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

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Media (Apple) Businesses Media Music The Internet Apple

iTunes More Popular Than Most P2P Sites 333

Posted by Zonk from the paying-its-way dept.
bonch writes "A study by NPD Group shows that iTunes ranks #2 in popularity of music downloads, rivaling services like Limewire, Kazaa, and iMesh. The #1 service was still WinMX, but NPD believes this proves to the music industry that legal downloads can work, and that iTunes provides an economically viable alternative." From the article: "According to NPD, about 4 percent of Internet-enabled households in the nation used a paid music download store in March."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

iTunes More Popular Than Most P2P Sites More

iTunes More Popular Than Most P2P Sites

Comments Filter:

  • Why Should The RIAA Be Surprised? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by geomon ( 78680 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @06:12PM (#12752298) Homepage Journal
    Although there are still millions of people who will continue to trade on p2p, having legitimate outlets supplying digital copies of music, television, and movies will become a hugely profitable venture for the entertainment industry. They just haven't figured out how to do it and still capture the largest share of the market.

    A radio program this morning on NPR discussed how the movie industry was losing money on opening day box office receipts at the same time they are making a killing with DVD sales ($17BUSD). That means that they are going to have to change not only their marketing (opening day receipts are generally a 16-24 year old market), but also their metric for gauging success.

    Overall, once they stop focusing all of their energy on litigation and lobbying for worthless copy-protection standards, they will begin to create a market-driven system that people will gravitate to and embrace.

    • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @06:19PM (#12752370)
      Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Re:Meanwhile, somewhere in Hollywood... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by geomon ( 78680 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @06:25PM (#12752430) Homepage Journal
        How do these people come to be in charge of multimillion dollar companies? This should really be obvious, folks.

        Its funny that you made the same comment, in a different way, as the commenter on NPR. They said something to the effect that "these people [entertainment execs] are really smart and will eventtually figure this out".

        Until now, of course, all they have shown is that they are frightened asswipes with souless lawyers at the ready.
      • Nah, more like:

        Executive: Wow, iTunes really is moving a lot of units. Get Vinnie the Two Ton Crusher on the line, we've got to demand that iTunes quadruple the price and halve their cut. Bwahahaha! Let's fuck over the consumer some more! $50 CDs, here they come!
      • ...instead of pushing them around and spending all our efforts on advertising instead of actual, innovative, interesting products... Exactly, the US can do with more bonus in their products. Most of the audio CDs I bought in the US only has a cd and a front+back cover, nothing else.
        Compare it to the Japanese audio CDs I buy all the time? a booklet thicker than the CD, complete with lyrics! (why do the western CDs usually lack them? afraid of "infringement"? the last Japanese piano CD album I bought even

    • Re:Why Should The RIAA Be Surprised? (Score:5, Funny)

      by PopeAlien ( 164869 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @06:23PM (#12752418) Homepage Journal
      Are you kidding?

      This new-fangled form of distribution is going to ruin all creativity as we know it! Just like the VCR killed all movie production and Xerox ruined the publishing industry! We're doomed! Dinner is Ruined! We cant have nice things!

      • Xerox ruined the publishing industry

        Sort of off-topic, but I had absolutely no idea how many textbooks are available on eMule. I mean, I needed Jackson's Electrodynamics book, and it was there. My friend got me Sakurai's Quantum Book off there, and that's just the tip of the (online book-pilfering) iceberg. So, maybe Xerox avoided the wrath of publishers, but might they go after online services like this next? And no, neither book is public domain (yet).

      • Re:Why Should The RIAA Be Surprised? (Score:4, Funny)

        by Tony Hoyle ( 11698 ) <tmh@nodomain.org> on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @06:52PM (#12752689) Homepage
        Don't get me started on that damned printing press. Sure, it'll *start* with Bibles, but you can bet that soon they'll be printing all sorts of things.

        If that happens it's the end of the writing industry and *no more books will ever be written*. The entire world will be plunged into darkness!!!

    • A radio program this morning on NPR discussed how the movie industry was losing money on opening day box office receipts...

