iTunes for Windows... Concerns?

I think they should release iTunes for Windows without the apple music download shop support. Then if lots of people download it, Apple can show the figures as an idea for potential sales.

However it may just be most people who use Windows like to steal music and it is only on the Mac where their is a better class of user that the Apple music store works.

sounds fine to me

make 'em buy a mac

Once the record exec's start getting checks from Apple for the music sold so far, they won't care.

My only concern is Apple being slow with writing a Windows iTunes. I can't believe they didn't even advertise for the development position until after the iTunes 4 announcement. Besides, it's mostly a GUI on top of code they already have (Quicktime for music RIP/play, and they can use IE or an x86-compiled version of KHTML/KDE for store access).

Hopefully they'll get the thing out before someone else does.

Get on train or watch it go by

Here we go again. All this talk is useless. Within less than a month, Apple has proven its point and showed everybody that when you do things right, you can't go wrong. The iTunes music store is a masterpiece of conjunction between usability, respect, fun, simplicity, legal and usefulness. Let's go with the majors who want to get on the train and leave the others watch it go by. They'll come knock on the door soon enough.

If they have an iTunes for Windows does this mean they could very well have a Safari for Windows too? Is iTunes 4 really a combination of iTune, QuickTime and Safari code?

Apple won't release Safari for Windows just like it won't release iTunes for Windows without the Music Store.

One the Mac platform Safari makes sense since it is another good argument for MacOS X.
A PC version of Safari on the other hand would only cost money and not generate any.
Hence, there won't be a Safari for Windows.

And iTunes for Windows has only the one purpose to sell music via Music Store.
Even though Apple is a great company with cool people, they won't spend lots of money for developing iTunes for Windows for nothing.

considering the apple job posting for an experienced programmer to work on iTunes for Windows, we all know that they are at least considering it. no one should be denying this.

i am a little split on whether or not it will have some security issues on the licensing of downloaded music. apple is trying to keep an open way of thinking that computer users are honest and do not want to steal. programmers and companies need to understand that there will always be those who want something for free and will spend countless hours and days finding a way to crack their security designs.

Re: iTunes for Windows... Concerns?

Originally posted by Macrumors
According to the article, while "two majors" have signed agreements for Apple's Windows product, others still consider the Mac version "an experiment" and are expressing concerns about security:

Click to expand...

IMHO, Apple can open on Windows with only a few major labels.

1) Apple does not run a subscription service. The up-front cost for the consumer is minimal (assuming to date you have a Mac, or when iTunes/Win ships that you have a copy of iTunes). That means that if the iTunes Music Store doesn't have a particular artist, I'm not out anything to just go somewhere else to preview/buy that artists's music. And, even if there's only one album on the service that I like, I can buy that one album there (convenience and price permitting) and not feel ripped off. Greater selection makes individual users more likely to visit the iTMS routinely, but it does not penalize users as it would in the more "standard" music services.

2) Minor labels are clammoring to get aboard this bandwagon. The labels should already see that they are going to lose sales if they're not on board. It's their loss, not ours (the consumers), not Apple's.

3) If anything, greater restrictions will make the service flop on Windows. The Mac market was ripe for this, with more limitted file sharing possibilities in place (sorry, but Kazaa et al have a much higher quality selection of tunes than Limewire and Aquisition), a generally more up-market customer base, and an overall culture buit around iTunes (tied into iMovie/iDVD/iPhoto ... On a PC you won't be able to use an AAC file in, for instance, Premiere or VideoStudio or whatever). Windows enjoys none of these benefits, so the iTMS will be a harder sell even as-is. If a label thinks it can get the same sales tha Mac/US/Jaguar users produced, even on the much larger Windows market, with more restrictions, they are severely mistaken. If anything, Windows users are more sensitive to usage limitations.

More Restrictions? I hope not!

The current restrictions Apple has placed on the downloadable AAC files in my oppion borderlines on unacceptable, so the record companies better not push for more restrictions.

I've bought a total of five songs so far from the ITMS. I'd love to buy lots more, but don't want to have paid thousands of dollars for thousands of songs that are "crippled" and can't be played by a computer unless it's been "authorized" over an internet connection.

I'm sure some would call me paranoid or whatever, but honestly I would start buying up lots of songs and albums on the ITMS if these restrictions did not exist in the AAC files.

My biggest concern is thus. You are ony allowed to download these files one time. Meaning, if you loose your HD, that song has to be repurchased.

A bit weak...

I would take this article with half a grain of salt.

First off, its lean on the sources side. It only has one cryptic quote from someone at Sony.
Where are the other named executives at the rest of the majors?

