Apple vs. Anti-DRM

[Thor74]

And yes, to some people DRM IS bad. If you, as a consumer, don't like to see versatility in the products you buy then you, my friend, are a stupid consumer. If you had the choice to buy an iTMS song at 1.00 with no DRM and .99 with DRM which would you buy? What if they both cost the same?

What planet are you from? An you call me "stupid"?! LOL Too funny. Since we do not live on a planet where you can get iTMS song for $1 without DRM, you point is moot. Period. (Although the free songs for .00 with DRM Apple is giving away every day must also relaly tick you folks off too I bet!) 😀

You can wish all day long for it, but it just isn't gonna happen any time soon. Apple needs teh DRM in place. My point is valid, yours is a wish, a dream, a heckle from the balcony stands screaming at Apple for such a small little thing. I have all the choices in the world as a consumer. I can avoid Apple's DRM entirely and choose WMA, or any other audio format out there right now. No Apple executive has a gun to my head telling me to buy iTMS only. You arguments at first had clarity and passion (although I personally did not agree), but when you start calling other people "stupid" just because their opinion differs from your own, you wear the clothes of the court jester pal. But you know.. I value your hostile & passionate heckling.... Go on, yell more and more... IF folks like you get Apple to drop the (in my opinion the already low) .99 cent cost per song to say... .88 cents.. Yahoo for me the 'stupid consumer'! I will still buy the songs, WITH all their DRM glory and simply smile as you heckle from the balcony waiving your arms, beating your chest, and thorwing out the occasional insult. 😱

 

[greg75]

Here's a rumor which is even on-topic, from a VLC thread over at the MacNN forums:

Man, look around abit, there are already about 5 forumthreads that explain this. Fairplay isn't working anymore either. Apple switched to newer authentication protocols. The people are already on it, and i was told it will be a breeze to crack it again.

 

[hexcalibur]

Hoping people weren't taking from my statement that I agree with copyright infringement. I was only saying that the aforementioned poster who said that illicitly downloading songs was "stealing" was incorrect.

I am a faithful user of iTunes music store, and have spent too much hard earned cash on LEGALLY downloading songs. ;o)

Up here in the Wild, Wild North, downloading songs from p2p networks is currently LEGAL. You can't *upload,* but you can snag anything you find. This strange, half-assed situation also describes the current state of pot laws here. It isn't illegal to buy marijuana, but it's highly illegal to sell it. Go figure.

This gets to a sometimes-overlooked point the RIAA lobby wants you to ignore. Filesharing is "illegal" in the US because the government decided it was. They could change the law if they felt, um, compelled to by voters.

Yeah, and pigs could fly -- I know, it will never happen. More likely, the Canadian goverment will get bought off to change OUR laws to close the download loophole.

Since Canadian music publishers are dragging their heels about allowing iTMS to come to Canada, I'm unable to give 'em my $0.99 for their musical offerings, and use the excellent Acquisition app instead.

Just thought I'd point out US laws don't apply to all of us here on Planet Earth.

 

[dekator]

What planet are you from? An you call me "stupid"?! LOL Too funny. Since we do not live on a planet where you can get iTMS song for $1 without DRM, you point is moot. Period. (Although the free songs for .00 with DRM Apple is giving away every day must also relaly tick you folks off too I bet!) 😀

Well, I don't think calling anyone stupid helps, but I think zync has a point. It is completely irrelevant whether you can get an iTMS song without DRM or not. It's about the principle. And quite simply, I, for example, and certainly many, many others won't buy a DRM'ed song. Period. Well, you say Apple doesn't care? I don't think so, because if there was a way to sell songs without DRM, Apple would make incredibly much more money. So, there is a vision, and I think it's not too unrealistic, that DRM is abolished once and for all. Look at Apple's history. They've done many things ppl called 'impossible', 'from a different planet' etc. Try to look to the future, envision things, think possibilities, they may become real sooner than you think. You should know this as an Apple user. Or didn't Apple do the things they did on your planet ? They sure did on earth... 😉

 

[iMan]

Well, I don't think calling anyone stupid helps, but I think zync has a point. It is completely irrelevant whether you can get an iTMS song without DRM or not. It's about the principle. And quite simply, I, for example, and certainly many, many others won't buy a DRM'ed song. Period. Well, you say Apple doesn't care? I don't think so, because if there was a way to sell songs without DRM, Apple would make incredibly much more money. So, there is a vision, and I think it's not too unrealistic, that DRM is abolished once and for all. Look at Apple's history. They've done many things ppl called 'impossible', 'from a different planet' etc. Try to look to the future, envision things, think possibilities, they may become real sooner than you think. You should know this as an Apple user. Or didn't Apple do the things they did on your planet ? They sure did on earth... 😉

Well, me I do not like the DRM any better than you, but my realistic point of view is that we are stuck with this system for a long time. I do not think that Apple would see any surge in revenue either if the DRM is dropped. Most people are actually quite ignorant to this fact as long as it works and is simple to use - which iTMS certainly are.

