Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
Gentlemen,
iTunes for Windows was released today. Now there are no more valid excuses why anyone would not be encoding AAC (as opposed to that filthy MP3 swill). Sounds better, vastly better quality control, no variables. Sure there are a few good sounding MP3s, but *all* ACCs sound good. There are no settings available for you to mess it up. I'm sure we're all as sick as I am of hearing our wonderful mixes butchered on the web. Make it happen troops. -BH |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
Do any portable audio devices support AAC? I assume the iPod does but I
could be wrong- Om "BananaHead" wrote in message om... Gentlemen, iTunes for Windows was released today. Now there are no more valid excuses why anyone would not be encoding AAC (as opposed to that filthy MP3 swill). Sounds better, vastly better quality control, no variables. Sure there are a few good sounding MP3s, but *all* ACCs sound good. There are no settings available for you to mess it up. I'm sure we're all as sick as I am of hearing our wonderful mixes butchered on the web. Make it happen troops. -BH |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
Do any portable audio devices support AAC? I assume the iPod does but I
could be wrong- Om "BananaHead" wrote in message om... Gentlemen, iTunes for Windows was released today. Now there are no more valid excuses why anyone would not be encoding AAC (as opposed to that filthy MP3 swill). Sounds better, vastly better quality control, no variables. Sure there are a few good sounding MP3s, but *all* ACCs sound good. There are no settings available for you to mess it up. I'm sure we're all as sick as I am of hearing our wonderful mixes butchered on the web. Make it happen troops. -BH |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
"Mp3 swill"
Main Entry: 1swill Pronunciation: 'swil Function: verb Etymology: Middle English swilen, from Old English swillan Date: before 12th century transitive senses 1 : WASH, DRENCH 2 : to drink great drafts of : GUZZLE 3 : to feed (as a pig) with swill intransitive senses 1 : to drink or eat freely, greedily, or to excess 2 : SWASH - swill·er noun These guys have never heard an MP3 or you'd see under Mp3, swill for the ears. Does Ogg Vorbis have any chance of becoming a standard? Tom "Om_Audio" wrote in message news:AwRjb.804825$uu5.141723@sccrnsc04... Do any portable audio devices support AAC? I assume the iPod does but I could be wrong- Om "BananaHead" wrote in message om... Gentlemen, iTunes for Windows was released today. Now there are no more valid excuses why anyone would not be encoding AAC (as opposed to that filthy MP3 swill). Sounds better, vastly better quality control, no variables. Sure there are a few good sounding MP3s, but *all* ACCs sound good. There are no settings available for you to mess it up. I'm sure we're all as sick as I am of hearing our wonderful mixes butchered on the web. Make it happen troops. -BH |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
"Mp3 swill"
Main Entry: 1swill Pronunciation: 'swil Function: verb Etymology: Middle English swilen, from Old English swillan Date: before 12th century transitive senses 1 : WASH, DRENCH 2 : to drink great drafts of : GUZZLE 3 : to feed (as a pig) with swill intransitive senses 1 : to drink or eat freely, greedily, or to excess 2 : SWASH - swill·er noun These guys have never heard an MP3 or you'd see under Mp3, swill for the ears. Does Ogg Vorbis have any chance of becoming a standard? Tom "Om_Audio" wrote in message news:AwRjb.804825$uu5.141723@sccrnsc04... Do any portable audio devices support AAC? I assume the iPod does but I could be wrong- Om "BananaHead" wrote in message om... Gentlemen, iTunes for Windows was released today. Now there are no more valid excuses why anyone would not be encoding AAC (as opposed to that filthy MP3 swill). Sounds better, vastly better quality control, no variables. Sure there are a few good sounding MP3s, but *all* ACCs sound good. There are no settings available for you to mess it up. I'm sure we're all as sick as I am of hearing our wonderful mixes butchered on the web. Make it happen troops. -BH |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
From what I understand OGG requires floating point calculations ( I think I