      I think you mean they're losing money on total box office receipts. Or are they expecting to pay for all the production & distribution costs and then some from a single day's ticket sales?

      • Re:Why Should The RIAA Be Surprised? (Score:4, Informative)

        by geomon ( 78680 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @06:33PM (#12752520) Homepage Journal
        I think you mean they're losing money on total box office receipts.

        No, although the total office receipts are dropping too.

        Or are they expecting to pay for all the production & distribution costs and then some from a single day's ticket sales?

        No, they were using opening day receipts as a guage on how many units they would ship to Blockbuster and other rental outlets. The popularity movie as a rental was a function of how well it did opening day.
    • but the problem is that DVD may be making gobs of money but it canabalizes the movie theaters. The industry wants their cake AND eat it too... Once they sell a DVD movie tickets go out the window... to a certian extent the public is learning to wait out for the DVD... that's killing the big box office hits.

      Frankly, there's just too much product out there... even for my limited tastes there's times that 5 movies want to "compete" aginst each other when i'd like to see them all... other times there's mont

      • You've got to be kidding. Most DVDs aren't released until months after the movies are gone from the theatres. There's no way to see the film again, so there's no loss of ticket sales.

        Now there may be a set of people who won't see the movie in theatres but who wait for the DVD. I'd argue that those might be dollars gained rather than lost, since when I go through that argument, it's usually for a movie that I consider marginal, and won't pay $10 to see, but will pay $2. So that's an extra $2 they wouldn

    • Re:Why Should The RIAA Be Surprised? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I think the reason box office sales are declining has more to do with people being fed up with the current movie experience. Let's see, do you want to endure screaming children, immature teenagers, inconsiderate cellphone talkers, sticky floors, and overpriced food? ... or wait a few months to catch the movie on DVD? A lot of people are beginning to choose the latter.
      • A lot of people are beginning to choose the latter.

        I think you've nailed it. The commenter also said that theaters will continue to operate, but only serve a niche market.
      • You've missed the most important annoyance (or maybe you live somewhere where this sickness hasn't spread)---after paying $10 to sit in this hellhole, you STILL get bombarded by commercials. Not previews, which I like, except when they are 20dB louder than necessary, but actual "Diet Coke makes you hip, so buy more." F**k that. I could stay home and watch commercials for free, you f**kers.

        And, even when they are honest and tell you when the movie *actually* starts (so you could avoid the ads), then all the

  • even completely independent music sells VERY well (Score:5, Interesting)

    by linuxbaby ( 124641 ) * on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @06:13PM (#12752313)
    My company [cdbaby.net] is one of the main distributors of music to Apple iTunes, Rhapsody, Napster, etc.

    I gotta admit that when we started doing digital distribution two years ago, I thought it would be just a small income stream for the musicians - some extra income, maybe $5k/month combined.

    But our checks from Apple et al have been over $300,000 a month so far this year! And that's just for our catalog of mostly-unknown all-independent music. (And hey for the record, 91% of all that income goes directly to the musician.)

    NOTE: a lot of this discovery of independent music is thanks to cover songs [cdbaby.org] - another twist I never expected.

    Yes us alpha-geeks here on Slashdot may get our music from allofmp3.com or SoulSeek or whatever, but there's definitely millions paying that 99-cents-per song, or $20/month subscription out there. I get to see the detailed sales reports every month.

    (Personally, I'm so impressed with Yahoo Music Unlimited [yahoo.com], that it's making me want to use Windows again!)

    • NOTE: a lot of this discovery of independent music is thanks to cover songs - another twist I never expected

      The first lesson a band learns is that bookings come easier when you do covers.

    • Since you seem to work in the industry, an idea for you- I'd be more than happy to pay 10 or 20 a month for a Yahoo like deal. But not under the current conditions. I want to own the music, not rent it (meaning if I decide to quit paying, I can still play my files). And I want it in a no DRM format (MP3 is fine). Get that, and you'll have a lifelong customer. Until then, none of these sites will be seeing my money- I refuse to buy DRM, and I don't want to pay per song (or album).
      • Put $1500 (100 cds worth) in a government bond and use the interest from that to pay for yahoo music unlimited.