One other thing that was pointed out for me: Why this sudden frenzy about being able to use the music till the end of time? When we bought LPs we never even thought of it. Now I only buy CDs, and even bought a lot of the music again because of the better playback quality (my records were not always treated nice 🙂 Never thought that the record industry or anyone should be responsible that I was not able to use my already bought records... No guarantees was made when the CD was introduced neither that this system would always be around. There were even research that CDs would "selfdestroy" in a certain amount of time. Most people didn't care. Now all of a sudden everyone is in a frenzy that they will not be able to play their iTunes songs some time in the future - even though the technical quality of the goods for the first time is definitely poorer than the last system. Given the fact that CDs are only about 20 years old now, the realistic perspective of the "iTunes-regime" is at 10-15 years maximum, before a new revolution happens. And we start buying all the music once more 😀
Makes me wonder why we bother...

 

[zync]

What planet are you from? An you call me "stupid"?! LOL Too funny. Since we do not live on a planet where you can get iTMS song for $1 without DRM, you point is moot. Period. (Although the free songs for .00 with DRM Apple is giving away every day must also relaly tick you folks off too I bet!) 😀

You can wish all day long for it, but it just isn't gonna happen any time soon. Apple needs teh DRM in place. My point is valid, yours is a wish, a dream, a heckle from the balcony stands screaming at Apple for such a small little thing. I have all the choices in the world as a consumer. I can avoid Apple's DRM entirely and choose WMA, or any other audio format out there right now. No Apple executive has a gun to my head telling me to buy iTMS only. You arguments at first had clarity and passion (although I personally did not agree), but when you start calling other people "stupid" just because their opinion differs from your own, you wear the clothes of the court jester pal. But you know.. I value your hostile & passionate heckling.... Go on, yell more and more... IF folks like you get Apple to drop the (in my opinion the already low) .99 cent cost per song to say... .88 cents.. Yahoo for me the 'stupid consumer'! I will still buy the songs, WITH all their DRM glory and simply smile as you heckle from the balcony waiving your arms, beating your chest, and thorwing out the occasional insult. 😱

Originally, no, I was not calling you stupid. But for you to make such a garish attempt at calling me no better than a "jester" or "heckler," I should indeed ascribe that label unto you. My point, which you so obviously missed, was that among such services of which you are the consumer (this obviously being online services only) the laws of consumerism, as in any capitalist system, is driven by demand. In this case, as my point commenced, the demands of consumers should be for less-restrictive DRM, or even the altogether stripping of DRM, from the companies which hold the supply. As consumers, our demand is always a higher level of quality at a lower price. In this case, that is what I'm speaking about. I'm most certainly not a heckler, sir, and if you would take but some consideration into your reply you would find yourself no better than one.

I find it quite funny that irony has born this down upon you. However, I find it funnier that you see the image of a consumer speaking against - not throwing stones - a multinational corporation as a stupid thing. This kind of rationale is what makes boycotting outrages to society useless, instead of doing what they were intent on doing. If we, as Americans, didn't see this sort of thing as useless then perhaps people like Nike (and yes Nike is considered a person as it's a corporation) wouldn't be using what's essentially slave labor to turn a high profit. I'm sorry to be so rude, but it was blatant that you didn't take such care in your reply anyway so why should I afford you the same respect I afford anyone else on these forums? Your reply disgusts me, and continued messages such as these make your persona disgust me as well.

