SuperSite Blog

since Amazon MP3 store went live I have not purchased a single song from Itunes store, and won't ever again unless they dump DRM and increase track quality

$0.99 is highway robbery. If we consider all the overhead that goes into a typical 10-song, $10 CD, each song costs WAY, WAY less than 99 cents to produce. There is no way that the overhead of putting songs already digitally on a server, formatting supporting pages, and paying for microcommerce brings the total cost anywhere close to 99 cents.

Bottom line? These DRM'd songs restrict the user's freedom and make the record company much more than CDs.

5 Million songs?  That's a lot.  :)  (check you blog heading buddy boy)

Shouldn't the headline read 5 billion?

blogs.oreilly.com/.../the-numbers-can-indie-labels-r-1.html

@DMCCALL

An album costs less than $10 to produce? I'd love to meet a music producer who offers those kind of Wal-Mart rates. Many artists have anywhere from 5-7 figure production costs for a record, music sales aren't what they used to be so you're going to have a hard time convincing the labels to lower the price on digital downloads when the profit from iTunes isn't that great to begin with.

@dmccall

We have to pay apple for the privilege of uploading our songs on to their servers.

then we have to pay them a cut of any sales.

Bottom line is, we make way less money on itunes (per song sold) than on CDs (per single sold) even when taking into account distribution costs etc.

But wait AAC is a failure!!!!!  There is simply no way they could sell 5 billion AAC songs, its a failure!!!!

I just cant believe that anyone, let alone 5 billion, would by DRM music!!!!

98% of Jo Users, dont even know what DRM or AAC is.  They buy/sync/listen.

Its the ease of use that the consumer wants.....really it is.

Apple is selling songs like Nintendo is selling Wii's.  Napster is selling songs like MS is selling 360's.

: D

Thank you for putting the blame of DRM squarely on the shoulders of the record companies--where it belongs. Fair is fair...if they're willing to drop it for Amazon and others, they should do it for iTunes.

I remember paying a buck for singles back in the 70's. The fact that they still cost that now is ridiculous.

It'll even be more expensive when cash-strapped states and the feds start taxing the damn things.

Anyway, 5 billion is a helluva number. Quite an achievement.

@Lindy

"98% of Jo Users, dont even know what DRM or AAC is.  They buy/sync/listen.

Its the ease of use that the consumer wants.....really it is."

EXXXAAACCCCTTTLLLLLLLLLYYY!  

Paul, listen to this man.  He knows what he's talking about.  

I know no one in the US cares, but it's worth pointing out that we here in Australia (and I imagine quite a few other countries) are yet to be even able to buy or rent any TV shows or movies through iTunes.

All we get are songs and music videos.

By the time they do show up, absolutely no one will care. Torrents are a way of life now.

@Lindy:

Yes, AAC is a failure. People buy music and ease of use (as you suggested), not AAC formats. They can sell well because of good performance of ipod and ease of buying songs from itunes, not because AAC is superior. If consumers had a choice in iTunes store (to let them choose which format they want to download), they will quickly dump the AAC and embrace MP3.

Regarding Paul's views on how successful a product should be, do we see a pattern?

Wii - Paul blasts it, consumers love it

AAC - Paul hates it, consumers don't see an issue

Mac - Paul says in 2004 that "The Mac market is ending. "  Look what's happened since.

Macbook Air - Paul says without any qualification that it won't sell - there are now reports it is selling extremely well

@cesjr

Wii - Paul blasts it, consumers love it

I have to agree with you here. Paul doesn't get it that there are people that don't care about the HD ultra realistic graphics of the current generation of consoles, but like to have *fun* playing games on the Wii.

AAC - Paul hates it, consumers don't see an issue

I have never read an article where Pauls says he *hates* AAC. He said that he considers it a failure, because it hasn't replaced mp3. Much like many people consider the Zune a failure, because it hasn't replaced the iPod. Most consumers don't see an issue because like somebody said in another thread...they download, sync, and listen...and it works.

Mac - Paul says in 2004 that "The Mac market is ending. "  Look what's happened since.

If you say "Look what's happened since", you should provide something to look at. Give a link showing the stats since 2004, and we can discuss. How many times did our friend Bonch-Preseton-Vandil say that Microsoft was a sinking ship...something that I doubt will ever happen. Imagine the impact to the governments and businesses around the world if one day, MS just closed its doors and said, "We are no longer in business".

Macbook Air - Paul says without any qualification that it won't sell - there are now reports it is selling extremely well

Again, show me the numbers. Personally, I wouldn't buy an Air...because it lacks what I want in a portable. I did, however, just buy a MacBook Pro on Tuesday.

--tayme

@Paul

BBBBillion.  With a 'B'.  Not Million.

