“I love the iTunes Music Store. When Apple CEO Steve Jobs unveiled the shop in the spring of 2003, I called it revolutionary, and who can argue that it’s been anything but?” Farhad Manjoo writes for Salon.
Manjoo writes, “Still, iTunes has always seemed like a stopgap measure, something to tolerate until the music industry got its act together. I think of it, now, as a place to buy music that I like, but not a place to get music I love. If you love something you want a permanent copy, and music from iTunes is fundamentally ephemeral: Nearly everything you purchase from the store will never work on any device not made by Apple.”
MacDailyNews Take: iTunes Store-purchased content work on Mac or Windows PC desktops and notebooks, can be burned onto music CDs and played on any CD player and – by ripping said CD – played on any MP3 player on Earth. It’s quite simple. Known to just about anyone who’s ever used iTunes. Yet, it’s amazing how many people get this wrong either by lazily repeating ignorance or intentionally spreading disinformation, isn’t it?
[And, as MacDailyNews reader “kenpet” notes below: You can also use iTunes to convert your non DRM music files to mp3 which is playable anywhere. Just set your iTunes Preferences: Advanced: Import Using to “MP3 Encoder” and you can then convert any track to MP3 under iTunes’ “Advanced” menu.]
Manjoo continues, “This week, Amazon launched a beta version of a music store that breaks this lock-in.”
MacDailyNews Take: You know, the “lock-in” that doesn’t exist. iPods do not require iTunes Store purchases. The iTunes Store does not require iPods. Is that simple enough for you, Farhad?
Manjoo continues, “All of Amazon’s tracks are sold as unrestricted MP3s, free of Digital Rights Management, or DRM — they will work on just about any music player in the world, including an iPod. The store marks iTunes’ first real competition. In fact, I think it kicks iTunes’ buttons.”
MacDailyNews Take: And we’re supposed to care about what you think because so far you’ve gotten extremely simple facts completely wrong? M’kay, Farhad.
Manjoo continues, “Here’s the main way Amazon runs circles around iTunes: I kid you not, shopping for digital music at Amazon simply feels better than shopping on iTunes. That’s because everything is unrestricted. You don’t have to consider where you’re going to play the songs or if you plan to keep them for the long run… Most of the tracks on iTunes, meanwhile, are gummed up by Apple’s copy-protection scheme, called FairPlay. Under these restrictions, you can put your songs on just five computers at a time; make only seven CD copies of a particular playlist; and, if you want to go mobile, the iPod and iPhone are your only option.”
MacDailyNews Take: Quick, alert the manufacturers! Mac and Windows PC notebooks are not “mobile.” Although, for some reason, we see people – on planes, for example – listening to something with white earbuds plugged into their notebooks. Must not be music. Oh, “only” seven CDs (until you change the order of a song and can burn seven more). Regardless, all you need is one CD and – Boom! – unrestricted Psychic well-being out the yin-yang.
Manjoo continues, “As wonderful as it has been to see Apple change the music business — and make no mistake, that’s what it did; Amazon’s store is only possible because Apple paved the way — nobody benefits from a digital-music monopoly.”
MacDailyNews Take: Farhad really screwed up here; he got something right.
Manjoo continues, “From now on when I look for music, I’m going to go to Amazon first. Only if I don’t find something there will I think about buying from iTunes. If you value your freedom, I recommend you do the same.”
Full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Kevin” for the heads up.]
MacDailyNews Take: You go to Amazon first if you’re interested in saving some money, not because of some ignorant dope scribbling about the value of “freedom.” People who are looking at Amazon forget that prices are not static. These could be introductory prices for all we know. If the labels are giving better pricing to Amazon, and artificially manipulating the market, then Apple – and perhaps Apple’s lawyers – are going to have something serious to say about it.
Competition is good. Don’t forget that it was Apple’s Steve Jobs who called for the end of music DRM, prompting just such competition. So, use the store that offers what you want, whether it be cross-platform support, file formats, bit-rates, selection, and/or prices. We plan to check out both Amazon and iTunes Store when buying music – because they both support Macs and iPods. We’ll probably buy from whichever store has the best price (even though we prefer AAC over the old dino MP3 format). Competition is good. Let it work its magic.
People who look at this as “Amazon takes on iTunes Store” completely miss the real story. Jobs’ call for the removal of DRM was designed to totally marginalize Microsoft, once and for all. It’s the final nail in MS’s coffin. Redmond will not control digital music formats. Apple won. Meanwhile, iPod sales continue unabated as iTunes Store does not and never did drive iPod purchases (which we know because 97% of music on the average iPod is not from the iTunes Store). And, believe it or not, despite recent hyperbole, Apple’s iTunes Store will be just fine.