read about this on OGG web site) which iPod etc do not have- I was way into OGG for awhile- emailing Apple to support the format in the iPod- but I'm back to mp3 for sheer compatability reasons- 192kbps is passable for me at this point- Om "Tommy B" wrote in message k.net... "Mp3 swill" Main Entry: 1swill Pronunciation: 'swil Function: verb Etymology: Middle English swilen, from Old English swillan Date: before 12th century transitive senses 1 : WASH, DRENCH 2 : to drink great drafts of : GUZZLE 3 : to feed (as a pig) with swill intransitive senses 1 : to drink or eat freely, greedily, or to excess 2 : SWASH - swill·er noun These guys have never heard an MP3 or you'd see under Mp3, swill for the ears. Does Ogg Vorbis have any chance of becoming a standard? Tom "Om_Audio" wrote in message news:AwRjb.804825$uu5.141723@sccrnsc04... Do any portable audio devices support AAC? I assume the iPod does but I could be wrong- Om "BananaHead" wrote in message om... Gentlemen, iTunes for Windows was released today. Now there are no more valid excuses why anyone would not be encoding AAC (as opposed to that filthy MP3 swill). Sounds better, vastly better quality control, no variables. Sure there are a few good sounding MP3s, but *all* ACCs sound good. There are no settings available for you to mess it up. I'm sure we're all as sick as I am of hearing our wonderful mixes butchered on the web. Make it happen troops. -BH |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
From what I understand OGG requires floating point calculations ( I think I
read about this on OGG web site) which iPod etc do not have- I was way into OGG for awhile- emailing Apple to support the format in the iPod- but I'm back to mp3 for sheer compatability reasons- 192kbps is passable for me at this point- Om "Tommy B" wrote in message k.net... "Mp3 swill" Main Entry: 1swill Pronunciation: 'swil Function: verb Etymology: Middle English swilen, from Old English swillan Date: before 12th century transitive senses 1 : WASH, DRENCH 2 : to drink great drafts of : GUZZLE 3 : to feed (as a pig) with swill intransitive senses 1 : to drink or eat freely, greedily, or to excess 2 : SWASH - swill·er noun These guys have never heard an MP3 or you'd see under Mp3, swill for the ears. Does Ogg Vorbis have any chance of becoming a standard? Tom "Om_Audio" wrote in message news:AwRjb.804825$uu5.141723@sccrnsc04... Do any portable audio devices support AAC? I assume the iPod does but I could be wrong- Om "BananaHead" wrote in message om... Gentlemen, iTunes for Windows was released today. Now there are no more valid excuses why anyone would not be encoding AAC (as opposed to that filthy MP3 swill). Sounds better, vastly better quality control, no variables. Sure there are a few good sounding MP3s, but *all* ACCs sound good. There are no settings available for you to mess it up. I'm sure we're all as sick as I am of hearing our wonderful mixes butchered on the web. Make it happen troops. -BH |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
"BananaHead" wrote in message om... Gentlemen, I'm sure we're all as sick as I am of hearing our wonderful mixes butchered on the web. Make it happen troops. Hahahaha, I started the install and it said "If you proceed your Quicktime Pro will no longer work and you'll have to buy a new key." Assholes, what does an audio player have to do with video? And why should a free download break or require the upgrade of my paid-for s/w? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
"BananaHead" wrote in message om... Gentlemen, I'm sure we're all as sick as I am of hearing our wonderful mixes butchered on the web. Make it happen troops. Hahahaha, I started the install and it said "If you proceed your Quicktime Pro will no longer work and you'll have to buy a new key." Assholes, what does an audio player have to do with video? And why should a free download break or require the upgrade of my paid-for s/w? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
iTunes relies on QT for AAC decoding. You have a non-AAC version of QT. You
need QT 6.4. I was lucky enough to have 6.2 when I got QT Pro. Why they charge for the update, only they know; perhaps there are other QTP features you didn't buy, it's not like they're the only ones that do this. MikeK wrote: "BananaHead" wrote in message om... Gentlemen, I'm sure we're all as sick as I am of hearing our wonderful mixes butchered on the web. Make it happen troops. Hahahaha, I started the install and it said "If you proceed your Quicktime Pro will no longer work and you'll have to buy a new key." Assholes, what does an audio player have to do with video? And why should a free download break or require the upgrade of my paid-for s/w? |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
iTunes relies on QT for AAC decoding. You have a non-AAC version of QT. You
need QT 6.4. I was lucky enough to have 6.2 when I got QT Pro. Why they charge for the update, only they know; perhaps there are other QTP features you didn't buy, it's not like they're the only ones that do this. MikeK wrote: "BananaHead" wrote in message om... Gentlemen, I'm sure we're all as sick as I am of hearing our wonderful mixes butchered on the web. Make it happen troops. Hahahaha, I started the install and it said "If you proceed your Quicktime Pro will no longer work and you'll have to buy a new key." Assholes, what does an audio player have to do with video? And why should a free download break or require the upgrade of my paid-for s/w? |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
"Om_Audio" wrote in message news:AwRjb.804825$uu5.141723@sccrnsc04...