@Heran

So... you are basing the 'success' of something on the quality of it?  Not the adoption rate?  Not the sales rate?  Not how wide-spread it is?  

That seems asinine.  Do you think the Kaliedescope is more successful than the AppleTV?  Cadillac more succesful than Toyota?  Prada more successful than Wal-Mart?

You understand the concept of money and of business, right?

@Tayme

If you need 'numbers' to tell you than Apple and the Mac have been growing significantly in sales over the past 4 years... you must have your head in the freaking sand.  

"If you say "Look what's happened since", you should provide something to look at. Give a link showing the stats since 2004, and we can discuss."

Really?  I think everyone knows what's happened with mac sales the last couple of years, without any statistics from me.  For those that don't know, try google.

You're just throwing up unnecessary requests for data showing the obvious - which of course you don't require of Paul or others sharing your viewpoint.

@pthurott

Paul, if you get the chance, could you give us your thoughts on this article:  blogs.zdnet.com/storage

I would be really interested to hear your thoughts on this issue.

Thanks!

I'm not saying that I need numbers...I am saying that if you say to "look" at something, you should give the information...not expect the people that you are requesting to "look" to to go get it themselves.

cesjr uses standard trolling tactics...post an argument, with no supporting information and never respond to a direct question. This is waht I take issue with. Like I said yesterday, cesjr is sounding more and more desperate. Everyday he/she posts a rant against Paul...I guess that if I disliked reading Paul's posts that much, I would find a blog that I enjoyed more.

Maybe I should just take my own advise and start ignoring cesjr, but that never seems to work with the trolls that frequent Paul's sites.

--tayme

Like Tayme, I'd like to see the Air numbers, or they are simply just hot air.  Quoting ocean, numbers, please.

And here we have fivepoint trolling to read some story by a hack blogger about ZFS, which has nothing to do with this article.  I don't know what Robin is smoking, but I've dealt with a lot of disk failures, and in no case would the file system have saved you.  And software based RAID is better than hardware based RAID in ZFS?  He's a blogger that deals with storage and believes this?  Either way, quoting ocean again, I'd like to see the real numbers that back this up.

@fivepoint - One question/comment that I have regarding the ZFS article that you link to:

In the article, the author states, "For all of Microsoft’s fine talk about innovation they don’t do squat unless someone else does it first." How is Apple using a filesystem developed by Sun Microsystems that many Solaris admins ignore in favor ov VxFS an innovative move?

And like Dip stated above, what does this have to do with this thread? Why not send an email directly to Paul to ask his opinion? His address is well known:

thurrott@windowsitpro.com

Or you could even post a private message for Paul:

community.winsupersite.com/.../AddPost.aspx

I am guessing that you want the world to see you challenging him.

--tayme

"Everyday he/she posts a rant against Paul...I guess that if I disliked reading Paul's posts that much, I would find a blog that I enjoyed more."

Tayme,

I have to agree with you 100% on this.  I read Paul because I find his viewpoint refreshing.  Do I disagree with him?  Yes.  Do I think sometimes that he is way-unfair and biased... yes.  But I do enjoy it... and it is obvious that cesjr does not.  I would recommend he move on.

"And here we have fivepoint trolling to read some story by a hack blogger about ZFS,"

Dipshit, I am not a troll, and he is not a hack blogger.  By your incessent attacks, I would say that you are in fact the troll.  I will take tayme's advice and email him, although I thought this format would work just fine.  I was not being a jerk, I was sincerely asking Paul for his thoughts on the issue.  It is very relevant to all things Microsoft, an I thought he would have some input.

Paul does a good job of breaking things down so we can understand them better, and I appreciate his opinion.  

Why would you think that this format would work fine?  This is not a general forum, this is supposed to be comment that are specific to this article.  That article has nothing to do with this one.  If it is relevant to all things Microsoft, then you should post it in an article that is MS specific, or e-mail Paul directly for his comments.  However, your tone and the off-topic nature of the post certainly smelled of a troll to me.

And a simple search of your previous posts clearly confirms that you do a fair share of trolling.  Such as this article community.winsupersite.com/.../7665.aspx where you say "Paul!  We've been waiting to hear from you in regards to Net Applications recent announcement that Apple now holds over 7% market share!  C'mon man!  Lets see those numbers from you... I love trying to see you weasel your way out of the truth." in a post about some Windows updates.  That is pretty much troll like as far as I'm concerned.  And the fact that you come here every 1-3 weeks, post up a stir of trouble, then leave is also telling.

@tayme:  "How is Apple using a filesystem developed by Sun Microsystems that many Solaris admins ignore in favor ov VxFS an innovative move?"

Good question.  I"m sure that cesjr will provide a lot of thoughtful insight in to that question.