I do not believe that the author is off by that much. Regardless of why iTunes has DRM (thank you major labels!) or how easy it is to override it, tracks free of DRM are preferable.
Where I disagree with Manjoo is that Amazon is not flawed, either. Except for a few impulse buys at iTunes, I still purchase the vast majority of my music as CDs. This is partly because of the DRM, but mostly because it is a compressed format. Unless iTunes or Amazon had either uncompressed or lossless formats, they are flawed. I know that some will say “I can’t hear the difference/you’re some sort of pretentious audiophile douchebag!”. However, I am not an audiophile and on good speaker systems, the limitations are not only noticeable, but irritating. On earbuds, sure, no difference.
Wake me up when Amazon and iTunes catch up to some of the niche services with their, to quote some jibber-jabbar from yesterday, “obscure” artists*, and offer uncompressed or lossless files without DRM. Beacuse, you know, with the various indernets and such, we should really be relying on the same old bullshit star-driven system that brought us N’Sync and Britney Spears. They are SO not obscure.
Until then, I am buying CDs.
to Maul:
“They are setting you up”??? How can they be setting anybody up by watermarking? You buy your songs from Amazon and put them on your iPod! Why in the world would you ever want to put them on a P2P file sharing network? I thought that’s illega in most jurisdictions in the worldl!!!
As long as watermarking doesn’t alter the actual sound of the song, I have no beef with it. This is just like iTunes meta-tagging.
As for pricing and DRM-free deal, Apple has every right to demand the same treatment from the labels. If Amazon is allowed to sell Universal’s tracks DRM-free and cheap, I would love to hear the reason why Apple cannot be allowed to do exactly the same! I believe Microsoft was found guilty for doing exactly that – preferential deals with certain OEMs and not others.
As much as they would like to, labels simply cannot win in this game. The game belongs to consumers and Apple has proven that. Going back to business of forcing artists to record albums instead of singles, and forcing audience to buy those albums, instead of singles, will not happen in the download world. Labels must make their peace with this if they wish to survive.
@Spock: iTunes Store, and Amazon’s, are just convenience stores. They are there to satisfy only about 80% of the users. Those that they want the product now, and not later. Those that want to listen only the good 2 tracks that are on a CD (thanks to the label pigs that pushed this business model: sell 10 crappy tracks bundled with 2 hits). Those that are not audiophiles.
Girly Pants…
Thanks for the comment regarding my post. If you paid attention before you typed you would realize that a laptop is not a portable device in the sense and spirit with which this argument is based. All I read on this site is how bad a zune and other competitors are… I can tell you that I would gladly run, hike, bike, kayak whatever with any one of those “Mobile” devices before strapping my Macbook Pro around my neck.
Get real about what a mobile device is. I sit in my car with Ipod plugged in to the sound system. This may get a little complicated with a Macbook.
I agree with TeamZissou about the Donald Rumsfeld approach to everything Mac.
I say it again… “Positive reaction should be given where credit is due!” Congratulations to others who share the vision of a DRM free world. That doesn’t mean that I won’t use my Itunes store. I happen to like it. But, the music that I have purchased cannot sync to anything other than an Ipod or an Iphone. Period. The PC being used with ITunes is not being synced for mobile purposes.
I would love to see the person riding his bicycle with a macbook in a back pack with headphones coming out the top. It may get a little difficult to change tracks while on the move. Get real people! Focus!
Damn! There’s quite a backlash against MDN. Even the Apple fanboys see how unreasonable MDN can be.
Amazon music downloads are great.
I like the selection, the non DRM, the prices and the layout of the store.
Remember folks, MDN is against anything that is not owned or created by Apple.
One point the writer is making is convenience – i.e. that with non-DRM mp3, there is no need for conversion from AAC to mp3, burn to CD, re-ripping back to mp3 from CD etc. If someone has a device that does not play AAC they are not going to be too keen on all of this conversion every time, and iTunes implementation of it has always been clumsy. True, users are not exactly “locked in” but it is clumsy and time wasting.
@DRM sucks
You don’t think CD’s are compressed? They are compressed. Where have you been. Compare a good quality phonnograph to a CD. There is a difference.
I’ve said before and I’ll say it again and again and yet again I’m sure before it’s all said and done. The Music Industry is broken and needs to just close up shop. The Music Industry in it’s infantile temper tantrums, is basically trying to kneecap it’s third largest retailer.
