<a href="http://www.computers.net/2006/12/amazon_soon_ope.html">link here</a><br><br>snippet:<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>The company is apparently telling labels (politely, I'm sure) that it is only interested in selling DRM-free mp3s (meaning, once you download the song, it's yours for whatever purpose you see fit, no more restrictions like you can burn only X amount of times or you can only have it reside on X computers, etc.). The second difference is that Amazon seems interested in offering variable pricing.<p><hr></blockquote><p>--<br>"I am mindful that diversity is one of the strengths of the country" --president bush on 9/27/05
[color:blue]Right now it's not clear which major labels might be included at Amazon's launch.</font color=blue> - Interesting was it not the Labels that drove the DRM schemes in the first place ?<br><br>
details haven't emerged. the thinking is that amazon would have to start with indie labels until the biggies sign on board, if they sign on board. that remains to be seen. but, i think no DRM is what the future holds.<br><br>i think apple could possible make it happen if they were willing to give up the 99 cent across the board pricing. but, maybe the big labels are not that close . . . yet.<br><br>--<br>"I am mindful that diversity is one of the strengths of the country" --president bush on 9/27/05
The biggies are only interested into tiered pricing and still wants the copy protection of the DRM . Otherwise its back to the old Napster days with the only difference , the Labels gets at least one sale before being completely rip off after .<br><br>IMO<br>Apples pricing is 2 fold<br>1 - 99¢ for a song that has DRM restrictions = lame duck <br>2 - 99¢ is good marketing in such to build a strong customer loyalty <br><br>Now to charge more for songs say 1.99 with the lame duck restrictions is why Apple is against the Labels on the up charge , they need to drop the DRM restrictions . Simply should people pay more for less ?<br><br>So if Amazon pulls this off - minus DRM . Then Apple could do the same and enter into a price war and win given its shear market size . The trick remains would the big labels go for the idea or zero DRM ?<br><br>
If the big labels drop DRM at Amazon, how long will it be before they drop it at iTMS?<br><br>____________________________________________________<br>Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive,<br>But to be young was very heaven!
_________________________ MACTECHubi dolor ibi digitus
I've been hemming and hawing about this subject for quite a long time. Do you really think that a 128 m4a is all that bad? Those files sound pretty good to me. <br><br>Just yesterday I decided to import some of my classical music into my iTunes library, and because of so much negative sentiment on various forums that I frequent regarding 128 bps, I decided to rip the CDs as m4as at 192. That should be good enough, right? Even Apple encourages Apple lossless for best results, but I'm wondering what everyone else thinks.<br><br>Obviously, this is very subjective.<br><br>
A)<br>The big labels aren't going to drop DRM anytime soon<br><br>B)<br>Nobody gives a rat's @ss about indie labels, and we all know it.<br><br>C)<br>You can order virtually any CD you want from your local library and RIP it to your computer at your preferred bit rate. Or, of course, there are "other" ways of getting it.<br><br>D)<br>Can you see Steve Jobs drooling over the thought of the day when no DRM exists does come? Bring a towel. And bring your pocket book because the song is going to probably set you back $5 and up!<br><br><br><br>CreativeGuy for daily tips, tricks and commentary on all things graphic design.
_________________________ The Graphic Mac- Tips, reviews & more on all things OSX & graphic design.
No, I don't think they sound that bad. But, things have changed in the last few years. Disk space is outrageously cheap and broadband is prevalent. There is no reason not to offer higher quality music downloads.<br><br>
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Can you see Steve Jobs drooling over the thought of the day when no DRM exists does come? Bring a towel. And bring your pocket book because the song is going to probably set you back $5 and up!<p><hr></blockquote><p>Was that last one a joke, cause that's a load of nonsense? Apple may have high profit margins, but Jobs is no idiot. Find me one person that would pay $5 (or even half that) for a single song download. Even a minor increase in price would see a drop in sales and a lot of negative publicity.<br><br>
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.