Do any portable audio devices support AAC? I assume the iPod does but I could be wrong- Yep, iPod. Nobody on osx that i know uses anything but AAC unless you need MP3 for compatibility. The files are the same size but one sounds drastically better so it's a no brainer. I don't know about other portable devices but with AAC in itunes for windows I would guess if they don't already they will soon. -bh |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
"Om_Audio" wrote in message news:AwRjb.804825$uu5.141723@sccrnsc04...
Do any portable audio devices support AAC? I assume the iPod does but I could be wrong- Yep, iPod. Nobody on osx that i know uses anything but AAC unless you need MP3 for compatibility. The files are the same size but one sounds drastically better so it's a no brainer. I don't know about other portable devices but with AAC in itunes for windows I would guess if they don't already they will soon. -bh |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
Is there software available for windows xp that encodes AAC? Which one?
JL |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
Is there software available for windows xp that encodes AAC? Which one?
JL |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
I believe Quicktime Pro encodes AAC.
JL wrote: Is there software available for windows xp that encodes AAC? Which one? JL |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
I believe Quicktime Pro encodes AAC.
JL wrote: Is there software available for windows xp that encodes AAC? Which one? JL |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
"BananaHead" wrote in message om... Gentlemen, iTunes for Windows was released today. Now there are no more valid excuses why anyone would not be encoding AAC (as opposed to that filthy MP3 swill). Sounds better, vastly better quality control, no variables. Sure there are a few good sounding MP3s, but *all* ACCs sound good. There are no settings available for you to mess it up. I'm sure we're all as sick as I am of hearing our wonderful mixes butchered on the web. Make it happen troops. Too bad iTunes doesn't support WM9 which to my ears is the best sounding codec out there for any given bit rate. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
"BananaHead" wrote in message om... Gentlemen, iTunes for Windows was released today. Now there are no more valid excuses why anyone would not be encoding AAC (as opposed to that filthy MP3 swill). Sounds better, vastly better quality control, no variables. Sure there are a few good sounding MP3s, but *all* ACCs sound good. There are no settings available for you to mess it up. I'm sure we're all as sick as I am of hearing our wonderful mixes butchered on the web. Make it happen troops. Too bad iTunes doesn't support WM9 which to my ears is the best sounding codec out there for any given bit rate. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
"JL" wrote in message ... Is there software available for windows xp that encodes AAC? Which one? JL Nero 6 will encode AAC. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
"JL" wrote in message ... Is there software available for windows xp that encodes AAC? Which one? JL Nero 6 will encode AAC. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
I just got the itunes which has a "convert to AAC" feature. Is there only one
algo for converting to AAC? I've bought some music from itunes and the AAC has very little artifacts at all. Very cool stuff. Steve |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
I just got the itunes which has a "convert to AAC" feature. Is there only one
algo for converting to AAC? I've bought some music from itunes and the AAC has very little artifacts at all. Very cool stuff. Steve |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
"BananaHead" wrote in message
om Gentlemen, iTunes for Windows was released today. Now there are no more valid excuses why anyone would not be encoding AAC (as opposed to that filthy MP3 swill). Sounds better, vastly better quality control, no variables. Sure there are a few good sounding MP3s, but *all* ACCs sound good. There are no settings available for you to mess it up. I'm sure we're all as sick as I am of hearing our wonderful mixes butchered on the web. Make it happen troops. My daughter egged me on, so I installed it on my normally bullet-proof XP system. I think I crashed it about 5 times in the first 3 minutes. However it does have a lot of ease-of-use features |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
"BananaHead" wrote in message
