Online Music Stores Compared 594
prostoalex writes "DesignTechnica has a comparison of the leading online music stores. With the variety of services available they only concentrated on several top ones. Conclusion? 'If you simply want to download music from the charts, then Yahoo and Wal-Mart are your cheapest options. For your MP3 player, there are several options, with Yahoo the best of all. If you're an iPod owner... then you're stuck with iTunes.'"
Stuck, huh? (Score:5, Insightful)
Poor, poor us.
Wow even posters do not RTFA (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course I still believe in the ripping CDs myself method. If I want music I still want my little piece of plastic, especially since entire albums still cost about the same.
iTunes (Score:2, Insightful)
iTunes is free so that doesn't really bother me much. I can just download my music and start playing it on my computer. I don't own an MP3 player, but if I were going to buy one it would be an iPod. That's not because I'd have to buy an iPod to play my music, it's because I think the iPod is the best MP3 (I know not technical MP3) player out there. Just my opinion.
"Stuck" with iTunes? (Score:5, Insightful)
WIPO: I don't download music (Score:1, Insightful)
No way am I paying $1.00 per song to Apple then having to re-buy everything after my hard drive dies and I lose the songs I downloaded.
Re:Stuck, huh? (Score:2, Insightful)
Looks like another format war (Score:2, Insightful)
Don't ypou love vendor lock-in.
Re:Stuck, huh? (Score:2, Insightful)
2 strikes in the conclusions alone (Score:5, Insightful)
Because we all know that the iPod isn't a mp3player, don't we?
The iTunes (program) - iTunes Music Store (the store) confusion should be a clue to the cluelessness the review has.
Re:Stuck, huh? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:"Stuck" with iTunes? (Score:5, Insightful)
Those iPod owners are "stuck" with iTunes? The iPod has only 90% of the MP3 player market. And iTunes is the market leader for music downloads and it has the largest catalog. In fact, Apple reported to its investors that ITMS has the second most signed-up accounts (10 million), behind Amazon. In other words, Apple has built the only successful music "ecosystem" in the industry with iPod+iTunes+ITMS. So "stuck" seems to be an odd choice of words.
The "lowdown" is also misleading. Under iTunes, they put $0.99/song, but not $9.99 for most albums. But for some reason, they put the album purchase information under Napster.
Not a very useful article.
Re:Oh come on my friend (Score:2, Insightful)
(It's just DATA, folks. Back it up.)
Re:Oh come on my friend (Score:3, Insightful)
More accurate to say (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:WIPO: I don't download music (Score:3, Insightful)
Back up your data. If you're not smart enough to know that, you're not really qualified to have a conversation on this subject. In fact, you're not really qualified to discuss anything related to technology.
Out of curiousity, when you buy direct from an artist as opposed to buying a CD, what format do you get it in? Do they come play it in your living room? And what do you do to ensure a fire or theft doesn't remove your access to the CDs?
Write-up is incorrect (Score:3, Insightful)
They are all MP3 players. Some also play AAC or protected AAC. Some also play WMA or protected WMA.
They also all play WAV, most play AIFF. Note these formats span the entire player industry - there is no 'lock out' other than what the labels create for themselves.
It is not a given that this idea (selling unprotected music) is totally outlandish.
Keep this in mind next time you see the labels gnashing and wailing about vendor lock-in.
online music == low quality ripoff (Score:3, Insightful)
But none of the legal online music shops sell their tracks in a lossless format!
As long as they don't do that I don't see buying tracks online as an option.
Re:WIPO: I don't download music (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Most of us don't have money for a RAID (Score:2, Insightful)
I mean there are lots of fancy ways to back up the music, but I just bought a drive, plugged in the USB cable, and dragged the icon of the music folder to the icon of the drive. How hard is that?
Re:FYI I'm not a troll buddy (Score:3, Insightful)
Might want to investigate menu options more closely and avoid condescending tones next time (the latter is one of the only reasons I bothered posting). Some of us read
telling truth to zealots. (Score:2, Insightful)
Thank you for telling us about this gaping flaw.
The iTunes appologists who lecture you about backing up your data are hilarious. iTunes doesn't implement a reasonable, I would say vital feature in their product, which you paid money for, and they have the gall to act like you are the one who screwed up.
I have always thought that Apple appologists have their heads up their asses and these guys have proven it beyond a reasonable doubt. Hey geniuses, why do you think there are a dozen 3rd party applications for loading mp3s on to an iPod?
Re:I work 14 hour days most of the time (Score:5, Insightful)
So, you don't have the time to back up your data, but you DO have the time to read Slashdot? Uh, I think you have your priorities mixed up.
