I tried it out, downloaded an album. It works fairly well, it's still beta, but I think I am going to like it. I really don't like the amazon downloader app, but hey it beats paying $0.99 a song, getting all 15 songs for $6.99.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Amazon Launches Public Beta of DRM-Free Music Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Music labels are trying very hard to create a competitor for iTunes so that they don't get stuck with only one distributor or retailer. Thus, they are willing to sell at lower prices and without DRM in the short term. If iTunes ever goes out of business, I am pretty sure they would start raising prices and re-introduce DRM. If iTunes can withstand this assault, then they will probably let Apple sell songs without DRM as well.
Yes, they are VBR. My Pink Floyd - The Wall download featured songs from 214 kbps to 245 kbps in bitrate.
Or if you buy something in the top 100 albums like The Wall. It's normally really expensive since it's a double album, but because people are downloading it like crazy, it is $8.99 on there with no tax and of course no shipping. Pretty sweet deal. I think Amazon said that we're saving $11 or something on it by downloading. That's a big savings.
so i tried it...
the experience is not bad but i have some issues with it...
1. first of all navigating the store is SOOOOO much better on itunes....
i typed in "The Game" and it gave me too many results that werent just "The Game" ... like The Game Ft. blah blagh... none of his acctual albums i had to really hunt for them.... anyway thats one thing... iTunes store is way easier and user friendly to navigate....
2. i have my safari set NOT to open/run any files automatically once it downloads from the net for both security (i think there was an exploit back sometime) and i just dont want anything running right away all the time... so when it downloads that file from amazon to run the download app i have to go and find it and open it so it can start downloading the song.... so i have to take a few extra steps which make the experience non "intuitive" for my case.
3. and last is that i have my iTunes set up to make a copy of a file when added to itunes, so it makes a copy and places it in my itunes music folder and in itunes but pretty much that means i keep a duplicate of the file and have to take yet another step in removing the original... not "intuitive" again....
i know this is because how i have my settings... but iTunes just works way better in these cases.... store is easier, no working with files to download a file, and no dealing with duplicate files....
so for me iTunes still holds the belt... but those amazon prices and quality is just about the only thing it has going for it besides both pc and mac integration....iTunes just has a better set up... but they are going to have to offer a little more to keep people from moving to amazon.
the experience is not bad but i have some issues with it...
1. first of all navigating the store is SOOOOO much better on itunes....
i typed in "The Game" and it gave me too many results that werent just "The Game" ... like The Game Ft. blah blagh... none of his acctual albums i had to really hunt for them.... anyway thats one thing... iTunes store is way easier and user friendly to navigate....
2. i have my safari set NOT to open/run any files automatically once it downloads from the net for both security (i think there was an exploit back sometime) and i just dont want anything running right away all the time... so when it downloads that file from amazon to run the download app i have to go and find it and open it so it can start downloading the song.... so i have to take a few extra steps which make the experience non "intuitive" for my case.
3. and last is that i have my iTunes set up to make a copy of a file when added to itunes, so it makes a copy and places it in my itunes music folder and in itunes but pretty much that means i keep a duplicate of the file and have to take yet another step in removing the original... not "intuitive" again....
i know this is because how i have my settings... but iTunes just works way better in these cases.... store is easier, no working with files to download a file, and no dealing with duplicate files....
so for me iTunes still holds the belt... but those amazon prices and quality is just about the only thing it has going for it besides both pc and mac integration....iTunes just has a better set up... but they are going to have to offer a little more to keep people from moving to amazon.
Universal ... you've thrown down the gauntlet
I think that Universal should pay a price for their outrageously anti-iTunes stance .... make no mistake about it this may cause ITMS irreparable harm and may even lead to their eventual demise, and that wouldn't be good for anyone as Apple has fought this anti DRM battle on behalf of consumers ( see: "Like Amazon's DRM-Free Music Downloads? Thank Apple" .... ) http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/news/2007/09/drm_part_one and now they are unjustly left out of the marketplace for DRM-free music (if in fact UMG has struck a deal with Amazon which they wouldn't cut with Apple) .... this strikes me as unfair business practices bordering on the criminal (RICO anyone)....
What could Apple's response be ? Buy out Universal .... use some of the $12+ Billion in cash reserves and buy them out (or use their extremely valuable shares as currency for a possible buy-out) ... short of doing that sign away their biggest artists and show them you mean business ... Apple cannot take this lying down there is too much at stake .....
I think that Universal should pay a price for their outrageously anti-iTunes stance .... make no mistake about it this may cause ITMS irreparable harm and may even lead to their eventual demise, and that wouldn't be good for anyone as Apple has fought this anti DRM battle on behalf of consumers ( see: "Like Amazon's DRM-Free Music Downloads? Thank Apple" .... ) http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/news/2007/09/drm_part_one and now they are unjustly left out of the marketplace for DRM-free music (if in fact UMG has struck a deal with Amazon which they wouldn't cut with Apple) .... this strikes me as unfair business practices bordering on the criminal (RICO anyone)....
