If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Earth Times)   Apple's iTunes becomes number two music retailer in the U.S., just behind Wal-Mart. Suck it, haters   (earthtimes.org) divider line 118
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

849 clicks; posted to Geek » on 26 Feb 2008 at 12:40 PM (6 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



118 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2008-02-26 12:41:33 PM
I wonder what RIAA thinks about iTunes?
 
2008-02-26 12:48:44 PM
Weaver95: I wonder what RIAA thinks about iTunes?

Pretty sure they get their cut off of iTunes but I doubt they are that happy with it's business model since they can't reap their huge cuts from over priced full albums from crappy artists pushed out solely to make them money.
 
2008-02-26 12:53:20 PM
country music fans
 
2008-02-26 12:57:58 PM
entropic_existence: Weaver95: I wonder what RIAA thinks about iTunes?

Pretty sure they get their cut off of iTunes but I doubt they are that happy with it's business model since they can't reap their huge cuts from over priced full albums from crappy artists pushed out solely to make them money.


Not only that, but it's harder to hide the money with an online busines model. all that stuff is tracked by accounting software that knows *exactly* where every last penny ends up. So when the artist asks for his/her cut of the action, they can't dummy up the records without getting caught in a lie by the software.
 
2008-02-26 12:58:50 PM
iTunes is bloat-ware

Suck it, haters

I forgot that a general opinion was fact. I mean honestly, when in the course of history have people in large groups made an intelligent, informed decision?
 
2008-02-26 01:00:56 PM
Weaver95: I wonder what RIAA thinks about iTunes?

I think they love it. Last I heard Apple was trying to change artist royalties to $0.04 per track.
 
2008-02-26 01:03:47 PM
For the life of me I can't figure out why anyone who downloads much music wouldn't go with a subscription-model service so they could download all they wanted.

If you spend more than $15 a month on music, iTunes is utterly retarded.
 
2008-02-26 01:09:54 PM
Not a huge fan of iTunes. I only use it with my iPod because MediaMonkey is even worse. The iTunes store is convenient, but the DRM involved royally sucks; I stream music from a NAS hard drive to my receiver, and the iTunes tracks don't play nice with that, so I try to avoid buying much off of there; the only things I do purchase from iTunes are tracks where I really don't want the entire CD and the tracks aren't available off Amazon.

iTunes is a little too married to the iTunes store, especially where album art is concerned, and iTunes also doesn't work well with multiple users on the same PC (a major oversight). While I like my little iPod nano, I'm not sure that it was the best choice for me (but I'm still not giving it up). Like most Apple products, it works best when everything in the chain is related: iPod + iTunes + music from the iTunes store. Fiddle with any part of that or the default settings, and things can go to crap in a hurry.
 
2008-02-26 01:10:18 PM
zzzzz bloatware blaaaah ogg vorbis zzzzz open source blaaaaah people still pay for music? zzzzz sheeple bbbbbzzzz ack
 
2008-02-26 01:13:45 PM
SacriliciousBeerSwiller: For the life of me I can't figure out why anyone who downloads much music wouldn't go with a subscription-model service so they could download all they wanted.

If you spend more than $15 a month on music, iTunes is utterly retarded.


Except with the subscription model,
a) you lose ALL of your (essentially rented) music the moment you stop paying the monthly fee, or if the subscription service goes out of business
b) Most (all?) subscription music has DRM or is in a format (WMA) incompatible with the iPod, which, like it or not, is far and away the dominant portable music player

That said, I buy most of my downloads from Amazon these days- cheaper, no DRM, decent bitrate mp3.
 
2008-02-26 01:18:42 PM
Titanic was a popular movie.
 
2008-02-26 01:19:07 PM
Born to Die: That said, I buy most of my downloads from Amazon these days- cheaper, no DRM, decent bitrate mp3.

Ditto. That said, I probably end up buying 2-3 songs a month on average, whereas before Amazon's service I didn't buy any.
 
2008-02-26 01:21:03 PM
What far back behind Wal Mart does #2 mean? Are we talking Apple desktop market share vs microsoft Microsoft #2 or Honda vs Toyota #2?
 