        Then you get unlimited access for a one time investment - and if you ever want to you can cancel and get your $1500 back, and yahoo can have their music back.

        Sure it's DRM'd but i've found Yahoo's drm pretty unobtrusive.
        • Sure, DRM is unobtrusive until your machine goes fubar and you suddenly have to prove that you've *really* paid for all your music to a sceptical record executive so he'll let you reregister it on the new hardware.

          Heaven help you if you decide to buy a Mac or install Linux.
          • Then i'll download it all again... pretty low effort compared with setting up my development environments again.

            Equally if Yahoo! go bankrupt then i can just sign up for raphsody using the money i would have spent on yahoo (well actually a little more) and i'll have access to the same (well slightly different) unlimited set of music.

            The Mac/Linux thing is a problem, but I'm doing windows development right now so need to have an XP machine anyway.

            I'm sure streaming services will be available on the Mac wi

        • Re:Here's a thought (Score:3, Interesting)

          by AuMatar ( 183847 )
          1)I refuse to pay for DRM on principle
          2)I can't use it on my linux box anyway
          3)I have better things to do with that kind of money.
          4)I don't rent anything I intend to use long term. Not a house, not a car. Why the hell would I rent my music. If I can't buy it and keep it, I don't want it. The only things I rent are books fromt he library, and thats because they're free.
          • Wow, you're an idiot. I'm sure the record companies would love to create a service like you describe. You would subscribe just long enough to download all the music (well, at least the music you want), and then stop the subscription. Lets say that takes two months. Now you just got hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of music for $40. Yeah, that's going to happen.

            • Re:Here's a thought (Score:3, Interesting)

              by AuMatar ( 183847 )
              Thats assuming they don't continue to put out new music that I like and want. If they do that, I need to continue my subscription. Gee, putting out new good music, what a concept. Of course it does seem to be one the record companies don't get lately.
              • Sorry for being rude before. Anyway, yeah, if new music comes out that you want you would have to pay again, but if you are willing to wait, you could just sign up for a month every year or twice yearly and fill up your coffers.
          • 1) Your choice

            2) I feel your pain here. Hopefully in time someone will realise that people want to play music in Linux and that there is a market. Either that or Mplayer will start playing Y! music files - they play fine in WMP.

            3) If you have better things to do with your money than spending it on music, then by all means go for it. Music is a luxury item.

            4) Here's an analogy.

            Say you house costs $250,000 and you have a 5%, 30 yr mortgage on it, and lets assume it doesn't appreciate at all (because music
      • Personally I find .99 not too bad a price, and .50 about perfect for a song I really like.

        As far as I am concerned a price less than that is really unfair to the artists and does act as a disincentive for others to produce music for a living.

        That's why I do not think we'll see legit US sites ever offer what you are asking for. No artist would allow it.

        • I don't want to be nickled and dimed for every song. ANd even at $1 (or .50), its too expensive to download a few tunes from 4 or 5 artists to see if you like any. Or download songs other than the main track of an album to see if they're any good.

          A price less than that is a disincentive for the artists? You do realise the actual artist usualy makes .10 to .25 dollars per ALBUM sold. They get pennies if that on internet sales. THat argument just doesn't hold water.

          If the legit US sites won't offer a s
          • Did you not read the post by the CDBaby dude?

            $300,000 a month, $3.6 million a year, 91% goes to the artist.

            So $273,000 a month goes to the artists. Or, if you believe DownhillBattle, $0.65 of every $0.99 goes to CDBaby, and if 91% goes to the artist, then each artist gets $0.59 a track.

            Your value of $0.10 to $0.25 is bogus, and applies to non indie, RIAA affiliated musicians. So if you really do want to support artists, find some indies on iTunes and buy away; look for CDBaby artists, and you'll be givin
    • I have been a real happy user with Rhapsody. Can anyone tell me if it's worth switching to Yahoo?

      The reason why I dropped Napster was because of the insane percentage of "Buy-ONLY" songs. Why pay a subscription if you have to pay again to listen to half an album. I am really wondering if Yahoo doesn't have this problem. So far Rhapsody is clean.