om Gentlemen, iTunes for Windows was released today. Now there are no more valid excuses why anyone would not be encoding AAC (as opposed to that filthy MP3 swill). Sounds better, vastly better quality control, no variables. Sure there are a few good sounding MP3s, but *all* ACCs sound good. There are no settings available for you to mess it up. I'm sure we're all as sick as I am of hearing our wonderful mixes butchered on the web. Make it happen troops. My daughter egged me on, so I installed it on my normally bullet-proof XP system. I think I crashed it about 5 times in the first 3 minutes. However it does have a lot of ease-of-use features |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
Isn't AAC just MP4 with a different name? I believe that there are the
exact same ways to screw things up encoding AAC as mp3. When I encode AAC in quicktime I have the same options as mp3 encoding. I don't know that AAC sounds better, but it does sound different than mp3. I do however still hear the same chopped reverb tails as mp3. The sound stage sounds a bit wider. It sounds a bit clearer, kind of. I don't know that consumers are going to perceive a benefit over mp3. I played some stuff I encoded as mp3 and AAC and my friends didn't really notice a difference in my studio until I pointed it out. They did think the low end was a more extended on the mp3 versions. Bottom line...it's still not as good as CD audio at 16 bit 44.1! Now that Apple opened this thing up to the whole market place(the other 95+% of us) maybe they will have the cash to really improve audio data compression. I saw an interview with Steve Jobs and he was talking about how little money Apple can expect to make from iTunes and I was a bit horrified. He said the vast majority of moneys went to the labels. Shouldn't Apple get "retail". It didn't sound like the labels are really getting the idea. I think they are WAY overcharging for these files at $.99, and that over $.90 was going to the labels. How about A 50/50 split at $.50 a song. The files don't sound nearly good enough for me to pay the same price as CD's. Steve Jobs is trying, but are they making enough money to sustain iTunes? Arny Krueger wrote: "BananaHead" wrote in message om Gentlemen, iTunes for Windows was released today. Now there are no more valid excuses why anyone would not be encoding AAC (as opposed to that filthy MP3 swill). Sounds better, vastly better quality control, no variables. Sure there are a few good sounding MP3s, but *all* ACCs sound good. There are no settings available for you to mess it up. I'm sure we're all as sick as I am of hearing our wonderful mixes butchered on the web. Make it happen troops. My daughter egged me on, so I installed it on my normally bullet-proof XP system. I think I crashed it about 5 times in the first 3 minutes. However it does have a lot of ease-of-use features |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
Isn't AAC just MP4 with a different name? I believe that there are the
exact same ways to screw things up encoding AAC as mp3. When I encode AAC in quicktime I have the same options as mp3 encoding. I don't know that AAC sounds better, but it does sound different than mp3. I do however still hear the same chopped reverb tails as mp3. The sound stage sounds a bit wider. It sounds a bit clearer, kind of. I don't know that consumers are going to perceive a benefit over mp3. I played some stuff I encoded as mp3 and AAC and my friends didn't really notice a difference in my studio until I pointed it out. They did think the low end was a more extended on the mp3 versions. Bottom line...it's still not as good as CD audio at 16 bit 44.1! Now that Apple opened this thing up to the whole market place(the other 95+% of us) maybe they will have the cash to really improve audio data compression. I saw an interview with Steve Jobs and he was talking about how little money Apple can expect to make from iTunes and I was a bit horrified. He said the vast majority of moneys went to the labels. Shouldn't Apple get "retail". It didn't sound like the labels are really getting the idea. I think they are WAY overcharging for these files at $.99, and that over $.90 was going to the labels. How about A 50/50 split at $.50 a song. The files don't sound nearly good enough for me to pay the same price as CD's. Steve Jobs is trying, but are they making enough money to sustain iTunes? Arny Krueger wrote: "BananaHead" wrote in message om Gentlemen, iTunes for Windows was released today. Now there are no more valid excuses why anyone would not be encoding AAC (as opposed to that filthy MP3 swill). Sounds better, vastly better quality control, no variables. Sure there are a few good sounding MP3s, but *all* ACCs sound good. There are no settings available for you to mess it up. I'm sure we're all as sick as I am of hearing our wonderful mixes butchered on the web. Make it happen troops. My daughter egged me on, so I installed it on my normally bullet-proof XP system. I think I crashed it about 5 times in the first 3 minutes. However it does have a lot of ease-of-use features |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
"MikeK" wrote in message ...
