 goes to "writers, performers, producers and labels"

          Ambiguous and second-hand info admittedly, but could be worse...
      • I wish people would stop saying Itunes gives $.xx to the artists. Or .yy Euro to the artists. Its just plain wrong.

        What you meant to say was that they plan on giving the respective record industries .80 Euro. As usual, the artists will get their couple eurocents [cdfreaks.com].

        I really don't know what the proper name for the euro cent is, my friends and I just called them eurocents, eurodimes, etc.

    • Re:not competitive (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Your use of the word inacceptable is unacceptable.

    • Re:not competitive (Score:5, Interesting)

      by ponxx ( 193567 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:40AM (#9214982)
      That's completely normal. For some reason everyone has decided to simply charge more in Europe...

      I've recently tried to buy a new camera from Amazon. Canon EOS 300D is priced at:
      Amazon US: $850 (adding 20% sales tax-> $1020)
      Amazon UK: UKP 780 ($1400)
      Amazon Germany: EUR 1000 ($1200)

      I thought these markets are meant to be competitive? Why is Amazon UK charging a mark-up of more than 40% on a digital camera???

      Similar things go for cars, clothing, CDs, DVDs, etc. What is needed with all this globalisation is a complete freedom to re-import things from anywhere in the world, that would see prices crashing down right, left and centre!

      • Re:not competitive (Score:5, Informative)

        by anonicon ( 215837 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:55AM (#9215197)
        I could be wrong, and since I'm posting on Slashdot, I probably am, but perhaps the reason why that Canon 300D is so much more in the UK or mainland Europe is because of government import taxes that are attached to it before it goes on sale.

        Every government charges differently, and since Amazon has to abide by their laws, the pre-sales tax cost will be different. Either that, or Amazon thinks UK shoppers are suckers. ;-)
        • I could be wrong, and since I'm posting on Slashdot, I probably am, but perhaps the reason why that Canon 300D is so much more in the UK or mainland Europe is because of government import taxes that are attached to it before it goes on sale.

          I live in Holland, and just checked the customs web-site [douane.nl] (in dutch)
          There is no import tax on digital cameras. There is however a 19% VAT tax.

          Note that this is applicable to the whole european free trade zone (the VAT might change from country to country).

          Also note th
        • It's expensive because it's a different model (300D in Europe, Digital Rebel in USA). Thus, Canon can charge different amounts for it in the different areas. And guess what? They do. You can't sell the Rebel in europe because the battery charger is wrong, and the warranty etc is invalid. So amazon.co.uk have to source UK product, which Canon have doubled the price on.

          There has always been a disparity between EU and US on pricing, but for some reason right now it is worse in cameras than pretty much anythin
      • Canon is known for this mark-up, and you're right: it's annoying too.

        The difference between a camera and a song is, though, that the transaction called "buying a camera" involves the transfer of a physical object (the packaged camera), while buying a song means to transfer information and a issuing a license to use it. No shipping -> location doesn't matter as much -> price difference much harder to explain to customer.
      • ...that's what I did. We *are* in a free market here (called the EU/EEA) with complete freedom to import things from anywhere within any of those 28 countries at least (25 EU + 3 EEA).

        Prices here in Ireland are even more extortionate than the UK, so I buy just about anything of any value from other EU/EEA countries (Germany, France, Norway, Spain). It's especially easy to compare prices now that much of the EU has the same currency.

        I used to buy stuff from the UK also, but sterling is very expensive at th
      • Last November I was shopping around for a camera and found the (by far) lowest price in Europe with Austrian web shops.
        about 2 months ago a Europe-wide consumer organisation found the same, for camera's you shop in Austria. (No, not the Skippy place you moron)
        It is indeed frustrating to see how prices are manipulated in Europe, it is clearly not (just) tax that makes the difference.

        But then in Europe just about every stand-alone DVD player is Region Free (tm) or can be made to be.
        And that's the way we l

  • No link? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Mz6 ( 741941 ) * on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:10AM (#9214634) Journal
    Seems the poster didn't want to include any links. For your reading pleasure..

    Napster beats iTunes to Europe with U.K. launch [com.com]

  • 1.49 Euro (Score:5, Funny)

    by DrXym ( 126579 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:10AM (#9214635)
    1.49 Euro = 1.79 USD per track


    How do they keep their prices so low and still make a profit?