 

[michaelal]

Well, I don't think calling anyone stupid helps, but I think zync has a point. It is completely irrelevant whether you can get an iTMS song without DRM or not. It's about the principle. And quite simply, I, for example, and certainly many, many others won't buy a DRM'ed song. Period. Well, you say Apple doesn't care? I don't think so, because if there was a way to sell songs without DRM, Apple would make incredibly much more money. So, there is a vision, and I think it's not too unrealistic, that DRM is abolished once and for all. Look at Apple's history. They've done many things ppl called 'impossible', 'from a different planet' etc. Try to look to the future, envision things, think possibilities, they may become real sooner than you think. You should know this as an Apple user. Or didn't Apple do the things they did on your planet ? They sure did on earth... 😉

I totally agree. I have refrained and will continue to refrain from purchasing any songs that have protection in them. Who knows how and when I will use a song that I purchase. It could be today, it could be 10 years from now. I have gone back to vinyl LPs that I purchase 20 years ago and ripped songs off these to use in a new way in the digital world. They are still relevent to me and I want any digital music I purchase now to be relevant in another 20 years whether I use them then or not. I payed the money. It should be my choice. 😱

 

[arogge]

Microsoft's latest DRM scheme has new "features"

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2004/may04/05-03DigitalRightsManagementTechnologyPR.asp

 

[applebum]

I totally agree. I have refrained and will continue to refrain from purchasing any songs that have protection in them. Who knows how and when I will use a song that I purchase. It could be today, it could be 10 years from now. I have gone back to vinyl LPs that I purchase 20 years ago and ripped songs off these to use in a new way in the digital world. They are still relevent to me and I want any digital music I purchase now to be relevant in another 20 years whether I use them then or not. I payed the money. It should be my choice. 😱

Hmmmm let me see if I can get this straight, you find the vinyl relevant today. When you bought that vinyl, the medium itself was the DRM if you will. Even if you had 5 turntables back then, you could only play that vinyl on one of them at a time. If you went to another room and wanted to hear your music, you had to turn up the volume - you turned it up really loudly if you wanted to share your music with everyone in the house. Today, it is the same way. You can't take that vinyl with you and play it in the car, or on your computer at work. So you have to update it by ......gasp....making a CD.

Now your DRMed iTunes music has much more flexibility than that vinyl originally did. You can play it on 5 computers - simultaneously if you want. If you leave a room, turn it on in the computer in the next room. You want to hear it at work, just turn it on there (provided you have transferred it there). What, you say you want to hear it in your car? Then you ...gasp... burn it to CD - just like you did the vinyl. Once you have it on CD, it is as relevant as that vinyl is and will be viable until the medium changes once again.

Now, if you say iTunes music will be less relevant in the future due to poorer quality from the start, that is another argument which you didn't make. It is just a silly argument to not buy due to DRM when that music is still much more flexible than any medium we had in the past.

 

[zync]

Now, if you say iTunes music will be less relevant in the future due to poorer quality from the start, that is another argument which you didn't make. It is just a silly argument to not buy due to DRM when that music is still much more flexible than any medium we had in the past.

Of course you are excepting CDs since, as we all know, songs ripped off of them can be of higher quality and have no DRM. Therefore, you just helped make our point. You said it would be silly to avoid buying DRMed songs since they are more flexible than the media we've had in the past. However, CDs are still more flexible than DRMed iTMS songs, thus it would be silly to buy the latter instead of CDs. 😀

 

[iMan]

Of course you are excepting CDs since, as we all know, songs ripped off of them can be of higher quality and have no DRM. Therefore, you just helped make our point. You said it would be silly to avoid buying DRMed songs since they are more flexible than the media we've had in the past. However, CDs are still more flexible than DRMed iTMS songs, thus it would be silly to buy the latter instead of CDs. 😀

Exactly. The fuzz about this DRM thing is way off in my opinion; CDs generally offer higher quality music and no DRM (though at a stiffer price and less convenience), but if the iTMS DRM is such a pain, why don't people just stop whining and stick with the CDs? Why? Because they want the music cheaper (or rather free...) and the flexibility of the iTMS. Well, apparently one can't have it all ways - for now 🙂

 

[iMan]

My point, which you so obviously missed, was that among such services of which you are the consumer (this obviously being online services only) the laws of consumerism, as in any capitalist system, is driven by demand. In this case, as my point commenced, the demands of consumers should be for less-restrictive DRM, or even the altogether stripping of DRM, from the companies which hold the supply. As consumers, our demand is always a higher level of quality at a lower price. In this case, that is what I'm speaking about. I'm most certainly not a heckler, sir, and if you would take but some consideration into your reply you would find yourself no better than one.

