• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Success of Apple Music Store Proves Apple Users Will Overpay for Anything

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
LOL, how many of you actually read the article? BBSpot is like the Onion and makes stuff up. The article is just humorous stuff and you people act like this it is flame bait. 🙂 you people crack me up.
 
They don't charge .99 a song for a whole album. If you purchase an entire album it is usually 9.99 for allt he tracks (beware partial albums).
 
Originally posted by: 4Lclovergirl
I just checked through my CDs, not one of them had less then 10 tracks... most had 14-16. Of course I used to listen to mostly country music, so maybe your music just have less songs? Anyway, I would only use this service for specific songs when I didn't want to buy a whole CD, or make a mixed tape of somehitng. Or most likely for obscure songs not easily found elsewhere.
Click to expand...

You can buya whole CD for $9.99 on the iTunes store.
 
Originally posted by: shinerburke
$1 per song is nothing. When iTune comes out I'll be all over it.
Click to expand...

yeap.

considering one of the biggest excuses people have for stealling music is they dont want to pay $15-20 for a cd with one or two good songs. Well now they can buy the songs they want. Personally i think its a great idea.

If it i could use it on my XP machine i would. $1 for the song i want? well worth it.
 
Originally posted by: Kenazo
They don't charge .99 a song for a whole album. If you purchase an entire album it is usually 9.99 for allt he tracks (beware partial albums).
Click to expand...
Correct, I was just about to post this as well.

Full albums, no matter how many songs there are, cost $9.99.

And AAC encoded songs at 128 kbps sound as good 160 kpbs MP3s. I know because I've listened to them, and yes I own a mac. 😉
 
Meh, maybe when they break out the 192+ kbps MusePack encoded files, maybe, but till then i'll pass, especially when I can buy the CD for about the same price.
 
I also think it is a good idea as long as the quality is as good or better than CD quality sound for that price....$1/song is fair and alot better than buying a CD filled with crap for $16-20
 
i'm not paying $10/album or $1/song for the equivalent of 128 Kbps... pump it up to 256 and i'd consider it.

as for short CDs check out the new linkin park
 
CNN article

In addition to downloading songs for 99 cents each, users would be allowed to burn songs on an unlimited number of CDs for personal use and download them on up to three computers

Great idea for us dialup users who don't want to tie up the phone line overnight waiting for a .02kb/s download to finish. But I would also like a higher quality file to be available.

 
The files are 128kbps AAC files. They sound better than 128kbps MP3s. I can't tell them apart from a CD, and I find it rather humorous that so many people are complaining about the quality of a sound format they've never even heard.
 
Originally posted by: Tyler
The files are 128kbps AAC files. They sound better than 128kbps MP3s. I can't tell them apart from a CD, and I find it rather humorous that so many people are complaining about the quality of a sound format they've never even heard.
Click to expand...


You know why they are complaining.
 
Great for those who have money to burn, but for those who aren't, a freeloader like me, would not even shell out a penny. I'd pay a little more for faster connection. since its at the top of my priority list.
 
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: Tyler
The files are 128kbps AAC files. They sound better than 128kbps MP3s. I can't tell them apart from a CD, and I find it rather humorous that so many people are complaining about the quality of a sound format they've never even heard.
Click to expand...


You know why they are complaining.
Click to expand...

They didn't like the poop-in-a-bag?

😀
 
Originally posted by: zsouthboy
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: Tyler
The files are 128kbps AAC files. They sound better than 128kbps MP3s. I can't tell them apart from a CD, and I find it rather humorous that so many people are complaining about the quality of a sound format they've never even heard.
Click to expand...


You know why they are complaining.
Click to expand...

They didn't like the poop-in-a-bag?

😀
Click to expand...


har har. 😀
 
It's a step in the right direction, but I still prefer buying used from Half.com for $5-$10, ripping & encoding myself. It needs to be a little cheaper for me to benefit from it, although I do think it's a really cool service.
 
Originally posted by: Tyler
The files are 128kbps AAC files. They sound better than 128kbps MP3s. I can't tell them apart from a CD, and I find it rather humorous that so many people are complaining about the quality of a sound format they've never even heard.
Click to expand...
What equipment are you using?

M-Audio Revolution --> DIY META42 --> Etymotic ER-4P, DIY Interconnects and cables.

^^My planned system, should be close to completion by the end of summer. Damned if i'm listening to lossy encoded crap on it.
 
Originally posted by: Tyler
The files are 128kbps AAC files. They sound better than 128kbps MP3s. I can't tell them apart from a CD, and I find it rather humorous that so many people are complaining about the quality of a sound format they've never even heard.
Click to expand...

Maybe because OGG utterly rapes AAC. It's completely cross-platform, free for all, 0wns it in compression-to-quality, and doesn't eat much CPU time (not saying that AAC does, just another point for both sides)

Make them 0.500 quality OGGs, and I'll be on that service like stink on a monkey.

- M4H
 
Originally posted by: NuclearFusi0n
VORBIS GODDAMNIT, IT'S CALLED OGG VORBIS.


i'm going to eat your face. :|:|:|
Click to expand...

Yeah, but if I called it "vorbis" then 90% of the commonfolk would have no idea WTF I'm talking about.

Hell, I bet at least 50% is still clueless without Google assistance. 😛

But technically, it's an OGM container with a Vorbis stream. 0wned. 😀

- M4H
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top