  • Not that much cheaper.... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:10AM (#9214640)
    That's really not that much cheaper than a "real" single... and you only have to look at a site like to see that pricing for "real" albums is already less than 9.99! [cd-wow.com]
    • Everyone I've spoken to who buys from CD Wow these days says there are loads of problems getting a delivery from them - since they were banned from importing CDs from Asia (or wherever it was) and have to source them from within Europe now.

      Of course that might have improved, noone I know carried on trying with them...
      • I've bought 5 or so CDs since they were forced to source from Europe. 2 or 3 have had slight delays in shipping due to this, but I still tend to get them with 7 days of ordering.

        More annoying is the fact that many of the CDs are copy protected. Still my PowerBook seems to ignore all copy protection and rips them fine :)
    • I find that I can get CDs almost as cheaply and easily at Play.com [play.com], and they don't charge for postage. Something to do with the VAT laws for Jersey.
      HMV and Music Zone stores, at least here in the UK, are dropping their prices to be similarly competitive. For example, Nelly Furtado's new album is a hair under ten pounds in HMV, about a pound more expensive in Music Zone, and I bet it's a similar price in my three local (large-chain) supermarkets.

      I must admit, even though it can be quite convenient to shop

  • Bit bloody pricey eh? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by phaze3000 ( 204500 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:11AM (#9214642) Homepage
    1.09 for a single? When iTunes in the US is 99c (~ 0.56)?

    You're having a giraffe [cockneyrhy...lang.co.uk] ain'tcha?

    • Yes, and at 9.95 pounds for an album that is $17.8 us dollars. Is this because of the VAT?
      • No, VAT is 17.5% here, compared to the highest (AFAIK) US tax of 8.625% in NYC. There's certainly a far greater difference than that small percentage.

        We in the UK have always been ripped off on music (and most other stuff eg fuel at the equivalent of $1.43 per litre of unleaded).

        Still I choose to live here blah blah blah.

  • text for the hearing impaired? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:11AM (#9214648)
    one thing i'm disappointed about those offerings is the fact that the formats they use can't store the text for the songs, so that hearing impaired people could follow a song while it's being played (alongside the vibration, the bass).
    • Although on the face of it what you say sounds patently ridiculous, a guy I know who works in a dance club says they had a group of regular punters who were stone deaf, but came anyway to stand real close to the speakers and get their internal organs mashed in time to the thumping bass. They were loving it.
      I'm sure that the large quantities of Ecstacy helped too, mind.
  • That is way too much money. I would much rather pay a monthly fee for unlimited usage or just listen to live365 for free!
    • Unlimited usage would promote abuse, if you think about it. Some people would download 3 songs a month, others would take the opportunity to pay one fee for all the songs they can get, and then download just as they would on, say, Kazaa or WinMX, and then be able to claim legality.

  • pathetic browser support though (Score:4, Informative)

    by Gaima ( 174551 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:12AM (#9214659)
    I went along to the .com site last night, and was promptly redirected to the .co.uk as it has detected I was from the UK. Fair enough I guess.

    The free 11meg download intrigued me, so went to look. Didn't get far mind.
    At the bottom of the front page it does say:

    System Requirements
    PC only, Windows XP/2000, Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.1 or higher, Windows Media Player 7.1 or higher, Internet connectivity

    The page I was sent to, as a Konq user, was even worse:

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

    They wouldn't have had my custom anyway, but even if they would have had, after that, no chance.
    Get with it Napster

    • Re:pathetic browser support though (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward
      "Get with it Napster"

      Yea because Napster really stands out as odd from the rest of the online music industry and the big players like Itunes who fully support users running Konq on alternative OS's...

      Did you serious think they would support something other than Windows and WMP? Seriously, why are you surprised in the least?

  • Wow... (Score:1, Redundant)

    by JustNiz ( 692889 )
    Thats almost as much as buying the CD (even in the UK).
    Its more than the cost of the CD in many countries, like the US.

  • Hardly European (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    saying that Napster UK is Napster breaking into the European market is like saying that the USA and Europe went to war together in Iraq...
    we've been waiting for iTunes here in Ireland for the last 6 months or so and we're not holding our breath...