@Dipsh*t, Re: ZFS

I'd like to hear Steve Gibson's rebuttal on the issue.  I bet money he'd agree with you about a file system not being able to protect against hardware failure.

Hey, Paul!:  Maybe you should send a nudge to Leo to suggest this be the next "Security Now" subject.

Dipshit,

I stand by my comments.  Do you really want to get into a 'you said this' argument with me?  For a man who's avatar is Steve Jobs serving cool-aid and who repeats the term 'iCabal' endlessly... you sure like to play the non-troll card.  Your whole identity is based around being a troll!

Talk about an identicy crisis.  It's like Chris Farley or Rush Limbaugh running around making fun of everybody for being fat drug addicts.

Hey, unlike most Apple people, I can take a joke, and inject a little bit of levity.  And no where do I say I don't do a certain amount of trolling, if you will.  However, this is a Windows based site, so helping to tow the line is fair game.  I don't go to Apple sites and do what would be trolling no doubt.  The reverse is not true for the thin skinned Apple fans that we have here.

Vis-a-vis the iCabal label, I don't know who you are talking about that repeats the term endlessly.  Paul started it, I've used it sparingly, and even tried to make it seem as though it wasn't much of big deal, but Apple fans weren't having it.  For what it's worth, I don't take any offense to the "Windows-Jihadists" label that members of your "sect" like to mention.  I don't take myself too seriously, and why should I.  This IS the Internet.

However, whether or not I'm a troll is indifferent.  You certainly act like one here on the SuperSite for Windows (TM).  Posting such an off-topic baited "question" is the very definition of a troll.

en.wikipedia.org/.../Internet_troll

For example, the "concern troll" is described as "The concern troll posts in web forums devoted to its declared point of view and attempts to sway the group's actions or opinions while claiming to share their goals, but with professed "concerns". The goal is to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt within the group."

That fits your posts here to a T.

First, big kudos to Apple for the iTunes Store. Its a great service and my complaints are minimal. I have been a full time customer since 2006. I still have not filled my 30 GB video iPod.

With that said, I still have some complaints. First, is the lack of consistent new content from Paramount. From what I've read, this might be more of an issue with Paramount than Apple. However, I would hope that Apple would lean on Paramount to get new content on iTunes quickly.

Second, no DVD burning. I really do think Apple should add this functionality to purchased TV shows and movies. That way you can use the content in the mannor you see fit.

Third, no NBC content. I think this is more of an NBC issue as well. I do hope that Apple and NBC make up before Knight Rider debuts this fall.

Fourth, DRM. Apple should use whatever leverage it has to get more DRM-less tracks.

Fifth, higher quality recordings. As a listener and a person gifted with perfect pitch hearing ability, I find that MP3's recorded at at 256 and 320 kbit/s sound better than the AAC songs sold by Apple. Not that the AAC sounds bad, I just get whats called musical warmth from higher kbit/s MP3's. (What can I say, my ears don't lie to me. My years of musical training also tells me this.) I've also become aware that Apple has not added HE-AAC known as High Efficiency AAC. HE-AAC is part of the digital radio standard. I think Apple should update both the iPods and iTunes to support the HE-AAC format.

Although these are minor gripes, I'm otherwise very happy with the service. I recommend it to anyone. Perhaps with these fixes, iTunes could convert more customers to their service. Keep up the nice work, Apple.

"I find that MP3's recorded at at 256 and 320 kbit/s sound better than the AAC songs sold by Apple"

It all depends on the quality of the codec.  Earlier MP3 codecs are some of the best.  They were slow, didn't incorporate newer CPU instructions, and favoured quality above all else.  Those were available in the early P1 pre-MMX days.  Earlier codecs would give you no perceivable quality loss between 112kbps and 128kbps and were still better quality than those of today.  LAME isn't of particularly good quality either.  One of the best of recent years was the one incorporated into Musicmatch Jukebox, which featured a high-quality mode that allowed you to set the response frequency up to 24KHz.  Most MP3 encoders use a cutoff frequency at about 16KHz.  Newer MP3 codecs compensate by offering 2-pass CBR encoding.

"I've also become aware that Apple has not added HE-AAC known as High Efficiency AAC. HE-AAC is part of the digital radio standard. I think Apple should update both the iPods and iTunes to support the HE-AAC format."

HE-AAC is not ideal for music, because it's limited by bandwidth.  It competes with other low-bandwidth applications for compression such as those used by WMA Professional @ 64kbps/48kbps and MPEG-2 Layer 3 (normal MP3 files are MPEG-1 Layer 3).

Now, HD-AAC on the other hand, seems to be a bit more interesting....

Naw...its all in the cables:

ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons

--tayme