2008-02-26 01:28:51 PM
i need to ease off the flu meds :(
 
2008-02-26 01:30:40 PM
Two words: Bit Torrent
 
2008-02-26 01:31:39 PM
smeag0l: i need to ease off the flu meds :(

Gotta be careful with those NyQuiladas. They're addicting.

/good for putting the kid out, though
 
2008-02-26 01:33:36 PM
PT Barnum nods in approval.
 
2008-02-26 01:34:18 PM
Why... oh why... did mp3 have to become the format winner for retail music.

Yea, I "know" why but it'd be nice if SACD or DVD-A could have become viable enough so those of us who want the best music in the best possible quality could have carved out a niche of such critical mass that the industry would strive for better. And before anyone dismisses the quality difference, I have a system that only cost a few hundred and my friends always pick the SACD over the CD or high bitrate mp3.
 
2008-02-26 01:36:33 PM
The great thing about apple fanatics is when you say that Microsoft is one of the greatest companies in the world as evidenced by it's market dominance you are wrong, but when they say Itunes/ipods are great and point to Apple’s dominance they are right.
 
2008-02-26 01:37:47 PM
apple was an early mover in digital media sales. it's not surprising news that they are one of the big retailers right now.

but like most early movers, their competitive advantage will wane. they are too entrenched in their revenue to make gutsy moves like demanding DRM-free media, which means that some other outlet (likely amazon.com) will overtake them... being the early movers in that regard.

itunes is like the aol of digital media sales. it brought it to the masses, even if it doesn't do it in the best way.
 
2008-02-26 01:38:29 PM
Apparently nobody on Fark understands what the RIAA is and how it works. iTunes doesn't have to pay a cent to the RIAA - the major record labels do voluntarily - the RIAA is essentially a prosecuting/lobbying company that all the big labels pay to protect their copyrights and ensure industry-wide manufacturing standards.

They are evil money-whore bastards- I mean, they are corporate lawyers, so that's a given - but it's not like they are demanding a 'cut' from Apple or anything.
 
2008-02-26 01:38:53 PM
iTunes for Windows is god awful. Even setting aside the music store part, it's just bad software. Bloated, unfixably buggy and most aggravating, Apple couldn't be bothered to obey Windows UI conventions, so a lot of the on screen controls operate in a non-obvious fashion. I'd guess the updates probably fail on 10 - 15% of Windows installs, leaving users without access to their DRM-laden popular music.

Apple: for people who buy furniture instead of computers.
 
2008-02-26 01:40:24 PM
linoleum knife: The great thing about apple fanatics is when you say that Microsoft is one of the greatest companies in the world as evidenced by it's market dominance you are wrong, but when they say Itunes/ipods are great and point to Apple's dominance they are right.

or it could just be tards on either side thinking that, and fark greenlighting whatever will result in the highest number of post counts and thus ad impressions, and favoring the flamewar for that reason.

but, you know, whatever.
 
2008-02-26 01:42:11 PM
Microsoft leader in software sales: "OMGZ DA EVIL EMPIRE DIE MONOPOLY DIE MUST SPLIT DEM UP"

Apple leader in music sales and players: "HAHAH SUCK IT HATERS APPLE OWNZ U LOL!1!!"
 
2008-02-26 01:43:26 PM
Oh yes, yay for monopolies, but only when the *good* companies get one.
 
2008-02-26 01:44:22 PM
Weaver95: I wonder what RIAA thinks about iTunes?

They get their share of the store's profits, but the 4 billion songs iTunes has sold probably wouldn't fill 1% of the capacity of all of the iPods Apple's sold. That's got to have them worried.
 
2008-02-26 01:49:20 PM
I don't buy music from either source. Does that qualify me for the non-conformist hipster club?

/wait, it costs $5/month to be in the non-conformist hipster club?
//totally fark that
 
2008-02-26 01:52:38 PM
Now if apple would just make it so I could turn off everything in iTunes except for syncing music and managing playlists, I'd be much happier. I don't like having my computer lock up for 10-30 seconds just attempting to play an mp3.
 
