Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Amazon and Wal-Mart MP3 Stores Adopt Variable Pricing

pr5owner said:
highest quality hey?

the song my sister bought legally from itunes was missing 30 seconds fromt the end of the track (Sky - Peice of paradise >> needed for her wedding)

i had to pirate the album to get the rest of the song. (pirating was faster than itunes believe it or not, full CD in less than 3 minutes at 320kbps mp3)
Click to expand...

Strange it was missing 30 seconds... good thing it's the only song. Did you get refund, or ask Apple to look into fixing it? Last time I had a complaint, I had an email back with 24 hours with the offer of a refund, keep the song, and they would fix it shortly!

Anyway, AAC is better then MP3, even at higher bit rates. AAC allows for higher and lower frequencies to be played, so you get more dynamic sound out of good A/V equipment able to reproduce it. The total footprint is also smaller then comparable bit rates, as the compression technology is more advanced and efficient.
 
Apple stock is still cheap

Did I say Amazon & Walmart both sell iPods? :cool:

Take advantage of undervalued Apple stock before everyone wakes up... Apple is in the money seat.

Keep in mind, it's in their monetary best interest to keep music as low as possible to continue to promote their hardware. As such, they are actually our advocate, as our interests are the same, in this regard.

DRM had to be won first, now the real fun can begin! They will let some time for this to settle in with the labels... then the real fun will begin! ;)
 
Maybe there should be a FEDERAL Investigation.

Collusion by the Record industry to Hurt Apple. Collusion is Illegal. We should but these Bastards in JAIL.
:mad:
 
Windinthedust said:
Strange it was missing 30 seconds... good thing it's the only song. Did you get refund, or ask Apple to look into fixing it? Last time I had a complaint, I had an email back with 24 hours with the offer of a refund, keep the song, and they would fix it shortly!

Anyway, AAC is better then MP3, even at higher bit rates. AAC allows for higher and lower frequencies to be played, so you get more dynamic sound out of good A/V equipment able to reproduce it. The total footprint is also smaller then comparable bit rates, as the compression technology is more advanced and efficient.
Click to expand...

Ahhh so that's why when I preview a song in iTunes it always seems to sound better than ones I acquire in mp3 even at 320 br. :eek:
 
tbobmccoy said:
I really wonder still why the record industry thinks that raising the price of a commodity in a recession/depression is a good idea to stifle piracy. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Tones2 said:
Wow - a 30% - 40% price hike. Might as well buy the physical CD instead.

Tony
Click to expand...

Full of Win said:
Anyway you cut it, we the consumers got screwed.
Click to expand...

Ya the record labels are complete MORONS. I just read this article on Apple Insider that polled 60% of teens download music for free using P2P!

http://www.appleinsider.com/article...ation_point_for_ipod_itunes_use_by_teens.html

WOW, nice move studios, this is really going to help stifle piracy! :rolleyes:
 
Damn. It's incredible how worked up people can get over 30 cents.

It's 30 CENTS. Not even enough for half of the bun on your crappy Big Mac.

Edit: And what is it that's making people draw an arbitrary line in the sand at $0.99 per song, anyway? Do you refuse to buy a $12.99 CD album if it only has ten songs on it?

:eek::rolleyes:
 
dal20402 said:
Damn. It's incredible how worked up people can get over 30 cents.

It's 30 CENTS. Not even enough for half of the bun on your crappy Big Mac.

Edit: And what is it that's making people draw an arbitrary line in the sand at $0.99 per song, anyway? Do you refuse to buy a $12.99 CD album if it only has ten songs on it?

:eek::rolleyes:
Click to expand...

For me, it's not that the prices are exorbitant. The record labels are greedy, spiteful companies. They were relentless and unapologetic at the hell they put some people through with the DRM lawsuits and damages. If they were to wither and die on the vine of failure tomorrow, I wouldn't mind it one bit. I have bought pretty much most of the music I will ever need. If there is anything new I want, I certainly wouldn't mind paying slightly more to bypass a label's parasitic attachment to musicians and artists today.

:apple:
 
Tones2 said:
Wow - a 30% - 40% price hike. Might as well buy the physical CD instead.

Tony
Click to expand...

That is only for Singles, the CD's are still the same price :p

I understand the anger in raising prices, but do you really expect that the #1 hit should be sold for the same price as the worst song?? Look at the upside DRM FREE Music, + new and upcoming bands can get their name out there by selling their songs for cheaper. Making unknown bands more likely to get purchases.