  • 10 quid? Fuck off (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Enlarge Your Penis ( 781779 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:15AM (#9214695)
    I can get it on a CD with no DRM for that. Hell, if I take advantage of the current exchange rate I can probably get it for half
  • about how the major European labels are really putting the squeeze on Apple because they a) fear that they are going to become the dominant online music vendor b) don't want to create another MTV like entity, where the labels provide the content but don't have explicit control over it once it is turned over c) are greedy and stupid and d) don't seem to mind that the online market in Europe is already crowded.
    • How is the online music in Europe already crowded? I'm dying to buy music online (show of support, cant be arsed to go to the shops, etc...) and I can't find anywhere...

      Ok as of now there's Napster, but thats no use on a Mac or with an iPod. MyCokeMusic.com is apparently around but I'm buggered if I can get the site to work (yes, even on IE6 on WinXP)

      Where do you buy from?

  • 10GBP for an album? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by perly-king-69 ( 580000 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:19AM (#9214730)
    So, do I download and burn 14 WMP files for 10GBP, or go to CDWOW [cd-wow.com] or play.com and buy it for 8GBP?

  • Likely cost breakdown (Score:5, Interesting)

    by JosKarith ( 757063 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:20AM (#9214745)
    "1.09 British pounds" Lemme guess -
    0.20 Tax
    0.01 Payment to the artist
    0.78 Music industry profits

    and now with added -
    0.10 DRM administration

    And you don't even have a physical object, so if your HDD fries you have to buy it all over again...

    My housemate downloads large amounts of music - as he puts it - "I paid for it once on vinyl, once on tape, once on CD. After my CD's were stolen did they really think I was gonna buy them all over again?"
    • My housemate downloads large amounts of music - as he puts it - "I paid for it once on vinyl, once on tape, once on CD. After my CD's were stolen did they really think I was gonna buy them all over again?"

      Right on! When my laptop was stolen, there was no way I was going to pay for another one, so I stole one. I mean, I already paid for it once, right?
    • 0.01 Payment to the artist

      When will people finally realize that it is not the distribution services that pay the artists? It's the labels that pay the artists. For example, we pay a flat wholesale per track to our label partners and then they pay the artists. It's (usually) the labels that own the digital distribution rights, so it's the labels that get the cash.

  • Ridiculous prices (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Nadir ( 805 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:22AM (#9214777) Homepage
    The Apple iTunes price of 1.49 for a single is ludicrous. Especially considering that the Euro is at $1.19 now.
    Haven't they considered that average European salary is less than in the US ?

    Bah

    Tristan

  • An album is not 1 pound! (Score:3, Funny)

    by L. VeGas ( 580015 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:24AM (#9214800) Homepage Journal
    This article is just full of errors. I have lots of albums, and NONE of them weigh more than a pound.
  • Branding is one of the greatest scams ever perpetrated on people, but as long as they fall for it, it'll keep going. It might be a good service, or it might not, I haven't tried it to know, but I'd like to think that I'm smart enough to know that using the Napster trademark does not make you the successor of the Napster of old. If I ever use this service, it's because it's good and has a good selection and reasonable prices, not because of the Napster name.
  • Really, ignoring the fact that it only has DRM, and only has WMA files...

    The thing about Napster was it had a lot of music. Anything anyone felt like sharing. This new service doesn't. It just has what the corporate puppets decide that we should want. It's not the same service. I wish they'd stop pretending.

    Hmm... can they get into trouble with theEU for being UK only?
  • "Yes, we have multiple resuilts for 'zerfnarkle'"

    Oddly enough "Beatles" didn't return "The Beatles" amongst the list of matches.
  • 9.95 is a lot for an album. You can pick a real one (jewel case and everything) up for 8.99 GBP from CD-Wow [cd-wow.com].

    I'd prefer to convert music into my desired format, so I will continue to purchase physical media.

    • I use play.com for my cheap CD's. I've spent a *lot* of money buying my CD's, DVD's and games from that place over the years.. Between those two sites, you don't have to pay 'retail' price ever again!

  • Rip off Britain......again (Score:3, Insightful)

    by DFJA ( 680282 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:33AM (#9214903)

    GBP1.09 is expensive compared with US prices - iTunes at 99c (about GBP0.55, or half this price). This is yet another example of where us British have to pay substantially more for the same product than our American (and often European) counterparts. PCs and components have often been the same number of pounds here as dollars there. It's just not fair.