2008-02-26 02:00:30 PM
Born to Die:
Except with the subscription model,
a) you lose ALL of your (essentially rented) music the moment you stop paying the monthly fee, or if the subscription service goes out of business


ALL DRM'd music is effectively rented. At least with the subscription model, there's no bullshiatting around that fact.
 
2008-02-26 02:02:22 PM
zn0k: or it could just be tards on either side thinking that, and fark greenlighting whatever will result in the highest number of post counts and thus ad impressions, and favoring the flamewar for that reason.

but, you know, whatever.


hence the word "fanatics"
 
2008-02-26 02:03:16 PM
iTunes might be an okay program for playing and downloading music, but that doesn't mean that Apple or any of its other products are any good.

I have a Sony MD player that makes every Apple music-related product sound like perpetual diarrhea, but I don't go trying to fellate the CEO of Sony for it.

Suck it, fanboys.
 
2008-02-26 02:06:38 PM
"The iTunes store is convenient, but the DRM involved royally sucks;"

Well said... I would happily buy more music if I could play it more freely. I have xp64 and I can't even burn my itunes music to a cd with it. Apple doesn't have a 64 bit itunes for xp, and I can only burn itunes music with itunes.

In a perfect world, dvda would be mandatory for all.

(while you were reading this itunes probably posted an update)
 
2008-02-26 02:11:57 PM
DRM in my iTunes?

(Ummm... you guys who are whining about the DRM know that it's easily removed without any loss of music quality, right?)

Google QTFairUse.
 
2008-02-26 02:11:57 PM
This Is Necessar
I have a Sony MD player. Suck it, fanboys.

i had to do a search to figure out MD stands for minidisc. You may as well have been trying to promote 8track in your post. Thats not a technology anybody uses, except for you.

An ipod can play an uncompressed song just as easily as anything else. It depends how you acquired it/encoded it, which makes the difference in how it sounds,... plus a good pair of headphones.
 
2008-02-26 02:15:23 PM
Akula
Not a huge fan of iTunes. I only use it with my iPod because MediaMonkey is even worse. The iTunes store is convenient, but the DRM involved royally sucks; I stream music from a NAS hard drive to my receiver, and the iTunes tracks don't play nice with that, so I try to avoid buying much off of there; the only things I do purchase from iTunes are tracks where I really don't want the entire CD and the tracks aren't available off Amazon.

I know this is going to be hard for you to understand, but you are in the extreme minority of music consumers.
 
2008-02-26 02:16:08 PM
www.alarmingnews.com

itunes is teh sux
 
2008-02-26 02:23:20 PM
I know how to get rid of DRM, but if im paying for it i shouldnt have to. especially when i can get it for free and do what i want with it.
 
2008-02-26 02:23:44 PM
chemchris:
"The iTunes store is convenient, but the DRM involved royally sucks;"

Well said... I would happily buy more music if I could play it more freely. I have xp64 and I can't even burn my itunes music to a cd with it. Apple doesn't have a 64 bit itunes for xp, and I can only burn itunes music with itunes.


You know that Itunes now sales many of there songs DRM free for the same price. They have been doing this for like over a year already.

What there has been about 6 people posting about apple DRM and not aware they've had non-DRM music for like a year now?
 
2008-02-26 02:24:28 PM
chemchris: I know how to get rid of DRM, but if im paying for it i shouldnt have to. especially when i can get it for free and do what i want with it.

ITUNES SALES DRM-LESS MUSIC!!!
 
2008-02-26 02:26:54 PM
Corvus: ITUNES SALES sells DRM-LESS MUSIC!!!

Or, you can buy anything you want from the Amazon MP3 store without having to use shiatty Apple software and shiatty Apple file formats.
 
2008-02-26 02:27:38 PM
Wow, I didn't realize Wal-Mart sold that much music. I rarely see anyone in the music section when I go.

Also, I just refrained from ever purchasing music there knowing they NEEDLESSLY edit music... like Nirvana's "Rape Me" to "Waif Me" and not allowing Weezer's Maladroit because of "Dope Nose" (or maybe because it wasn't very good...)
 