But your logic fails a bit, doesn't it? The demand for iTMS is pretty high, I would say, so the laws of consumerism is very much in function. As for those (few?) that does not conform to the liberal restrictions imposed by the DRM, those should neither have any trouble finding themselves alternatives...
If noone actually found this product interesting though - that would of course either make the record companies / Apple loosen the DRM or drop the whole idea of online music. The important thing for me, is that I actually have a choice of where to play my music - which I do have by being able to burn CDs from iTunes (actually more so as with the current copyright controlled CDs on the market - which is really a pain since one does not have any real choices).

 

[zync]

Exactly. The fuzz about this DRM thing is way off in my opinion; CDs generally offer higher quality music and no DRM (though at a stiffer price and less convenience), but if the iTMS DRM is such a pain, why don't people just stop whining and stick with the CDs? Why? Because they want the music cheaper (or rather free...) and the flexibility of the iTMS. Well, apparently one can't have it all ways - for now 🙂

True, which is why I buy CDs only! I do try to download the free iTMS songs but I'll still strip them from their DRM. That however is a more grey area.

But your logic fails a bit, doesn't it? The demand for iTMS is pretty high, I would say, so the laws of consumerism is very much in function. As for those (few?) that does not conform to the liberal restrictions imposed by the DRM, those should neither have any trouble finding themselves alternatives...
If noone actually found this product interesting though - that would of course either make the record companies / Apple loosen the DRM or drop the whole idea of online music. The important thing for me, is that I actually have a choice of where to play my music - which I do have by being able to burn CDs from iTunes (actually more so as with the current copyright controlled CDs on the market - which is really a pain since one does not have any real choices).

As for this you missed a critical point that I stated. The demands SHOULD be for less restrictive DRM. And, technically, though not many have complained, the demand, though not stated, IS for less restrictive DRM. The point is that this is not a stated demand by everyone but no one would take a more restrictive file over a less restricted file if offered the same price and convenience. So really, as always, my logic did not fail. 😀

 

[iMan]

... the demand, though not stated, IS for less restrictive DRM. The point is that this is not a stated demand by everyone but no one would take a more restrictive file over a less restricted file if offered the same price and convenience. So really, as always, my logic did not fail. 😀

I am sorry, but it did; you are implying that the alternatives are equal - apart from the DRM. Unfortunately there are no current alternative to the iTMS without DRM. You may wish and demand all you want - but point is (this IS where we disagree) that it is not possible, neither necessary for Apple to remove the DRM.
You may want to benefit from the iTMS - but the price you pay for the lower cost and convenience is a restricted file. There is no unrestricted file to choose from - and quite frankly I do not believe it will be for a long time (unfortunately). For me: I don't like it too much, but it still is a lot better that copy-controlled CDs (since it is pretty easy to copy the files).
What worries me more is actually the possibility that the iTMS (and the like) is going to be such a success that CDs are dropped altogether, without the possiblity to actually get a noncompressed version of the music. That is a real step back...

 

[zync]

I am sorry, but it did; you are implying that the alternatives are equal - apart from the DRM. Unfortunately there are no current alternative to the iTMS without DRM. You may wish and demand all you want - but point is (this IS where we disagree) that it is not possible, neither necessary for Apple to remove the DRM.
You may want to benefit from the iTMS - but the price you pay for the lower cost and convenience is a restricted file. There is no unrestricted file to choose from - and quite frankly I do not believe it will be for a long time (unfortunately). For me: I don't like it too much, but it still is a lot better that copy-controlled CDs (since it is pretty easy to copy the files).
What worries me more is actually the possibility that the iTMS (and the like) is going to be such a success that CDs are dropped altogether, without the possiblity to actually get a noncompressed version of the music. That is a real step back...

I am sorry to you. My logic never fails and we don't disagree there. In fact, we do not disagree at all! I never said, nor implied, that there is an alternative to the iTMS. In fact, if there is anything we actually disagree about it is what I explicitly stated many, many posts ago. I said that there are no alternatives, however neither case is a requirement of my point to stand on it's own merit. I said that the demand should, and indeed is, for less restrictive DRM. I also agree that it is not possible for Apple to remove the DRM.

Also, I have made no implications, especially as to the availability of alternative services. As a matter of fact, I didn't even imply the existence of any alternative service, as I view the iTMS as being the best service in it's class. Simply put, whether another service exists or not, the law of demand still applies. As consumers, the demand is always for higher quality at a lower price and this doesn't change whether there is one provider or many.