Assholes, what does an audio player have to do with video? And why should a free download break or require the upgrade of my paid-for s/w? Truely. I was talking with someone just last night about this. "What does QT Pro add" I asked, "should I get it?" "No" he says. He bought QT Pro once, but then shortly after there was a new update and he said they made him purchase it all over again just to get the ****in update... or some such. This really is the most retarded thing on the planet. I didn't have to pay $1300 again for my recent N2.1 update... if I did PT would starting looking better and better. -bh |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
"MikeK" wrote in message ...
Assholes, what does an audio player have to do with video? And why should a free download break or require the upgrade of my paid-for s/w? Truely. I was talking with someone just last night about this. "What does QT Pro add" I asked, "should I get it?" "No" he says. He bought QT Pro once, but then shortly after there was a new update and he said they made him purchase it all over again just to get the ****in update... or some such. This really is the most retarded thing on the planet. I didn't have to pay $1300 again for my recent N2.1 update... if I did PT would starting looking better and better. -bh |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
"Arny Krueger" wrote ...
My daughter egged me on, so I installed it on my normally bullet-proof XP system. I think I crashed it about 5 times in the first 3 minutes. Its part of the vast "fruit-tree-conspirancy" to try to convince the 92% of the market to abondon Windows and go over to the Dark Side. :-)) |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
"Arny Krueger" wrote ...
My daughter egged me on, so I installed it on my normally bullet-proof XP system. I think I crashed it about 5 times in the first 3 minutes. Its part of the vast "fruit-tree-conspirancy" to try to convince the 92% of the market to abondon Windows and go over to the Dark Side. :-)) |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
"Andrew M." wrote in message
Isn't AAC just MP4 with a different name? My understanding is that MP4 (more properly MPEG-4) is a superset of AAC. A vast superset. I believe that there are the exact same ways to screw things up encoding AAC as mp3. No doubt. When I encode AAC in quicktime I have the same options as mp3 encoding. Right, and under the covers the programming can be as good or as bad as the programmers & analysts who developed it. I don't know that AAC sounds better, but it does sound different than mp3. I do however still hear the same chopped reverb tails as mp3. The sound stage sounds a bit wider. It sounds a bit clearer, kind of. Here's my attempt to shed some light on the subject: http://www.pcabx.com/product/coder_decoder/index.htm I don't know that consumers are going to perceive a benefit over mp3. That's grist for the market survey mills, right? I played some stuff I encoded as mp3 and AAC and my friends didn't really notice a difference in my studio until I pointed it out. They did think the low end was a more extended on the mp3 versions. Level-matched, time-synched, bias-controlled tests or casual listening? Bottom line...it's still not as good as CD audio at 16 bit 44.1! All I can say is that my Nomad Jukebox 3 is loaded with 1644 .wav files. But in a pinch I've been known to listen to MP3s. It's about the music, right? Now that Apple opened this thing up to the whole market place(the other 95+% of us) maybe they will have the cash to really improve audio data compression. I don't know if Apple is a gatekeeper for this technology. I wouldn't be surprised if iTunes includes some technology they licensed from someone else, under the covers. My understanding is that AAC was developed by a consortium that includes both US & European companies. One person I casually know who was intimately involved with the development of AAC and was well-known on some Usenet audio groups is now said to be working for Microsoft... I saw an interview with Steve Jobs and he was talking about how little money Apple can expect to make from iTunes and I was a bit horrified. He said the vast majority of moneys went to the labels. A recent biz magazine article said that of a 99 cent sales price, 75 cents goes to the label, and 5 cents goes to the charge card folks. Shouldn't Apple get "retail". It didn't sound like the labels are really getting the idea. I think they are WAY overcharging for these files at $.99, and that over $.90 was going to the labels. I hear its *only* $0.75. How about A 50/50 split at $.50 a song. The files don't sound nearly good enough for me to pay the same price as CD's. Steve Jobs is trying, but are they making enough money to sustain iTunes? Normally hard-headed people like Dell are also jumping on this bandwagon. It might be THE NEXT BIG THING! ;-) Getting back on topic, (or maybe not, since iTunes is both a program and a web site) The windows iTunes program does seem to be a nice program for indexing media files, if a bit fragile in its import function. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