2008-02-26 02:31:27 PM
likefunbutnot: Or, you can buy anything you want from the Amazon MP3 store without having to use shiatty Apple software and shiatty Apple file formats.

Fine buy it from them if you want. Does amazon have as big of a selection? Not sure why you think apple software and files are "shiatty". What format is amazon in and what is the bit rate? But most likely you are an apple basher and that's why you give no reason.


But that doesn't change the fact that people here are repeating things that are not true for over a year and don't seem to know what they are talking about.
 
2008-02-26 02:35:07 PM
likefunbutnot: Corvus: ITUNES SALES sells DRM-LESS MUSIC!!!

Or, you can buy anything you want from the Amazon MP3 store without having to use shiatty Apple software and shiatty Apple file formats.


Oh I just checked the "superior" amazon format is mp3 at a worse bit rate.
 
2008-02-26 02:35:45 PM
Oakenshield: zzzzz bloatware blaaaah ogg vorbis zzzzz open source blaaaaah people still pay for music? zzzzz sheeple bbbbbzzzz ack

Hehehehe. OMGZ! NoT this! WHAAAA!#45w!
 
2008-02-26 02:37:55 PM
morgankingrocks

Apparently, you don't know how it works. Itunes pays a price from the labels to resell a song. That price is determined by the label. The label sets that price based on thier costs and profit margins. Those costs, DING DING DING, include RIAA membership fees.

If the RIAA fees were less/non existant, it is possible (albiet they are greed bastages) that the price to itunes would be lower, and thusly too the consumer. BWAHAHAHAH YEAH RIGHT
 
2008-02-26 02:38:11 PM
Corvus: But most likely you are an apple basher and that's why you give no reason.

I listen to Classical music. iTMS's Classical selection is approximately the same and of the same quality as that of the "Tape World" in my local mall. There's less than zero reason for me to use it. Amazon is much better in that department.

Amazon's MP3s are 256kbps. I presume they are watermarked, but they are real MP3 files and they are delivered at an acceptable bit rate.

I already detailed my frustration with Apple's singularly incompetent Windows software in a post within this thread. If you'd like, I'll be happy to tell you why Macbooks are deeply shiatty hardware as well, in a post that I could call "Ow! My balls are too hot!"
 
2008-02-26 02:40:11 PM
Corvus: ITUNES SALES DRM-LESS MUSIC!!!

DRM-less, yes. But they still place a watermark with your some of your information on it. When I buy a song, I want to buy just it. No additional DRM, no watermarks. I bought it, I can listen to it wherever and however I please. If I wanted a watermark on it, I would put it on there myself.
 
2008-02-26 02:40:58 PM
Corvus: Oh I just checked the "superior" amazon format is mp3 at a worse bit rate

Yes, but they are *MP3* files. Not .AACs. Not Apple Lossless. Not formats that most people don't know how to convert to anything else, but files that will play in anything that is smart enough to handle a computer file format. And most importantly, not a file format that can be locked in layers upon layers of moronic copy protection.
 
2008-02-26 02:43:41 PM
Mrbogey: Why... oh why... did mp3 have to become the format winner for retail music.

Yea, I "know" why but it'd be nice if SACD or DVD-A could have become viable enough so those of us who want the best music in the best possible quality could have carved out a niche of such critical mass that the industry would strive for better. And before anyone dismisses the quality difference, I have a system that only cost a few hundred and my friends always pick the SACD over the CD or high bitrate mp3.


You're comparing 128kbps MP3s to a 9.6Mbps DVD-A... for download?

/facepalm
 
2008-02-26 02:44:28 PM
boothboy007: DRM-less, yes. But they still place a watermark with your some of your information on it. When I buy a song, I want to buy just it. No additional DRM, no watermarks. I bought it, I can listen to it wherever and however I please. If I wanted a watermark on it, I would put it on there myself.

I bet you pay for everything in cash too, so "the man" can't track you.
 
Displayed 50 of 118 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report