What could Apple's response be ? Buy out Universal .... use some of the $12+ Billion in cash reserves and buy them out (or use their extremely valuable shares as currency for a possible buy-out) ... short of doing that sign away their biggest artists and show them you mean business ... Apple cannot take this lying down there is too much at stake .....
that is extremely short-sighted ... think long term my friend .... Am I paranoid or do I see Microsoft's hand in all this (they do after all pay Universal one dollar for every Zune sold ...who knows what the true hush hush agreement is) ... Remarkably similar to what they did with SCO in their Linux suits versus IBM and a few big corps using Linux .... The enemy of my enemy is my friend
Wow, you're paranoid. There's a reason we have a free marketplace. I do NOT enjoy the idea of Apple having a stranglehold on the market. You know why? It prevents innovation and advances for the consumer, even if Jobs claims he is on the consumer's side (I do believe he is by the way). Competition is a good thing and I'm sure Apple will come out with something to blow this out of the water, for instance the Beatles exclusively on iTunes for a full year or something or a new label agrees to a DRM-free deal with iTunes. Competition helps no one but us in the end my friend.
They already have you in their back pocket ... short term gain for long term pain ... have you no idea how corrupt the music business is ... do you really believe they want competition and lower prices for consumers ? Get real ... this a naked ploy to drive Apple out of the music business ... pure and simple ... I for one will boycott Amazon for sleeping with the enemy (UMG) ... my choice, you're free to do what you like, but don't let short term savings delude you .... keep the bigger picture in mind
While I'm happy that Amazon's making the effort for higher quality at 256 (although I understand that for a small but significant portion of the population that is still not enough), it actually could be a disadvantage with the new ipod touch and its limited capacity.
Buying individual song won't be so much of a problem, but it takes away some of the advantage of DRM-free music when valuable space is lost, and recompressing takes time and, I imagine, further distorts sound quality (how much, I don't know).
Buying individual song won't be so much of a problem, but it takes away some of the advantage of DRM-free music when valuable space is lost, and recompressing takes time and, I imagine, further distorts sound quality (how much, I don't know).
Apple is too smart to get run out of the business. As I said, you are paranoid. Apple will come right back and have their own exclusive label on iTunes. Imagine if they strike a deal with Sony. Sony hates Microsoft and Universal due to the Xbox 360 and HD-DVD. Apple has already said they will use Blu Ray, so they already see eye to eye. Sony is the strictest of all the music companies, so if Apple could get them on their side it could be a permanent deal since Universal and Microsoft are on the other side of the fence.
How dare you chastise Amazon.com. It's the best retailer in the world for good reason. They give their customers good prices, good shipping packaging, and a great deal on the free $25 order shipping. As far as I'm concerned, Amazon.com is up there with Apple as one of my favorite companies.
It's a pain in the rear, but you can convert to WAV in iTunes, then convert the WAV files to 128 kbps AAC. This is the only way I know of to losslessly convert between lossy formats. The other option: wait for a REAL iPod Touch to be released, meaning one with at least 60 gigs of storage.
For the record Amazon, like Apple, are in business to make money ... and they are driven not by altruism but by their bottom line .... the formula you quote is fine and they make lots of money with it and it keeps them and their shareholders happy. I draw the line however, when they fall into the hands of a fox like UMG ... Up to now I've had nothing but admiration for Amazon .... but they should see this naked and abhorrent ploy to drive Apple out of the music business .... UMG have publicly gone on record stating that they want to control pricing and packaging (what does that tell you ?) and feeling that Apple wielded far too much power in the online retail music business...
Apple DOES have too much power at the moment. A monopoly is NOT a good thing, and that's damn near what Apple has right now. I love Apple's products, but iTunes is a ripoff as far as I'm concerned. I've bought a few things from there that I felt were good deals, but in general it's a ripoff store, almost as bad as Best Buy. I will continue loving Apple's products, but balance is a good thing. When you get a monopoly, you get a crappy situation for the consumer: Microsoft should ring a bell. No innovation and an absolutely horrible operating system dominating the market.
Agreed, monopolies are bad..... that's not what I'm advocating .... I'm advocating that BOTH Apple and Amazon (or anyone else for that matter) should have access to the SAME thing (DRM free music catalogue from ALL major music companies) ... then we would truly be in a FREE market ... then they could compete on an equal footing
Oh, but it was okay for Apple to have exclusive deals for years while other music services got left out in the cold? Now the shoe's on the other foot and you're crying foul. Nice.
I agree with your premise, but you are arguing FOR Apple, not from a neutral point of view. I think it should be equal, but then again I was a Rhapsody user and know EXACTLY the kind of exclusive stuff that Apple would get through being tough in their negotiations due to their market share. That wasn't fair, and neither is this. But since Apple is the one that started this type of stuff, I figure they will do just fine in getting their own exclusives. Eventually, ALL the labels will be in every online music store and hopefully it's all in open formats.