"Andrew M." wrote in message
Isn't AAC just MP4 with a different name? My understanding is that MP4 (more properly MPEG-4) is a superset of AAC. A vast superset. I believe that there are the exact same ways to screw things up encoding AAC as mp3. No doubt. When I encode AAC in quicktime I have the same options as mp3 encoding. Right, and under the covers the programming can be as good or as bad as the programmers & analysts who developed it. I don't know that AAC sounds better, but it does sound different than mp3. I do however still hear the same chopped reverb tails as mp3. The sound stage sounds a bit wider. It sounds a bit clearer, kind of. Here's my attempt to shed some light on the subject: http://www.pcabx.com/product/coder_decoder/index.htm I don't know that consumers are going to perceive a benefit over mp3. That's grist for the market survey mills, right? I played some stuff I encoded as mp3 and AAC and my friends didn't really notice a difference in my studio until I pointed it out. They did think the low end was a more extended on the mp3 versions. Level-matched, time-synched, bias-controlled tests or casual listening? Bottom line...it's still not as good as CD audio at 16 bit 44.1! All I can say is that my Nomad Jukebox 3 is loaded with 1644 .wav files. But in a pinch I've been known to listen to MP3s. It's about the music, right? Now that Apple opened this thing up to the whole market place(the other 95+% of us) maybe they will have the cash to really improve audio data compression. I don't know if Apple is a gatekeeper for this technology. I wouldn't be surprised if iTunes includes some technology they licensed from someone else, under the covers. My understanding is that AAC was developed by a consortium that includes both US & European companies. One person I casually know who was intimately involved with the development of AAC and was well-known on some Usenet audio groups is now said to be working for Microsoft... I saw an interview with Steve Jobs and he was talking about how little money Apple can expect to make from iTunes and I was a bit horrified. He said the vast majority of moneys went to the labels. A recent biz magazine article said that of a 99 cent sales price, 75 cents goes to the label, and 5 cents goes to the charge card folks. Shouldn't Apple get "retail". It didn't sound like the labels are really getting the idea. I think they are WAY overcharging for these files at $.99, and that over $.90 was going to the labels. I hear its *only* $0.75. How about A 50/50 split at $.50 a song. The files don't sound nearly good enough for me to pay the same price as CD's. Steve Jobs is trying, but are they making enough money to sustain iTunes? Normally hard-headed people like Dell are also jumping on this bandwagon. It might be THE NEXT BIG THING! ;-) Getting back on topic, (or maybe not, since iTunes is both a program and a web site) The windows iTunes program does seem to be a nice program for indexing media files, if a bit fragile in its import function. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
BH,
iTunes for Windows was released today. I'm astonished nobody mentioned the fatal flaw with iTunes and the other pay-to-download sites: The files you download from iTunes can be played on "up to three computers." So what do I do in 2011 when I get my fourth computer? I have LPs and 45s from 30 years ago that I can still play. Well, I could play them if I had a working turntable, but you get the idea. This is just more copy protection crap and I'll have nothing to do with it. Too bad the masses have no idea they are buying music that eventually self-destructs like those tapes on Mission Impossible... --Ethan |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
BH,
iTunes for Windows was released today. I'm astonished nobody mentioned the fatal flaw with iTunes and the other pay-to-download sites: The files you download from iTunes can be played on "up to three computers." So what do I do in 2011 when I get my fourth computer? I have LPs and 45s from 30 years ago that I can still play. Well, I could play them if I had a working turntable, but you get the idea. This is just more copy protection crap and I'll have nothing to do with it. Too bad the masses have no idea they are buying music that eventually self-destructs like those tapes on Mission Impossible... --Ethan |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
3! computers. That sucks. I am not paying full price for something that
isn't half the quality of CD. I wouldn't mind as much if the artists were getting a fair share but my understanding is that artists are getting paid the same cut as with CD's, so the labels are making MORE than they do from selling actual CD's. Why aren't the artists getting a bigger cut just like the labels they are on? It looks like the consumer AND the artists get kicked in the proverbial nuts on this one. Ethan Winer wrote: BH, iTunes for Windows was released today. I'm astonished nobody mentioned the fatal flaw with iTunes and the other pay-to-download sites: The files you download from iTunes can be played on "up to three computers." So what do I do in 2011 when I get my fourth computer? I have LPs and 45s from 30 years ago that I can still play. Well, I could play them if I had a working turntable, but you get the idea. This is just more copy protection crap and I'll have nothing to do with it. Too bad the masses have no idea they are buying music that eventually self-destructs like those tapes on Mission Impossible... --Ethan |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