 

[iMan]

I am sorry to you. My logic never fails and we don't disagree there. In fact, we do not disagree at all! I never said, nor implied, that there is an alternative to the iTMS. In fact, if there is anything we actually disagree about it is what I explicitly stated many, many posts ago. I said that there are no alternatives, however neither case is a requirement of my point to stand on it's own merit. I said that the demand should, and indeed is, for less restrictive DRM. I also agree that it is not possible for Apple to remove the DRM.

As consumers, the demand is always for higher quality at a lower price and this doesn't change whether there is one provider or many.

Well, I still claim we are of different opinion - or at least of different principle 🙂
Since your logic never fails; why is there a demand for iTMS in the first place; this is actually a service that provide less quality at a lower price - i.e. it should hence fail according to the "consumer law" - and you should be a lot more concerned of the quality of the tracks (which is lousy compared to the CD alternative) in the first place than the DRM part.
Your argument could very well also be that music should be distributed free and with no restrictions (if we take it a bit further on principle). This conceptual idea - as wonderful as it might seem - is however not going to be an industry standard. It might be a way to promote unknown artist and good for special purposes, but your arguments fail to comply to a business model (by that I mean someone is making an effort to distribute and market the music inbetween the artist and the consumer). To own an original of this final product (if it is an LP, CD or a DRMed digital file) is what they sell. It is quite easy to copy all of them, but there is still an original that is (for some) a novelty to own. If your argument should be correct, we should also be entitled to an exact copy of the LP and CD if we wanted to copy it (for personal use of course). The DRM allows you unlimited possibilities to easily create personalized copies of your tunes on CD - with basically unhearable loss of quality (and lets face the fact; if making such a copy you would not play it on your most expensive stereosystem anyways).

I still say your logic fail 🙂 and mine prevail; the demand should be for better quality of music (both performance and the actual file), better availability and lower pricing. The DRM part I agree I don't fancy too much, but it does not hinder me enjoying the music - for the time being.

 

[zync]

Well, I still claim we are of different opinion - or at least of different principle 🙂
Since your logic never fails; why is there a demand for iTMS in the first place; this is actually a service that provide less quality at a lower price - i.e. it should hence fail according to the "consumer law" - and you should be a lot more concerned of the quality of the tracks (which is lousy compared to the CD alternative) in the first place than the DRM part.
Your argument could very well also be that music should be distributed free and with no restrictions (if we take it a bit further on principle). This conceptual idea - as wonderful as it might seem - is however not going to be an industry standard. It might be a way to promote unknown artist and good for special purposes, but your arguments fail to comply to a business model (by that I mean someone is making an effort to distribute and market the music inbetween the artist and the consumer). To own an original of this final product (if it is an LP, CD or a DRMed digital file) is what they sell. It is quite easy to copy all of them, but there is still an original that is (for some) a novelty to own. If your argument should be correct, we should also be entitled to an exact copy of the LP and CD if we wanted to copy it (for personal use of course). The DRM allows you unlimited possibilities to easily create personalized copies of your tunes on CD - with basically unhearable loss of quality (and lets face the fact; if making such a copy you would not play it on your most expensive stereosystem anyways).

I still say your logic fail 🙂 and mine prevail; the demand should be for better quality of music (both performance and the actual file), better availability and lower pricing. The DRM part I agree I don't fancy too much, but it does not hinder me enjoying the music - for the time being.

My logic has still not failed 🙂 You are however getting closer to what I'm saying, however you leave out a factor then seem to remember it. The reason the iTMS has customers is because of convenience. Think about it this way (and you are correct also about better quality files, BTW) if it were possible for the iTMS to let you download the songs and a few days later you get the CD of whatever you purchased, wouldn't you go for that over the current form of the iTMS? I would chance to think that no one would take the old form of the iTMS over the new one.

Yes, as I said the demand is for better quality files (exempli gratia higher bitrate and less DRM) at a better price. If quality goes up and the price stays the same that satisfies consumers. If quality stays the same and price drops that also satisfies consumers. Without the need for multiple producers or even a thought in someone's mind, this is the way demand works for consumers. Remember, however, I'm not talking about demand in a strictly supply/demand sense.

 

[iMan]

The reason the iTMS has customers is because of convenience. Think about it this way (and you are correct also about better quality files, BTW) if it were possible for the iTMS to let you download the songs and a few days later you get the CD of whatever you purchased, wouldn't you go for that over the current form of the iTMS? I would chance to think that no one would take the old form of the iTMS over the new one.