    Come on, we're fed up of being ripped off by international big businesses. DVDs are another example - and of course region encoding is designed to stop us from importing more cheaply from the US.

    All you British reading this, I urge you to boycott products at these prices - and write to the company concerned explaining your actions and why.

    At least car prices have started to become a bit more reasonable recently, but only compared to the rest of Europe. I believe they are still a lot cheaper in the US.

    DFJA
    • In part british Xenophobia is to blame for this i'm afraid, and in particular the resistance to adopting the Euro. Even the most stupid SUN reader would realise they're being ripped off if they saw the prices in EURO both in the UK and on the beach in Spain.

      As long as they still have to divide prices by 1.5 or something like that most people simply don't realise how much they're being taken advantage of!

      There's plenty of products I simply refuse to buy in the UK. These include virtually any electronics, m
      • Probably very true. So what incentive does the Sun have _not_ to start a campaign against high prices? I would have thought it would muster plenty of popular support and sell lots of copies. .

        People are becoming more aware in certain sectors - cars and alcohol being good examples. However it's still not universal by a long way. I bought a 120GB hard drive in the US recently - for USD130. The same model cost GBP129.99 here - that's USD232! Tax accounts for maybe 25% of the difference in prices, no more.

        Whe
        • What incentive? Hmm... you think their advertisers might be a bit annoyed if they start telling people not to buy things from them?
        • I bought a 120GB hard drive in the US recently - for USD130. The same model cost GBP129.99 here - that's USD232!

          I hope it wasn't that recent (either that or it was a pretty special hard drive). 120GB drives can be easily bought for 60 in the UK - I've bought two in the last 3 months.

          As far as the "Rip off Britain" topic - yep, this country is a rip-off. But it's really not very hard to shop around for good deals. And Napster: at 1.09 per track, DRM, no AAC, no MP3, no OGG - no thank you.

  • I gathered that... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mdemeny ( 35326 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:34AM (#9214908) Homepage
    When I saw a spray-painted logo of Napster.co.uk on the sidewalk outside my office this morning.

    Is it just me, or is this an especially despicable form of advertising? Marketers must love it... not having to pay for ad space, while at the same time making it more noticeable because the one place we can expect not to see ads is under our feet...lovely.
    • Or on the bases in a baseball game. *cough*

    • Re:I gathered that... (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Mr_Dyqik ( 156524 )
      So spray paint a big red circle with a line through it on top...
    • Are you sure it is spray paint, and not something temporary like chalk?
      I remember some company trying that form of advertising around Belfast (with chalk), and they got taken to court and fined, but that's because they didn't ask for permission first.
      • Heh, I always thought of taking the opposite approach (not for advertising; for stealth stencil art):

        Get a portable water power washer** and a durable stencil (plastic or metal). Place the stencil on the pavement and stand on the edge of it to keep it in place. Spray over the stencil with the power washer.

        Surely you can't be prosecuted for making the streets *cleaner*? :)

        ** If such a thing exists? Would probably require a normal one in the back of a van with a drum of water
    • Not to poke fun, but anyone who bought a shirt with that logo on, back in the day, must people a complete tw*t now!
    • When I saw a spray-painted logo of Napster.co.uk on the sidewalk outside my office this morning.

      Take a photo, and send it to them with your latest council tax bill attached. Why should the public have to put up with our spaces being polluted like this?

  • How do these prices help? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by SuperMo0 ( 730560 ) <supermo0@gmail. c o m> on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:37AM (#9214945)
    If people go and see that Napster UK and Napster Europe are offering terrible prices, what incentive are they going to have to buy online? It will encourage either (a) people buying more real albums or (b) people downloading more music illegally. (A) will be a boon for the recording industry, (B) will be a bane for it, both of them will suck for Napster.
  • This was reported in the main daily nationals here (in the UK) yesterday... and yes it is too bloody expensive :)

  • The advertising campaign (Score:4, Interesting)

    by pumaman_fly! ( 781799 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @10:45AM (#9215030) Homepage

    That explains all the chalk grafitti that popped up everywhere in Edinburgh today.

    Pic here:here [donbrae.co.uk]

  • it's 10 a month to stream all the music you can eat.

    I don't tend to listen to music on the move and my computer is plugged into my TV's speaker system, so that means I can have every album they sell for 10 a month, which actually sounds worthwhile to me.