Lets all try to stay positive :cool:

Also note that MOST songs are still going to be the same price :eek:
 
Ok, so they raise prices during a recession. Genius. OPEC didn't even raise the price of oil during the recession.

I can't believe OPEC cares more about us then the record labels. :eek:
 
MacFly123 said:
Ya the record labels are complete MORONS. I just read this article on Apple Insider that polled 60% of teens download music for free using P2P!

http://www.appleinsider.com/article...ation_point_for_ipod_itunes_use_by_teens.html

WOW, nice move studios, this is really going to help stifle piracy! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...


http://www.bbc.co.uk/6music/news/20090116_downloading.shtml - My link says 95%

I prefer to buy cds and other physical media, I think that things like itunes/amazon/etc are too expensive for what they are and the compromise you make.
Putting the prices up when, in my opinion, they're already too high is pretty frustrating. I want instantly available, high(est) quality and drm-free media - a cheap usenet account gives me this, but it's naughty, illegal, against forum rules, starves the artists/production staff and funds terrorism (according to the adverts), so I put a lot less money into the 'system' than I'd like to.
 
sishaw said:
Quote: "Sources at Apple tell me that Apple is getting different prices than Amazon from the recording idustry."

Why would content providers deliberately set out to cause problems for the most successful vendor of their content? It doesn't makes sense. If iTunes were an extremely successful bricks-and-mortar music store, would the labels then force them to start pricing CDs in a non-competitive manner and reduce their sales?

Even granted that the record labels don't like new paradigms and don't like to play nice with Apple, it seems that requiring Apple to have higher prices, thus predictably reducing sales from the highest-volume online digital vendor, is nonsensical from a business perspective. Do these record companies want to fail?
Click to expand...


I think the record companies feel they can make more profit by forcing Apple to charge higher prices. Keep in mind the millions of iTunes consumers may not be quite as savvy or willing to shop around as the majority of users on this site are. I know people personally who are not that computer savvy who will pay 30 cents more per track just because of the integration of the store with the iTunes software and the iPod. The record companies have wanted variable pricing all along, and now that they have it there is no reason for them to wish failure upon iTunes. Personally I listen to mostly classic rock and smooth jazz in full album format, so this change means nothing to me and I will continue using iTunes.
 
keep raising prices

only makes torrents more and more appealing.

i'd rathe buy my music (i've spent the majority of all the money i make on music in some form or another) ((poor student, i'm not spending six figures here LOL)) but when it's the choice between paying 30% more for a song and downloading the song + have enough to go to a show, the choice is simple.
 
pr5owner said:
highest quality hey?

the song my sister bought legally from itunes was missing 30 seconds fromt the end of the track (Sky - Peice of paradise >> needed for her wedding)

i had to pirate the album to get the rest of the song. (pirating was faster than itunes believe it or not, full CD in less than 3 minutes at 320kbps mp3)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I noticed that in some TV episodes & movies. Some scenes or parts of scenes are gone on the iTunes version that were there on the broadcast/theater versions. Not sure if they got cut out by mistake or were deliberately taken out by the studios or whatever. Example: the iTunes version of star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (the whale one), the whole punk on the bus scene is gone. Kinda sad because that was like the best scene!
 
tbobmccoy said:
I really wonder still why the record industry thinks that raising the price of a commodity in a recession/depression is a good idea to stifle piracy. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Yeah, we're witnessing the last desperate breaths of an organization that has had a death grip on distribution for many years. What worked so well for them before is now going to be their downfall.

And good riddance.

IMO popular music would be a lot more diverse without those bastards.
 
I just did a fast run thru the iTunes Store and saw that of the music I would download, which is not the Top 100 by any means - older rock, jazz, blues; I found the bulk stayed .99 maybe 10 percent went up to 1.29 and I didn't see a single .69. So I do think it's a simple price rise scheme.
 
Boggles my mind!?

How can so many people remain so ignorant for so damned long? ... I don't understand why so many people are STILL complaining about the distributors and not attacking the actual source of the greed; the record companies. They are getting exactly what they wanted and it's the stupid people who let them.

You all ran to DRM-free Amazon, while attacking Apple. Apple caved into the demands of the record execs and agreed to offer tiered pricing, so that they can also offer DRM-free music. So, now all online music will have tiered pricing, but yet Apple still pays more. Which, as the record execs want, you will run to some other store and buy instead of paying 30 cents more. Once (if) iTunes loses market share, then the record execs will raise prices across the board, because the one store that could keep them in check will no longer have the market share numbers to do so.

Just like a herd cattle being corralled, just before they're slaughtered.

Thanks idiots.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back