    • Why would we alpha-geeks not be paying for our music? The problem is the services suck and are overpriced, I'm happily paying http://di.fm/ [di.fm] $13 a month for really great net radio.
    • If iTunes on the PC were slightly faster, these numbers would be even higher. I installed it on my PC and it works fine, but on my parents' PC (a Dell P3 at 1 GHz with plenty of RAM, probably fairly average for the home user) it will start skipping if you start a new process while it's playing, and you'll have to stop playback and start it again to make the skipping stop. As the average home PC catches up to iTunes' de fact requirements, I can see these numbers going up.

      Also, most Windows users don't
    • linuxbaby - excellent post! Now, is there any way to know whether any given artist is supported through cdbaby when shopping at iTunes - frankly, I don't mind 99c when most goes to the band but will stick to allofmp3 for all other fat-ass artist ripoffs - alternatively, do you or can you post on your website lists of disributed bands?
    • Hey congratulations on the success. You guys hit my radar some time ago.

      I noticed that your website only offers .m3u playlists for promos. I was wondering if you would ever consider putting up some vanilla .mp3s for demo purposes.

      My project is going for a radio-esque niche and I think my users prefer discreet files for portables and whatnot. I would love to post some files...

  • WinMX is not #1 (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    WinMX will never be #1. They suck. Stay away. Only RIAA loops and FBI agents are on WinMX. Stay away from WinMX. You never heard of WinMX.

    • Re:WinMX is not #1 (Score:4, Informative)

      by Uber Banker ( 655221 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @06:27PM (#12752452)
      Yeah, WinMX [winmx.com] doesn't work. Only fools would use spyware free P2P apps that have barely been updated in 2 years.

      Of course the reason for the WinMX software not to get updated for 2 years is coz it doesn't work, right? And the queues, they're there only to allow RIAA stooges to log your IP manually, and the users who say "you don't share enough", they're MPAA hooks using entrapment tactics. And the range of rare content is because only eclectic people use it.

      May WinMX continue to suck.

  • Stand by for BS (Score:3, Insightful)

    by am46n ( 615794 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @06:15PM (#12752328)
    Stand by for a bunch of /.ers, pretending to be representitive of the average consumer, posting as anonymous coward to tell us all how many tracks they pirated versus bought in the last week, and how this proves the stats are wrong.

    • Not BS (Score:3, Insightful)

      by DogDude ( 805747 )
      It's not BS. There are plenty of people using un-surveyable means of downloading entire albums, say, via IRC/Bit Torrent, anonymous FTP sites, straight IRC DCC's, etc. Personally, I don't like the way that Apple does business, so if I were to buy music online, it'd be through Yahoo.
  • I'd like to agree, but what about cumulative? Just because P2P is diversified doesn't mean it's outweighed by iTunes. They put iTunes at 1.7 million houses - I would bet the P2P total far exceeds that. It's the cumulative total that really counts.

  • I feel sorry for all the people who pay for music (Score:4, Insightful)

    by John Seminal ( 698722 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @06:18PM (#12752361) Journal
    Most of it has so much DRM that it is unusable.

    What will happen when Apple goes bankrupt? Or when the next generation of mini-players comes out with a new DRM?

    People are paying for music, then being told how they can use it.

    Fair use is simple. I can make as many copies for myself as I want. Many DRM's make it impossible to make even a back up copy. But what if I want one copy for my MP3 player, one on a CD for my car, and one for my wifes car? Does that mean I must buy three copies?

    • That's why people use iTunes DRM.

      If you want one for your MP3 player and two CDs, then burn two CDs and upload to your (iPod) MP3 player.

      In addition you can also store it on 4 additional computers. Or is it 6 now? I forget.
    • there a great big world out there but you're so adamant to make decisions based on your prejudices rather than facts that you're deliberately cutting off your own entertainment options.

      why the fuck would anyone decide to reduce their options in this way? it's like you're applying DRM to your *life*, and I'll tell you this: the DRM you're applying is a hell of a lot worse than that Apple puts on iTunes music.
    • Apple's DRM is the least restrictive of any of the music stores around at the moment - just enough to pacify the RIAA. If they made it any more lax, they couldn't exist. There are a few non-US music stores selling non-DRM'd music, but Apple have to operate from the US and so are stuck.