Your laws does not apply as you wish - I am sorry: One example; if the quality/price factor would be the driving force - why is 95% of the computer users on the Windows platform? 😉

Another one: Why does Britney Spears (or the like) sell more CDs than Classical Greats as Bethoveen - given that the price of the CD is usually in the favour of the classics, and the quality of the music should be indisputable... 🙂

And why oh why do people buy burgers at McDonalds???

Point is; consumers buy crap whenever they see it. Some even pay good money for it. The wish to buy has little to do with quality or price, and a lot to do with other factors - like convenience, formfactor, availability, affordability etc. (of course quality never goes out of style, but we are talking about the general public here).

Your argument seems to me to demand another form of iTMS and reality than exists - and the iTMS+mail CD thing is just like ordering a pizza on the door and expecting to get a voucher for a finer restaurant in the mail later. Sorry that is just of course not gonna work (although, I would not mind if it did - but remember there is people needing to earn their living inbetween here. give them at least some credit...)

 

[zync]

Your laws does not apply as you wish - I am sorry: One example; if the quality/price factor would be the driving force - why is 95% of the computer users on the Windows platform? 😉

Another one: Why does Britney Spears (or the like) sell more CDs than Classical Greats as Bethoveen - given that the price of the CD is usually in the favour of the classics, and the quality of the music should be indisputable... 🙂

And why oh why do people buy burgers at McDonalds???

Point is; consumers buy crap whenever they see it. Some even pay good money for it. The wish to buy has little to do with quality or price, and a lot to do with other factors - like convenience, formfactor, availability, affordability etc. (of course quality never goes out of style, but we are talking about the general public here).

Your argument seems to me to demand another form of iTMS and reality than exists - and the iTMS+mail CD thing is just like ordering a pizza on the door and expecting to get a voucher for a finer restaurant in the mail later. Sorry that is just of course not gonna work (although, I would not mind if it did - but remember there is people needing to earn their living inbetween here. give them at least some credit...)

Let us refresh ourselves of the original argument here. I do not believe that any of these hypothetical situations exist. I'm just saying DRM is too restrictive for my taste, and that of many other people.

In keeping with that I will give you the answers you seek 😀:

I. Windows Systems vs. Alternatives
1. Windows isn't that bad of an operating system
2. It's usually bundled with PC's anyway and many people don't even know how to install different operating systems
3. Windows/PC Systems are much cheaper than their mac counterparts

II. Britney Spears and the like vs. Classical Composers
1. We live in a pop culture where the people who have kids already don't know good music and rarely like classical music
2. These people's children most certainly may not even know Bach, Beethoven, Handel, Mozart, Chopin, (didn't realize I was alphabetizing the list 🙂), Tchaikovsky, Rachmaninoff, Palestrina, Pachabel, etc. (I'm 20 and these are the ones I can think of off the top of my head....how many other 20 year olds do you think can name more than a few of the ones on my small list? How many do you think can think of a single one outside my list off the top of their head? That pretty much answers that question 😀)
3. How many people do you know that even listen to purely instrumental music that isn't from the soundtrack to something?

III. McDonald's vs. Real Food
1. Convenience, convenience, convenience....
2. The food actually tastes pretty good (usually)...and it beats Burger King 🙂
3. It's extremely cheap as long as you don't get some gargantuan burger
4. It's fast, that's why they call it fast food.

This was actually a fun game 🙂 I hope that you realized why people do these things in the first place. Also, remember that anything having to do with people has to be simplified to a general sense, as in generally people behave like this. You have to remember, however, that people, in general, are very, very stupid.

 

[iMan]

This was actually a fun game 🙂 I hope that you realized why people do these things in the first place. Also, remember that anything having to do with people has to be simplified to a general sense, as in generally people behave like this. You have to remember, however, that people, in general, are very, very stupid.

This IS a fun game 🙂
And you are proving my point; the general demand is rarely for better quality/lower price alone - but rather for a lot of other reasons, amongst which convenience is one of the major factors of our time.

1. Most people finds the Windows system quite adequate, and the convenience (i.e. the compatibility with others, availability of resellers and lower priced systems) is a major factor of preference. As for quality the Mac system is undoubtedly better (even from a objective pow) - but appears to be more expensive (mainly because you get more built in features imo). Conclusion: People generally does not demand highest quality, but goes for the mainstream alternative - even though it really has lots of restrictions - it just doesn't appear so (MS software is generally the least compatible with others - it's just so dominating).