Since the data in question resides on your hard-drive, then the existence of that data relies on you. You can't assume that some magic elves come to your computer and back up YOUR data while you sleep. If you don't back up your data, and your HD dies, it's YOUR problem.
Sure there is. It costs money. And everyone would start claiming that "uh, my dog ate my HD, can I re-download the songs?". The key to safekeep your data is in YOUR hands. If you choose not to take the necessary precautions, it's your decision, and your problem.
Seriously, what is this "I want others to take responsibility of my data, and back it up for me, because I'm too lazy to do it myself!"-mentality?
Re:Oh come on my friend (Score:1, Insightful)
I thought, well, I'll just go back to Best Buy again, show them my receipts, and they'll replace my $1,500.00 worth of CDs I bought from them.
Well, I was wrong, and haven't "bought" a CD since.
Yeah, that sounds just as stupid was what you said.
Re:Stuck, huh? (Score:4, Insightful)
As for iTunes DRM...I simply burn it all to a music cd for archiving purposes. I can't say I've ever run into Fairplay's limitations, which are pretty damn liberal.
iTunes library is a well-organized directory (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:...And of course it's not even *true*. (Score:3, Insightful)
It's locked in to iTMS as far as DRMed music stores go. eMusic is great, and the way forward, but a lot of major labels just won't contribute material to non-DRMed stores. The article is talking about popular, chart music. In this respect, you are locked in to iTMS, because you are locked into Apple's proprietary DRM technology.
Of course, personally I'd prefer if there was no DRM at all, but if you want to deal with companies who will not release their content without DRM, you're locked into iTMS (unless you particularly feel like transcoding DRMed Windows Media content).
This is the lock-in issue. It's a valid issue. DRM in general is a bigger issue, but in this case its presence, and the unwillingness of major labels to release content without it, absolutely locks one who wishes to get their content to iTMS.
Re:Stuck, huh? (Score:3, Insightful)
Give me the power to resell the stuff I bought and I will reconsider. In this case I want to sell the licence.
If not, it's just a glorified renting system.
Stuck with an easily unlockable format... (Score:3, Insightful)
Right answer: Since you're going to strip the DRM off any music you keep anyway, isn't it nice that iTunes makes that so easy and convenient?
DRM is evil. If you aren't burning the music you buy to audio CDs you're just asking for the fuckup fairy to turn your music collection into digital hash. And once you do that it doesn't matter what format it was originally... it'll play for sure on any player.
(yeh, there's a miniscule loss in fidelity that I've yet to be able to detect... if yuo cared about that you wouldn't be buying lossy-compressed music in the first place)
Re:LOL (Score:5, Insightful)
IANAL, but what I've been able to drudge up from lawyers about this is, there is no clear legal answer for US citizens as to whether downloading from AllOfMP3 is legal. It could be argued, for example, that the purchase takes place in Russia, and therefore it is a legal sale by Russian law, and that the downloading constitutes a private individual importing a good purchased overseas. There are laws about what goods can be imported and how, but nothing barring purchased data being transferred over the internet.
Therefore, (according to this interpretation) if it is legal to buy in Russia, legal to import, and legal to own in America, the purchase is legal.
It's all about the DLOW (Score:2, Insightful)
---
You can use any kind of HTML formatting that Slashdot accepts.
Generated by SlashdotRndSig [snop.com] via GreaseMonkey [mozdev.org]
Re:Wow even posters do not RTFA (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple's lawyers are attempting to stop this, which seems anti-competitive to me, but I suppose the DMCA isn't really designed to aid competition, innovation, or the rights of anyone but big business, so they might well be successful. So it's a risky option, in theory.
Re:Wow even posters do not RTFA (Score:5, Insightful)
iTunes is a db frontend. With that, you get all the niceities of a database with a friendly GUI wrapper. It's so beyond a structured file directory that it's like comparing a database driven application to one that stores data in discrete text files.
Re:Stuck, huh? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Stuck, huh? (Score:3, Insightful)
I wouldn't say that Yahoo is a replacement for buying music -- you'll probably still buy the things you really like to listen to in the car or to have a permanent copy -- but it makes finding new things that you like very, very easy. The other nice thing is that you can listen to a huge library of music at work or wherever you are without having to transport your MP3 library.
Once you've tried it, $5 a month seems like a real bargain.
Re:Oh come on my friend (Score:3, Insightful)
Why? That's not the case with the majority of software sold. Lose that, and you have to buy another copy. I think people need some education if they believe in such fantasies. But I'd say most people do know that they aren't entitled to another copy. Only the wilfully ignorant or over-expectant would think like this. Do you have any evidence to suggest most people expect replacements of products they lose or damage? You break it, you get a new one, is the conventional logic.