      Since they let you burn all the music you've purchased to an un-DRM-encumbered audio CD, I don't see it as that big a deal. Once you've got your audio CD, you can do anything.
      • If they made it any more lax, they couldn't exist. There are a few non-US music stores selling non-DRM'd music, but Apple have to operate from the US and so are stuck.

        eMusic is a US site, and they sell popular music without DRM, right? Apple could do so (at least with some of their tracks) if they really wanted to.

        The problem is they don't want to sell DRM-free tracks, they want to sell you an iPod.

    • Two ways out with Apple DRM (Score:5, Insightful)

      by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) * on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @07:10PM (#12752877)
      What will happen when Apple goes bankrupt? Or when the next generation of mini-players comes out with a new DRM?

      You must be thinking of the OTHER music companies, that re-authorize every month or what have you.

      If Apple went out of buisiness, you music would continue to play on your current Mac until the end of time.

      However, like you say eventually you'd want to move the music. Two options then:

      CD's - I can burn any ITMS song to CD as much as I like (limit of ten burns a playlist, but I can always make new playlists...)

      Hymn [hymn-project.org] - I can convert protected AAC files into unprotected AAC files, which I can then play on anything that undrestands AAC (most PC players, not many portables) or convert it from there.

      So yeah I feel sorry for anyone buying music from anywhere other than ITMS or AllOfMP3.com. I still don't like to use AllOfMP3 though as I don't feel it gives artists as much as it should. Perhaps in the future I'll buy from ITMS, then buy the non-lossy version from AllOfMP3. Too much work though, so I probably wont...

  • Speed of Sound (Score:5, Informative)

    by LittleGuernica ( 736577 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @06:19PM (#12752373) Homepage
    Coldplay's new single "speed of Sound" sold extremely well thru itunes, thats because it was released the day after the first airplay. I run a Coldplay fansite ( http://closingwealls.net/ [closingwealls.net] - blatant plug) and following the news around the band, it seems that the single was one of the most downloaded songs ever on itunes, because of that fact. This has proven to be a very succesfull formula. Publish the single online the same day as it hits the airwaves, and people dont have to listen to the radio to hear it, for a tiny dollat they can lsiten it legally whenevewr they want. thats a huge incentive. Of all the legal downloadservices, iTunes gets it the best and is probably right that subscriptions dont work.

  • iTunes safer (Score:5, Insightful)

    by PenguinBoyDave ( 806137 ) <<david> <at> <davidmeyer.org>> on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @06:19PM (#12752376)
    For me it comes down to one thing...iTunes subscription ensures I'll not end up on the wrong end of a lawsuit. I can't afford the fines, and I'm not interested in trying to dodge getting caught. Not worth the risk for me.

  • My problem with iTunes (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @06:19PM (#12752377)
    Nobody shares. Not one. Take a look for yourself. Everything is hosted by Apple. At least on the other services, people share. I guess all the iTunes users are behind NAT firewalls.
    • Yah, I know the feeling. here at work, I only see the same ol list of 12 iTunes shares. I've already listened to what they all have to offer. I want more!

      And man, I've never seen so much ABBA in my life. Holy cow..
  • ...the music and movie industry will eventually realize what a cash cow pay per download / subscription music and movie services will be. i browsed p2p during the days of napster and found it to be a waste of my time. poor quality / incomplete songs. i would much rather pay a buck or two per song for something complete and high quality.

    a decent printer is easy to get. liner notes etc. could be bundled in.

    i am just surprised it is taking so long.

    • I think it's a pretty safe bet to assume that the quality of ripping sw and songs has improved since 1999. For the most part.

      Me, I like the all you can eat for $/month model, but to each his own.
    • That would be nice, wouldn't it? I know that I'd pay for TV show episodes.. if I could keep them and watch them on any computer that I own. Right now, I grab stuff off of bittorrent and watch it on the train.

