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

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

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

"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

"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

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

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

"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?

"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?

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?

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?

"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

"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

Is there software available for windows xp that encodes AAC? Which one?

JL

Is there software available for windows xp that encodes AAC? Which one?

JL

I believe Quicktime Pro encodes AAC.

JL wrote:
Is there software available for windows xp that encodes AAC? Which one?

JL

I believe Quicktime Pro encodes AAC.

JL wrote:
Is there software available for windows xp that encodes AAC? Which one?

JL

"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.

"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.

"JL" wrote in message ...
Is there software available for windows xp that encodes AAC? Which one?

JL

Nero 6 will encode AAC.

"JL" wrote in message ...
Is there software available for windows xp that encodes AAC? Which one?

JL

Nero 6 will encode AAC.

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

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

"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

"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

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

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

"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

"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

"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. :-))

"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. :-))

"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.

"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.

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

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

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

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

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.

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.

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