I’ve been in business for a long time, and as a business person, I’m always looking at know to take a reseller from no sells to a top tier resellers as quickly as possible. How do you do this?
iTunes when from everyone poking fun and making jokes about it to a top tier reseller more or less overnight.
Apple’s model for iTunes works and works very well. The Industry needs to be looked at, support, and promote 100% the Apple iTunes model for reselling it’s products.
If I were in the Music, Movie or TV business I’d want Apple selling my stuff on iTunes, and I’d let them sell it anyway they wanted to and what every price they thought was fair. The Movie and TV industries are babes in the woods when it comes to On-Line sales and marketing and Apple knows how to do both. The Movie and TV on-line sales will be in the same boat with the Music industry if they try to rely on their old out dated and backasswards business models.
The Music Industry as a whole is sinking into the ocean on a leaky ship, because their business model is broken and no longer works. Apple’s Music sells model does work and they have proven it. They’ve become the third largest music retailer. If the Music Industry would back iTunes with the next steps in the iTunes evolution (DMR free and full back catalog availability, including music videos), iTunes would be the number one Music Retailer in the world.
The Music Industry could start dumping their expensive duplication services, marketing costs, and trim their account sales staffers and drastically reduce their employee overhead costs, all by dumping physical product. To do this you have to start treating all on-line resellers like physical product resellers. On-line resellers are then going to niche market just like physical resellers. The Wal-mart and Amazon will stick to the current top 40 charting hits and a few select classic Tracks, Others will pick-up the Album market, You’ll have on-line stores that specialize in Classical and Opera, and every an audiophile store, and then you’ll have the mega super resellers that stock every track ever released by the music industry.
My vision of where the music industry needs to go is from a strictly business perspective.
Amazon = the new Apple
Apple = the new Microsoft
Some of things this guy says are true, but not with regard to music purchased at iTMS, that’s what really amazes me about the article. If he were talking buying TV episodes and movies I’d be slightly more with him, but he’s not talking about video he’s talking about music. I can tell you that for me the shopping experience at iTMS is far superior to Amazon, (I bought an album of music on Amazon yesterday), and since playing music on two, and occasionally three devices is all I ever need to do, (as opposed to buying music and then giving it away to all of my best buds), all this continued hoopla about how restrictive it is to buy music at iTMS, combined with the facts that he just got plain wrong – is bogus, simply bogus.
If Apple could twist the networks collective arms and allow us consumer-types to be able to burn at least one DVD of shows that would be playable on any standard component DVD player I think iTMS would do even better than it alreay is with videos. That’s my biggest beef with iTMS – and it is a big one. I buy episodes from one or two shows that I can’t seem to live without, and I refuse to buy movies for the already stated reason. If Amazon wants to really get in the game they should offer TV shows (and include Mac users dammit) with no DRM, now that would be an iTMS killer.
I’m glad for both of these commercial outlets for music, and for their support of my favorite platform, and I will undoubtedly shop at both – even though I much prefer the real-world experience of iTMS.
@MikeR:
You are a retard.
@ Mr. Peabody: “…real-world experience of iTMS”
LOL. “real-world”?
Apparently not only can Majoo not get the facts right, neither can MDN
According to Apple:
http://www.apple.com/itunes/store/music.html
“Know your rights to rock.
Burn the music you buy to an unlimited number of CDs for your personal use, listen to it on an unlimited number of iPod players, and play it on up to five authorized computers.”
This as opposed to Manjoo claiming you can only burn up to 7 CD’s, and MDN defending against that as if it were true.
Before you call someone else on not fact-checking, you might want to do it yourself.
Frankly, I’d rather buy the 128Kbps AAC files from iTunes that sound quite nice than the much larger MP3s that will quickly fill up my iPod. It’s not that big of a deal to burn a CD if I really need to get the music into some other format — something I rarely ever do anyway.
I like iTunes. Sure I hope the DRM goes away some day, but it’s not like it’s ruining my life. Geez.
The bigger battle has always been about Apple’s Quicktime wrapper versus Microsoft’s Windows Media. Before iTunes and iPods, Windows Media looked to be the likely winner, but Apple’s quick thinking turned the day. That’s the big untold story. All the rest of the stories of DRM, etc, all fall under this larger battle.
Burn and rip??? Come on MDN thats ridiculous and you know it.
Yes it is technically possible, but at the at the cost of audio quality and inconvenience.
This is a perfect example of MDN’s blind support for anything and everything Apple even is the face of such an obvious superior offering.
Better audio quality.
No DRM.
Cheaper.
Seems like a no brainer to me.