      Even "albums" I've found online are of poor quality.. like someone downloaded the individual tracks from various p2p services and then made a torrent out of it. One such album frustrated me, so I ended up just buying the damn thing.. but no such luck with some of the out of print albums. :(
  • Um...more popular than self-contained P2P services, sure, but what about good ol' torrent sites? I know I get my music off torrent places all the time, especially when I want to preview a whole album before buying (or, um, not buying).

  • iTunes "market share" below 20% (Score:3)

    by geekee ( 591277 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @06:34PM (#12752528)
    according to slyk [slyck.com], p2p users are over 10 million, which is more than 5 times the number of people using iTunes. And p2p use is growing, not shrinking.
    • The survey here is US only.

      Legit download services are only available in a handful of countries, and i'm not sure that streaming services are available anywhere outside of north america.

      I suspect a lot more people would pay for music if it were readily available to them - at least that's what i get by looking at both these results.
    • you forgot about all the people who just use P2P for porn.
    • Right in the introduction of your survey, it tells the reader not to use the results as an indication of P2P's popularity as a whole.

      "These stats are displayed on a network-by-network basis. While they are able to demonstrate the growth [or] decline of an individual network, they do not compare or evaluate the trends of the P2P community as a whole."

      Your comparison is misleading and invalid.

  • Not really that surprising (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Gauchito ( 657370 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @06:39PM (#12752577)
    I used to use Kazaa/Limewire to download my music before, but now I'm almost exclusively an iTunes man. I still use Kazaa for things I can't find on iTunes, but immediately buy it legally when they become available.

    I can think of several factors. First, of course, the quality of the music is much better in AAC than the ripped mp3's you find online. Second, you don't get screwed by fake or misnamed files, truncated versions, or the whole other slew of crappy files you find through P2P. Third, the legality of it vs P2P is appealing, especially when you get older and you start worrying more about not making mistakes you'll regret later.

    Fourth (and I think this one is very important, which is why I gave it its own paragraph) the interface to iTunes makes it so, so easy. Not only the iPod integration, but just the fact that making the actual purchase (after you login) is so smooth, you forget at the time you're actually spending $1 per song. You just click on the buy song button, the song is downloaded (and iTunes is still very useable while the song is being downloaded), and you don't even think that you will be billed for it later. The $1's add up, of course, but it took me a while to look at my collection and realize I had just spent $200 on music I could have gotten for free (had I really wanted to). On P2P it involves placing a search, looking through the hundreds of results you get back to find a version that looks legit and has the bitrate you want, hope that the file will still be available throughout the entire download, then wait while you're access to the song is limited by the slowest peer you're getting it from.

    About the only reason, besides the cost savings, I can think of for still going to P2P for music is if you have a music player other than an iPod and don't want to go through the hassle of burning the song to a CD before you can rerip and transfer it to the player. Unless, of course, there are AAC to mp3/ogg/wmv converters out there than can convert Apple's DRMed version, and if there are, please tell me where, because I've looked and haven't been able to find any that work.
  • When I first started using P2P apps, I went to WinMX because I had heard good things about its diversity and lack of negative attention that Kazaa got. It worked alright. Then, I tried Limewire. The difference was night and day. In almost every case-ease of use, availability of unknown bands, number of dead downloads, anything-Limewire was ahead of WinMX by leaps and bounds. I went back on WinMX recently to try and find something because I was on a computer that wouldnt run any Java programs (stupid re

  • General Observation (Score:5, Informative)

    by microcars ( 708223 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @06:55PM (#12752712) Homepage
    generally what I've noticed is that people who don't have the money to BUY music will download it via P2P.

    Nothing really lost, they weren't going to buy it anyways.

    BUT, when they DO have money...they BUY their music, either on CD or via iTunes or some other vendor.

    When your TIME becomes WORTH something you don't SPEND it all on P2P.

    I don't know, that's what I see going on around me....

  • Why P2P "sites"? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by dangrover ( 782060 )
    It's odd how journalists often refer to peer to peer networks as "sites", because normal people don't know that the internet != the web. But it's more than a semantic distinction, of course. Now people who see the term "p2p sites" will think that you go on to some website owned by someone, and you download all this copyrighted material from a single centralized source, which is completely wrong in most cases (allofmp3 aside).