3! computers. That sucks. I am not paying full price for something that
isn't half the quality of CD. I wouldn't mind as much if the artists were getting a fair share but my understanding is that artists are getting paid the same cut as with CD's, so the labels are making MORE than they do from selling actual CD's. Why aren't the artists getting a bigger cut just like the labels they are on? It looks like the consumer AND the artists get kicked in the proverbial nuts on this one. Ethan Winer wrote: BH, iTunes for Windows was released today. I'm astonished nobody mentioned the fatal flaw with iTunes and the other pay-to-download sites: The files you download from iTunes can be played on "up to three computers." So what do I do in 2011 when I get my fourth computer? I have LPs and 45s from 30 years ago that I can still play. Well, I could play them if I had a working turntable, but you get the idea. This is just more copy protection crap and I'll have nothing to do with it. Too bad the masses have no idea they are buying music that eventually self-destructs like those tapes on Mission Impossible... --Ethan |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
I'm astonished nobody mentioned the fatal flaw with iTunes and the other pay-to-download sites: The files you download from iTunes can be played on "up to three computers." So what do I do in 2011 when I get my fourth computer? I have LPs and 45s from 30 years ago that I can still play. Well, I could play them if I had a working turntable, but you get the idea. BRBR You could still play those original iTunes files if you just had the working original computer, but you get the idea. :-) More importantly, when you replace your computer, you de-authorize it so you can add your new one to the possible 3. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
I'm astonished nobody mentioned the fatal flaw with iTunes and the other pay-to-download sites: The files you download from iTunes can be played on "up to three computers." So what do I do in 2011 when I get my fourth computer? I have LPs and 45s from 30 years ago that I can still play. Well, I could play them if I had a working turntable, but you get the idea. BRBR You could still play those original iTunes files if you just had the working original computer, but you get the idea. :-) More importantly, when you replace your computer, you de-authorize it so you can add your new one to the possible 3. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
iTunes for windows
Nono, it's not that bad. You can play on up to 3 computers, and when
you take one out of service you deauthorize it so you can add another. And you can burn them onto as many CDs as you like. Now, I realize that "taking a computer out of service" usually means chucking it in the trash because it didn't wake up one day, but I think if you contact Apple that can be dealt with; they're pretty good at thinking ahead (software, not marketing). It's not very secure at all, really. You can rip the CD you burned from iTunes, then copy all you want (actually, I find the AAC file and import it into Peak, then save as AIFF). But this scheme seems to have satisfied the dinosaurs enough to license the music. Andrew M. wrote: 3! computers. That sucks. I am not paying full price for something that isn't half the quality of CD. I wouldn't mind as much if the artists were getting a fair share but my understanding is that artists are getting paid the same cut as with CD's, so the labels are making MORE than they do from selling actual CD's. Why aren't the artists getting a bigger cut just like the labels they are on? It looks like the consumer AND the artists get kicked in the proverbial nuts on this one. Ethan Winer wrote: BH, iTunes for Windows was released today. I'm astonished nobody mentioned the fatal flaw with iTunes and the other pay-to-download sites: The files you download from iTunes can be played on "up to three computers." So what do I do in 2011 when I get my fourth computer? I have LPs and 45s from 30 years ago that I can still play. Well, I could play them if I had a working turntable, but you get the idea. This is just more copy protection crap and I'll have nothing to do with it. Too bad the masses have no idea they are buying music that eventually self-destructs like those tapes on Mission Impossible... --Ethan |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
MP3 player with best hardware + software UI | Audio Opinions | |||
Interesting article on the effect of PtP file sharing on music sales... | Pro Audio |