I just tested Amazon's service with a song (from 1971) and found one flaw (at least with this song). The preview didn't accurately reflect the song and when I bought it it had a large level of background static.
Just to compare, I shelled out $.99 for the itunes version, which was the same, but at least the itunes preview definitely had the static.
(on the other hand, maybe Amazon could just remaster the entire song...)
Just to compare, I shelled out $.99 for the itunes version, which was the same, but at least the itunes preview definitely had the static.
(on the other hand, maybe Amazon could just remaster the entire song...)
I have to agree. It's not really a "free market" contest between Amazon and iTMS if the majors are artificially giving Amazon a break on price and DRM. We'll see if Apple can negotiate something similar (I'd love to see it; lower prices and better deals for full albums will really drive sales through the roof), but I have a feeling it won't happen because the majors have a vested interest in seeing anyone other than iTunes succeed. And Universal is free to pull the plug on this "beta test" in a few short months, though at least you won't be left totally in the cold like Virgin Digital subscribers just were.
However, I disagree with your previous thought that Microsoft is somehow behind this. Like I said before, they're completely left out in the cold by this deal; the proprietary DRM and file formats they've tried to foist upon consumers and content providers left dead and broken by the roadside. Amazon will quickly shoot up to the #2 spot in online music sales, though I think they'll largely cannibalize the other non-iTMS stores' sales, e.g. the subscription services.
Apple is smart and knows how to compete on their own merits, but there's only so much they can do if the labels are giving Amazon that much of a better deal.
After reading those posts about Apple charging sales tax I looked back at some of my receipts from iTunes and they all say that tax is $0.00. And I live in California.
Ridiculous. I don't have time to read the whole thread to see how many others have responded to this, but Microsoft Zune and Creative Zen, to name just two examples, play AACs. Perhaps you're thinking of Apple's protected Fairplay, but no one is licensed to sell that format anyway.
Please stop spreading false information. AAC is a superior format to MP3 and it's also an open format. MP3 is so 20th-century, it's a shame it still exists.
The iTMS "album-Only" restriction is not, in any example I've seen, based on popularity. It is based on song length. Their deal with the labels stipulates that all songs under a certain length would be $0.99 each, and that songs over that length would be "album only" unless the label makes an exception (which they have, at times, but most often not).
Amazon, most of the time, seems to sell these "double-length" songs at "double-length" prices - $1.29 to $1.49 so far as I've been able to find. Your example is the first too-long song I've seen on Amazon for "regular" price!
In any case: anyone expecting apple to "react" to this tomorrow is just being silly. Apple's store is dictated by their record label contracts. They could no sooner lower their prices significantly (technically, they could probably lower their cut of the price per song) or offer everything DRM-free, than the labels could force them to sell all the songs for $1.49 a piece. That's what contracts are there for. If Apple "reacts" to this, then it will have been in the works for months, because record-label contracts aren't renegotiated overnight.
Apple - Go Lossless!
256kbps is crap. 256kbps AAC is alot better, but why doesn't Apple start selling their DRM-free songs in Apple Lossless, MPEG-4 SLS, FLAC or WavPack? Any Lossless would do, I would even take FairPlay wrapped lossless as long as I can burn a CD. And the record companies would be happy because they could charge more e.g. $1.99/$15 album or something and they would only be selling the same thing that is on a CD. Sh*t just give me the PCM WAV file. They won't even have to re-encode anything.
I've decided to stop buying so much music in 128/256 AAC, it just sucks since I started listening on a nice stereo and not in headphones all day. Its makes such a difference! And it would be nice not to have to keep buying CDs, since that is so old school and you have to rip them anyways. Anyone know where you can purchase Lossless music on the net?
256kbps is crap. 256kbps AAC is alot better, but why doesn't Apple start selling their DRM-free songs in Apple Lossless, MPEG-4 SLS, FLAC or WavPack? Any Lossless would do, I would even take FairPlay wrapped lossless as long as I can burn a CD. And the record companies would be happy because they could charge more e.g. $1.99/$15 album or something and they would only be selling the same thing that is on a CD. Sh*t just give me the PCM WAV file. They won't even have to re-encode anything.
I've decided to stop buying so much music in 128/256 AAC, it just sucks since I started listening on a nice stereo and not in headphones all day. Its makes such a difference! And it would be nice not to have to keep buying CDs, since that is so old school and you have to rip them anyways. Anyone know where you can purchase Lossless music on the net?
You are absolutely right. I too long for the good old days when thousands of independent music retailers all sold CDs and prices just kept going down year after year because of the competition!
Oh .. yeah ...
The problem with the "free market rules all" argument is that one level above Apple in this market you have a colluding group of interests. One level above them you have the super-weak negotiating "recording artists", which feeds the power of the label. Without a counterbalancing force in the retail channel these labels end up with ultimate control over content and price of a relatively inelastic-demand product.
In other words: the free market does NOT work here.
The only thing which has brought lower consumer prices on music in the past 20 years has been Apple's entry into the digital download business.