    I wish journalists were more informated about stuff they wrote about.

  • and here's why. . . (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jafac ( 1449 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @06:58PM (#12752743) Homepage
    The Intel switch:

    x86 has DRM/Trusted Computing.
    PPC does not.

    I don't think this was so much a case of Steve Jobs playing hardball with IBM, as it is a case of Sony playing hardball with Steve Jobs.

  • Network != Client (Score:3, Informative)

    by rpdillon ( 715137 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @07:02PM (#12752795) Homepage
    I might be confused, but...

    Limewire is simply a client for the gnutella network. Same story with Kazaa for the FastTrack network. The article doesn't seem to distringuish between a network, and an interface (client) to that network.

    This doesn't mean their statistics are invalid, simply that they haven't grasped a fundamental distinction between a network and a client. It does make me question the credibility of the statistics.

    On topic, I'm still waiting for a legal site that offers DRM-less lossless (or Ogg, since that's the format I want to convert to) music. I'll pay them happily. I just want it all to work under Linux, for a bit cheaper than simply buying all the CDs and ripping them costs me in money and time. Oh, and I want to have permanent access to the music, without any of my fair use priveleges infringed upon. =) I use Magnatune, but something slightly more mainstream would be nice, as well.

  • report is bull---- (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    The NPD report is bull----. Zeropaid sets the record straight [zeropaid.com].
  • I might be a bit more interested if their prices were a bit fairer. For iTunes, the cost per track:

    $0.99 = £0.54
    0.99 Euros = £0.66

    What's the cost for iTunes UK? £0.79. At least they lowered it from £0.99, but it's still a rip off in comparison. Make if fairer and then i might consider using their services.

  • People are creatures of convenience (Score:3, Interesting)

    by bmajik ( 96670 ) <matt@mattevans.org> on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @07:07PM (#12752845) Homepage Journal
    I found out this week that a bookmark i had to some site that catalogged .torrent files was now stale - imagine my surprise when i went to that bookmark only to find the page covered with "sponsored links" and no torrents for me to peruse.

    I didn't try and find other places for more .torrents. I just stopped looking and did something else.

    I haven't looked for any kind of music online in a few years because its too much work. I dont want to install crap, i dont want to uninstall spyware, i dont want to worry abou not getting all of a file, and i dont want to be sued over a couple of songs that aren't any good to begin with. Hell, when i see mp3 files with naming convenitions i disagree with, i get upset and dont want the work of making sure the ID3 data is right and what not.

    iTunes is really, really convenient. I haven't bought anything from it, but my wife has when shes looking for some specific song for some reason or another.

    I think the value proposition is that paying 99 cents for a known quantity is more convenient than wasting a bunch of time and perhaps needing multiple attempts to get the same thing.

    Apparently this value proposition is working for alot of people.
  • WinMX??? Who the heck is this and where did they come from? I thought BitTorrent was the most popular, and Kazaa came next - based on lawsuits from the **AA mad dogs.

    What does WinMX bring to the table?

    • Winmx can be found at www.winmx.com It's actually a pretty good P2P program its never been bundled with any ads, spyware, etc.

      And as far as I know, it was one of the first to work without a central server.

      And more importantly, it was one of the first to allow you to download the same song (or whatever) from several different people at the same time.

      I never understood why it never gets any press. And now that I've learned its number one, I'm even more shocked.

      But, when you've got a great product, you d

  • distributed distribution (Score:3, Insightful)

    by bitspotter ( 455598 ) on Tuesday June 07, 2005 @07:44PM (#12753135) Journal
    Centralizaiton is not a feature.

    All this means is that iTMS is the only *single* place left. All the real action is distributed throughout the Internet. The only reason most go to bittorrent.com is to download the software - not the content.

    So, what fraction of Internet traffic [slashdot.org] does iTMS pull?

    most popular, my ass...
  • Surprise! People like downloading music cheaply instead of paying exhorbitant prices for CDs filled with crap. Who would have thought such a thing!

Slashdot Top Deals

"You know, we've won awards for this crap." -- David Letterman

Close