It would make the article more credible with some executives at the other labels being quoted directly.

Also, just because Apple has recently advertised for a windows person to work on iTunes doesn't necessarily mean that they've just begun.

Originally posted by daedelgt
My biggest concern is thus. You are ony allowed to download these files one time. Meaning, if you loose your HD, that song has to be repurchased.

Click to expand...

If you lose your store-bought music CD, that CD must be repurchased. You are responsible for your own property.

Make frequent backups and you don't have to worry about the loss of a hard drive.

You don't get a free replacement for a cd bought

Originally posted by daedelgt
My biggest concern is thus. You are ony allowed to download these files one time. Meaning, if you loose your HD, that song has to be repurchased.

Click to expand...

This has already been discussed to death. You don't get a free replacement if you buy a cd from Best Buy and then lose it. Tuff tits, they'd say. Some might argue that technology would allow Apple to keep track of your purchases and allow download replacements.

From a cost perspective, it would probably be expensive having to subsidize additional downloads from millions of users (bandwidth costs, customer service, etc.).

Keep that in mind.

Apple could technically allow you to get a "refill" of your previously-bought song if lost, but you must keep in mind that they're likely bound by strict record label requirements.

You should always make backups of data and music ... especially if you've purchased them.

If Apple adds more restictions to the music service for windows that would make them very angry, and thus use other services. If apple can offer the services with no compromises then they've got a real chance for success. The record companies are so stupid to think to add more restircitions, if the current system is selling well now why change it. Look at it this way the are getting cold hard cash for downloads instead of not getting any at all.

Originally posted by daedelgt
My biggest concern is thus. You are ony allowed to download these files one time. Meaning, if you loose your HD, that song has to be repurchased.

Click to expand...

What, you never back up your data? Put it on a CD. If you buy a CD in a store the store is not going to replace it just because someone steals it from you. That, IMHO, is a lame excuse.

Music Store and AAPL?

I've never seen AAPL rise like this in such a short time, especially between Macworlds.

The rumors of Apple buying Universal caused the stock to stumble below 12.80, a couple of weeks ago.

Now its trading at 18.55, after the official announcement of the Music Store.

Usually its the opposite - rise on rumor, fall on news. This is a refreshing departure.

I hope that you bought some a week or so ago!

Originally posted by Ugg
What, you never back up your data? Put it on a CD. If you buy a CD in a store the store is not going to replace it just because someone steals it from you. That, IMHO, is a lame excuse.

Click to expand...

I know it sounds stupid, but I typically consider downloadable media a type of backup. It's just something I have to get used to.

Foolish executives...

Just like the fools of Meryll Lynch who have underscored Apple stock which is out now at $18.56 from $13.00, the executives are trying to show that they have control over something, meanwhile
Limewire, Kazaa and other P2P services are running rampant without any restrictions, not that I care its just seems foolish not to embark with Apple when all
the while the ship is sinking under their feet, all of sudden they need to "consider"
and "ponder", Idiots! meanwhile Windows
users are sweating it out, ogling over the
convinience of streaming playlists through iTunes 4, which also raises the question whether you need to have your hardrive full up to rim with music when all the while you can connect to your buddies and listen, and keep your HD free
of huge amounts of data. also you can back up your purchased music on an external HD, or to disc, The experiment stage should be over, stock is up, people are buying music, the RIAA is happier today than it was 2 weeks ago, I bet you the kid who downloaded 600 songs who now has to pay installments to the RIAA over time is kicking himself in the bud wishing Apple's music service existed
before he went haywire downloading massive amounts of mp3s instead he had the Music Industry pummeling him down to the ground and
making an example of him, basically sayin;"you CAN be next".

Re: You don't get a free replacement for a cd bought

Originally posted by deepkid
This has already been discussed to death. You don't get a free replacement if you buy a cd from Best Buy and then lose it. Tuff tits, they'd say. Some might argue that technology would allow Apple to keep track of your purchases and allow download replacements.

From a cost perspective, it would probably be expensive having to subsidize additional downloads from millions of users (bandwidth costs, customer service, etc.).

Keep that in mind.

Apple could technically allow you to get a "refill" of your previously-bought song if lost, but you must keep in mind that they're likely bound by strict record label requirements.

You should always make backups of data and music ... especially if you've purchased them.

Click to expand...

Seeing as CD companies have always held that they're not selling you the music, but just the right to play their music (not duplicate it, distribute it, etc.), then it would follow that the usage rights are not contained withing a particular kind of medium. Once you pay for the rights to listen to a song at your leisure, those rights should bring you discounts if the repurchase of a CD is necessary (only paying for the medium, not the rights), or perpetual downloading rights for every song you've bought the rights to listen to.