    They are lacking some obvious bands though. Why no U2?

  • Incompatible OS (Score:2, Funny)

    by Cooke ( 708777 )
    "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. "

    Dont think ill be using it any time soon :(

  • When will these companies realise that the only reason Napster et al. were popular was because of the ease of access to a free catalogue of music ?

    Who cares about a digital delivery system if you can buy a CD (and something tangible) for less ?

    The majority of people will not care that it is 'easier', 'faster' [insert marketing crap here] etc... they'd rather buy cheap and spend the money saved on a few more beers after work - I know I would.

  • What's to stop me... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by TintinX ( 569362 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @11:10AM (#9215410) Homepage

    As one option is to pay Napster GBP9.99 for a month's worth of unlimited streams, what's to stop me from ripping them with a system sound recorder and making my own MP3s, Oggs etc.?

    I reckon of Napster's library of 500,000 tracks, I could probably find everything I like (and don't already have) and record it in this way in a month. That's gotta be worth a tenner of anyone's money ;)

    • Re:What's to stop me... (Score:4, Informative)

      by GothChip ( 123005 ) on Friday May 21, 2004 @11:53AM (#9216038) Homepage
      "As one option is to pay Napster GBP9.99 for a month's worth of unlimited streams, what's to stop me from ripping them with a system sound recorder and making my own MP3s, Oggs etc.?"

      That's what I thought until I tried their free "search engine" on the front page. It only gives an overview of the results recommendations, most of which are completely irrelevent to the search performed.

      eg. A search for the band Seize [seize.org.uk] returned the following. Yes, we have multiple results for Seize on Napster.
      Members who like this artist also like: Beenie Man, Bounty Killer, Sizzla, Shabba Ranks, Capleton, Sly & Robbie, UB40, Monica, O-Town, Backstreet Boys

      Not at all similar to a cutting edge electronica breakbeat act.

      Searching for small and exciting acts that have limited availability was part of what made the original Napster so popular. Without a decent and varied catalogue you might as well carry on shopping for cds on-line.

  • It's expensive, but... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Spad ( 470073 ) <slashdot.spad@co@uk> on Friday May 21, 2004 @11:26AM (#9215643) Homepage
    They might do OK on the singles. They may be a rip-off relative to the US prices, but they're still a hell of a lot cheaper than buying singles in the shops. Last time I looked it was 3.99+ for a CD single containing 1 track and a couple of shitty remixed.

    With Play.com selling albums for 9.99, 8.99 and even 5.99, however, I can't see many people paying up for Napster.

  • Idiot Countries (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Puls4r ( 724907 )
    WHY do companies continue to put up these artificial barriers? Why not simply call it a US company and have Napster US sell worldwide? Are the laws that screwed up? Isn't that the point of the internet?

  • From the site: "PC only, Windows XP/2000, Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.1 or higher, Windows Media Player 7.1 or higher, Internet connectivity"

    So I guess as a Mac user who wouldn't touch IE with a bargepole I'll stick with www.allofmp3.com where I can download music, in ANY format and bit rate of my choosing for a 1cent a megabyte (that's about 60cents an album!). And no DRM.

    So fuck you Napster.

  • Walking out of Birmingham, New Street station today I noticed a Napster logo and their tag line sprayed on a pillar. I assumed it was deliberate vandalism and paid for by them.

    This story confirms that. Let's hope they fined and charged to clean up the mess they've made: I doubt the one I saw was the only one.

  • I've downloaded Napster and I'm currently a couple of hours into my free seven-day trial.

    My first thoughts about the service are:

    -For 9.95 a month it gives me all the music I can listen to on my PC without having to pay for each individual song/album separately
    -If I want a specific album, or compliation, to listen to away from my PC then I can purchase this as a one-off which I then own a license for

    Let's have a look at the distinction between these two pricing models:

    Allowing me unlimited access to musi

  • "Apple has previously announced they would be entering the European market by the end of the year with rumors of singles priced at 1.49 Euro."

    I thought they had to watch that because of the record company, apple.

  • Huh? (Score:2)

    by MacWiz ( 665750 )
    So... what was the "surprise" supposed to be? Who was surprised? By what? Isn't this exactly what they said they wanted to do??

Slashdot Top Deals

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Close