Marian, why is MikeR a “retard”? (Real educated word choice, by the way, Marian).
The fact is that CD’s ARE compressed. They’re just not as compressed as AAC’s or MP3’s. YOU really need to think before you write.
CD’s may be the current de facto mass market gold standard, but they are definitely NOT the ultimate sonic listening or delivery medium. Ask any audiophile.
Until you’ve heard a gold-plated, Ultradisc UHR Gain 2 Super Audio CD or an equivalent DVD-Audio pressing that’s being played back through a state-of-the-art sound system, realize that CD’s are nowhere near the maximum in aural listening pleasure.
Look at it this way: MP3’s are about an inch off the ground; AAC’s are about two feet off the ground; CD’s are at about the second story window. But SACD is at the top of the Empire State building.
Hey MDN,
You’re kidding yourself if you don’t think you’re locked in. Yes, it is technically possible to get your songs to a non-Apple MP3 player by burning and then ripping them — but by doing that you’re decompressing and then recompressing the track, introducing artifacts into the music. The ripping breaks FairPlay but you’re paying for it with lower-quality music. Everyone knows that. It’s odd that you don’t.
Moreover, it’s work: If you’ve got a music collection of thousands of songs, you’ve got to burn and rip each to get it to another player.
So in order to break free from iTunes, you’ve got to make copies of your songs and make do with lower-quality music. You don’t call that lock-in? Fine. But imagine if Sony Music began selling CDs that only worked on Sony players but could be made to work on other machines if you recorded it to a cassette tape first. You would call that a ridiculous closed model, wouldn’t you? Tell me why iTunes DRM is different?
If you think there’s no added benefit to unrestricted MP3s, fine — don’t buy them. But many people do. Indeed, even Steve Jobs does — hence his request that record labels let him sell unrestricted music. And hence the big press conference when EMI agreed to sell unrestricted songs on iTunes. And, of course, hence iTunes’ greater price — $1.29 — for those songs. You pay extra, on iTunes, to get songs that can be played on other players. Apple certainly seems to think that DRM-free songs are worth more than DRM ones; if you don’t, fine, but don’t pretend there’s no difference.
–FM
“Until you’ve heard a gold-plated, Ultradisc UHR Gain 2 Super Audio CD or an equivalent DVD-Audio pressing that’s being played back through a state-of-the-art sound system, realize that CD’s are nowhere near the maximum in aural listening pleasure.”
Yeah, but can you import those into iTunes and put them on your iPod while keeping the original HD sound? Are there any portable player for these things? I’m sure they sound a lot better than CDs but they’re not practical yet. CDs and Apple Lossless are good enough for this decade. So until we have multi terabyte hard drives in our iPods thats out of the question.
1) Its great that amazon has come in. Now no-one can sue Apple for being a so-called Monopolist
2) I’ve downloaded the same song from both stores and guess what: iTunes Store downloads SOUND BETTER. I am an audiophile, so I notice it. but for your ordinary listeners maybe not. But I’m still going with iTunes.
I think it would be really slick if Apple & Amazon integrated their stores both into iTunes. Amazon’s music store is web based after all. I’m sure it could happen.
@ Spark
You are right about journalists, Spark. If you think about it… they are experts at absolutely NOTHING! Being a journalist, even specifically educated as one, doesn’t grant them the infinite wisdom required to understand everything they report on.
I suspect this guy wrote this article just so he could use the pun “it kicks iTunes’ buttons”
It has already been said here; Amazon is integrated into iTunes quite nicely. It’s a single-click process. You find your song(s), you click, it automatically launches their little downloader application; it begins download, showing you progress along the way; it finishes the download, imports the song in yor iTunes and launches iTunes for you. Once you plug in your iPod, depending on how your iTunes is set up, it will automatically show up in the iPod. The song comes with album art as well, so for practical purposes, there is little difference.
On another note, it’s nice to see the author of Salon’s article checking comments on MDN and submitting his own (obviously assuming it was indeed him and not an impostor). Regarding his comments, he’s got something a bit wrong (in that comment; I’m not talking about the original article, where others provided thoughts).
Apple’s price of $1.29 is for songs with BETTER quality (lower compression); these song also happen to have no DRM either. To imply that Apple is charging more for just removing the DRM distorts the picture. For more money, you are getting much better quality (which was something demanded by a very vocal minority of users), and removal of DRM was just a free bonus.
Either way, Amazon provides validation for Apple’s statements of the past year. Let’s watch how this pans out; I’m sure Apple will continue to stay on top (convenience, convenience, convenience…), but Amazon will probably all but kill other competitors.