That would be fair and the logical conclusion to a rights buying concept.

To take this a broadband, wireless step forward, one could purchase the rights to an entire companies catalog, in which you would be able to "tune in" to them on a digital radio iPod and their entire library would be at your disposal for playlists or whatever, though you'd never have the actual song files on your machine.

Pure usage listening rights on any piece of equipment you owned, but only to listen to, not to deal... - j

I have no worry about "losing" the music I bought from the music store. Matter of fact, unlike the store bought cd's, many of which I had stolen 3 years ago when my car was broken in to, I am more tempted to make back ups. Now I make two copies of an album or misc. play list. One for the car and on for tucked away at home.

Oh, and even if I did lose my HD before making a back up, yes I would have to buy the music again. Would it piss me off? YES! But then again, it pissed me off when I had to go buy more store CD's after they were stolen from me.

Apple does need to get a windows itunes out before they miss the boat. They have proven they know how to do this. More restrictions = bad = fails for the music industry. Quicker time to market as is = success = more profits. It is just a matter of who will get there first, Apple or some other copycat?

Something to consider: Apple probably cannot launch the iTunes for Windows without having all of the same labels signed on for it. Otherwise, they'd have to implement a way for the store to check what platform you're on, and say "Oops, you can't download that song unless you're on a Mac. Sorry." This would be problematic at best.

My two cents...

stock...

I watched that universal rumor draw the stock down...and bought at 13 even. My thinking went as follows:

4.5 Billion in cash. That means the stock is almost 'secured' at 13.

The growing dissatisfaction with MS. Look around, its cool to dump on MS. This is most important with graduating CS majors...they will be the developers of tomorrow, and MS is decidedly uncool.

PPC970.

OS X 10.3. I finally think that .3 will be the release that separates OS X from the pack. Face it, 10-10.2.6 are not the model for the worlds next gen OS, rather the foundation. .3 might just be it...

iPods and ITMS. 110000 ipods in 6 days. $200 margin...22 million in a week. That is real money compared to the $350000 in a week of the music store.

Anyway, I am holding for the long haul. It is getting harder watching my gains grow un-capitalized, but I think there is still money to be made with Apple stock. The stock may dip in late may/early June, but the WWDC might bring some surprises.

Anyway as Peter Lynch said, "If you spend 1 day a week thinking about short term market movement, you are wasting 23 hours a week." [quoted loosely]

I have been following AAPL since the late 80s and owned three times. I think this is going to be a break out year even *with* this recession.

Cheers
Ape

Originally posted by macnews

Apple does need to get a windows itunes out before they miss the boat. They have proven they know how to do this. More restrictions = bad = fails for the music industry. Quicker time to market as is = success = more profits. It is just a matter of who will get there first, Apple or some other copycat?

Click to expand...

Well, whether it's Apple of a copycat, you know that they have to have the licensing rights from the record labels. And, if Apple is have a hard time, you know that a copycat would have just as hard a time. Plus, a copycat couldn't offer syncing to an iPod, at least not as easily.

Re: Re: You don't get a free replacement for a cd bought

Originally posted by jayscheuerle
Seeing as CD companies have always held that they're not selling you the music, but just the right to play their music (not duplicate it, distribute it, etc.), then it would follow that the usage rights are not contained withing a particular kind of medium. Once you pay for the rights to listen to a song at your leisure, those rights should bring you discounts if the repurchase of a CD is necessary (only paying for the medium, not the rights), or perpetual downloading rights for every song you've bought the rights to listen to.

That would be fair and the logical conclusion to a rights buying concept.

To take this a broadband, wireless step forward, one could purchase the rights to an entire companies catalog, in which you would be able to "tune in" to them on a digital radio iPod and their entire library would be at your disposal for playlists or whatever, though you'd never have the actual song files on your machine.

Pure usage listening rights on any piece of equipment you owned, but only to listen to, not to deal... - j

Click to expand...

Ok, but that opens up an entire can of worms. What if the service is down? What if I'm in Upper Mongolia where there is no service? I would much rather have it to take with instead of being tethered to a network.

Would the company have to pay you for loss of access? What about books? and all other forms of copyrighted material?

Many online newspapers are now charging for archived articles. However, it is perfectly ok to save the article when you first read it. If they are to serve as the archivist then they should be able to charge users for the right to access it. THe maintenance of such archives must be considerable.

Should the music industry decide that it wants to put more restrictions on a Windoze iTunes, I doubt that it would succeed. Many indies are clamoring all over the service. Worldwide (eventually) coverage for hardly any investment. Hopefully this will finally halt the corporatization of the music industry.