Re:...And of course it's not even *true*. (Score:5, Insightful)
I appreciate the point your trying to make, and it's not entirely invalid (and I'm not just trying to be perverse
It's correct to say that it does not support other vendors proprietary DRM technology - any more than they support the iTMS - it's still true to say that it plays music from other vendors though, it just depends on how the other vendors encode their music (which really, is up to them and the record companies).
Given this and overwhelming dominance of the iTMS in online music sales, it seems absurd for the author to claim the iPods are 'locked in' and assert the other players are 'open', when the other players are just as locked, but to different systems (and a smaller share of the market to boot).
This is not an attempt at a fanboy post defending the iTMS - I'd prefer non DRM'd music too (even though the iTMS lets you burn unencumbered to audio CD, which is at least something - I just think the assertion made in the article is false and that its the music stores and their proprietary non-interoperable formats that are the problem, not the players, which by and large handle common formats (would be nice to see more Ogg Vorbis support though).
Re:Stuck, huh? (Score:5, Insightful)
"I'm constantly surprised how many people DON'T know about allofmp3.com."
I don't expect you to believe this or even understand this, but there are lots and lots of people who know about allofmp3.com, but have absolutely no interest in using it. Not all geeks share the same moral compass.
Classify people into "cool" or "uncool" based on their use of allofmp3.com if you like. There are simply people out there who see the world differently.
"For me, it is simply the only legal option."
I guarantee you it's not.
Re:Stuck, huh? (Score:2, Insightful)
It is ILLEGAL to use allofmp3.com from the United States, it is probably illegal from most other countries as well. As it is it's only specifically LEGAL in Russia, they just have a loop hole that allows them to put the burden of illegally using their site on the customer.
Really? How so?
The artist will NEVER see ANY of the MONEY you give them.
And that's different than giving money directly to the RIAA because...?
Re:Emusic and allofmp3 (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Stuck, huh? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I work 14 hour days most of the time (Score:3, Insightful)
The cost really isn't that high, and I'm sure most people would happily pay a couple bucks a gig to redownload their purchases if need be.
What I think would be a logical and equitable solution would be to allow people to redownload their tracks, any and all tracks, only once a year. That way, if you lose your HD, the first time you'll have not done it yet, so you're good and Apple will let you do it. It will also come with a warning that you won't be able to do it again for a year. That way, if you lose all your music again in less than a year (how often does that really happen?) you'll at least know all is not lost, and that you'll just have to wait.
From the point of view of the RIAA and the labels, they really want to have you buy the same song as many times as possible, so they aren't going to help you. But from the point of view of copyright infringement, I don't see how it's a legitimate concern. You can already copy the songs you downloaded and send them to anyone you want. They are locked with DRM, so it really makes no difference, does it?
Seriously, what is this "I want others to take responsibility of my data, and back it up for me, because I'm too lazy to do it myself!"-mentality?
What's with the "Screw you, you idiot. When bad luck befalls you, don't look at me for help!" mentality? This isn't an unreasonable request.
Why, exactly, shouldn't a person request quality service? I really just don't get it. It's like when the airliner crash-landed recently and people were upset that the CNN feed was cut/went out during landing so they couldn't watch it live. A lot of people responded to complaints with, "Hey, it's not your airline, they can do whatever they want. You don't like it, fly someone else!" Aside from the fact that you don't know ahead of time all the little details you might want for all sort of contigencies, nor do you really have any way to verify that you'll get them, I don't see how it's wrong, at all for the customer to request such service. How it's wrong to be upset or displeased when the service doesn't match their wishes.
In fact, it seems the opposite of wrong. It seems like exactly what the customer should do. They should demand better service. They should request features they don't currently have.
iTunes is an excellent store which provides a great service. Still, it can be better, and this is exactly one of the many ways it could be improved.
Re:Stuck, huh? (Score:3, Insightful)
As it stands, the legality is questionable ( there is no official ruling ), which is probably a safe bet it is not legal, but I doubt anyone's going to come banging on your door, especially since the IP records are stored in Russia
But again, aside from the legality, the artist isn't getting a penny gauranteed, and your financing a foreign company to rip off an artist you like. Just pirate the song otherwise and save your money. Arguements concerning the RIAA are in other various threads.
Who cares? (Score:3, Insightful)
This is one of the more worthless articles to appear on
Try again when someone writes a real review of online music stores.
Sean