iTunes DRM-Free Tracks Now Same Price As DRM Tracks 250
jawtheshark writes "Apple has made the decision to revise the pricing of Plus songs on the iTunes Music store. Whereas previously the DRM-less tracks were more expensive than the 'normal' option (at $1.29 vs. $0.99), DRM-less tracks bought via ITMS will now be priced on the same level as DRM'd tracks. 'Apple plans to expand iTunes Plus to include certain indie music labels starting Wednesday, October 17 (or sometime this week, at least) ... This expansion won't include all independent music labels just yet, although we're optimistic that more will be included in the future. While we have no information on whether the iTunes Plus songs are selling well, we assume that the decision to drop the price is a response to the Amazon MP3 store. Amazon sells individual tracks for between 89 and 99 apiece, all without any DRM restrictions. With that in mind, it's kind of hard for Apple to compete at $1.29.'"
Nice (Score:1, Informative)
All tracks to be 99 (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Hard, but not impossible (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Hard, but not impossible (Score:2, Informative)
Re:More important (to me at least) (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Hard, but not impossible (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Hard, but not impossible (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I realize all of this will continue to evolve.. (Score:3, Informative)
Hardly easier (Score:2, Informative)
Just for an unscientifc experiment, I randomized my iTunes playlist by artist and got the above sample. Not until "Fall Out Boy" in the 11th spot did I get an artist of my liking that is available from Amazon's mp3 stores. One or two songs would be ok, but 10 out 11 is simply not acceptable. Unless they sign more labels, this model is DOA.
Re:I realize all of this will continue to evolve.. (Score:3, Informative)
What precisely is the problem here? It's not as though you're sharing those files around is it? And it's only your name, in an easily removable tag. I'm yet to hear a serious reason why this is so bad that uses actual logic. At the absolute worst and most cynical, it could be described only as a "minor inconvenience."
Apple
And that's because Apple clearly don't want Universal to go DRM-free, is it? And you know this how, exactly? Could it be because EMI were willing, but other companies wanted different rules or wanted to break Apple's dominance? Will I end every sentence with a question mark? No, I have other punctuation waiting in the wings!
Apple
Other people have reminded you that Apple were doing this before Amazon. Not first in the online world (it's not hard to find other labels like eMusic) but they were the first really big, unquestionably legal player to offer DRM-free tracks.
Apple
Good point. Apple picked the 99 cent price point early on and stuck with it. There have been many accounts of pressure applied to Apple to raise the price, and they've resisted. Hopefully Amazon's lower price will force Apple to compete at that level (really, I mean force the labels to realise this level is the price people are willing to pay).
I think you've tried hard to criticise Apple here, but failed to come up with a compellingly damning criticism. Better points could have revolved around the poor support for indie DRM-free tracks (improving now though) and purchase of lossless media (256kbit versus lossless is hard to hear though). Sadly you didn't grasp the nettle of opportunity when you could've.
AAC is not Apple's proprietary format (Score:4, Informative)
AAC is just the MPEG 4 audio codec, it's a publicly defined standard, and somewhat better quality than MP3 for equivalent file sizes. There are a few other media players that support it... but most only support MP3 and Microsoft's proprietary WMA. It's ironic, too, when some company whines about Apple's "non-standard" formats when it's *their* decision, not Apple's, not to support MP4.
One wonders if Microsoft cuts them a deal on the license for WMA if they leave out MP4/AAC, OGG, etcetera...
You can transcode to MP3 if you need to, if you must buy a media player from a company that kowtows to Redmond.
Re:Free music (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.ejamming.com/ [ejamming.com]
Re:Nice (Score:3, Informative)
NO -- That's Incorrect (Score:1, Informative)