2. Most people prefers the "braindead" music like Britney Spears over the more complex (not only Classical, but even complex and quality rock/pop music: i.e. Yes, Pink Floyd, the Who - or even Jazz) out of convenience. It is easier to relate to - hence easier "available" to the main public. Even though you probably pay more for the new Britney album than a legacy Floyd recording - and the quality of the music and recording is doubtlessly in the latters favor - people actually buy the Britney album, well knowingly they probably "throw it away" in a couple of years. Conclusion: generally people "don't care" for quality and price; they want convenient fun right now.

3. Most people buy McDonalds out of convenience (I am not taking a debate of fast food preferences since the point applies to the industry. That said, Burger King will always rule 😉 ). The food generally tastes ok - and the same wherever you go in the world - i.e. it is always "safe harbour" - no worries. It is not particularly cheap, and not particularly tasty or healthy - but it IS convenient. So the conclusion: generally people prefer the convenience over quality and price - and what is good for them.

Overall conclusion - and why iTMS WILL be a success even with the restrictions imposed given the DRM:
Most people find it convenient to use, since you 1) buy only the tracks you want, 2) get it on your computer right now, 3) can easily transfer it to any of five computers (which is more than enough for most of us) or share over a network, 4) can easily use the songs on the worlds favourite mp3 player, 5) can easily burn favourite songs on CDs to friends (I mean to use in your car), 6) get acceptable quality (at least over downloading via P2P).
For most people; the quality is good enough, the DRM imposes no limitations whatsoever and iTunes offer the most convenient user experience ever. There is currently no reason why the iTMS should dramatically change its DRM (or other features) other than continue to develope the user experience and back catalogue.

As goes for the original argument that the DRM is too restrictive for some peoples needs - I accept that. But those people are in minority (like the Hi-Fi freaks), and they still have the option to buy CDs. There will always be some tough choices, and to twist your argument a little (to make it more viable in my opinion): Would you be willing to pay, let's say $1.50/track for an uncompressed, non DRM alternative over $0.99 for the regular iTMS available today? (figures just for illustration purposes - point: will people pay more for better quality over convenience (being smaller filesize) - given the choice).

 

[zync]

This IS a fun game 🙂
And you are proving my point; the general demand is rarely for better quality/lower price alone - but rather for a lot of other reasons, amongst which convenience is one of the major factors of our time.

1. Most people finds the Windows system quite adequate, and the convenience (i.e. the compatibility with others, availability of resellers and lower priced systems) is a major factor of preference. As for quality the Mac system is undoubtedly better (even from a objective pow) - but appears to be more expensive (mainly because you get more built in features imo). Conclusion: People generally does not demand highest quality, but goes for the mainstream alternative - even though it really has lots of restrictions - it just doesn't appear so (MS software is generally the least compatible with others - it's just so dominating).

2. Most people prefers the "braindead" music like Britney Spears over the more complex (not only Classical, but even complex and quality rock/pop music: i.e. Yes, Pink Floyd, the Who - or even Jazz) out of convenience. It is easier to relate to - hence easier "available" to the main public. Even though you probably pay more for the new Britney album than a legacy Floyd recording - and the quality of the music and recording is doubtlessly in the latters favor - people actually buy the Britney album, well knowingly they probably "throw it away" in a couple of years. Conclusion: generally people "don't care" for quality and price; they want convenient fun right now.

3. Most people buy McDonalds out of convenience (I am not taking a debate of fast food preferences since the point applies to the industry. That said, Burger King will always rule 😉 ). The food generally tastes ok - and the same wherever you go in the world - i.e. it is always "safe harbour" - no worries. It is not particularly cheap, and not particularly tasty or healthy - but it IS convenient. So the conclusion: generally people prefer the convenience over quality and price - and what is good for them.

Overall conclusion - and why iTMS WILL be a success even with the restrictions imposed given the DRM:
Most people find it convenient to use, since you 1) buy only the tracks you want, 2) get it on your computer right now, 3) can easily transfer it to any of five computers (which is more than enough for most of us) or share over a network, 4) can easily use the songs on the worlds favourite mp3 player, 5) can easily burn favourite songs on CDs to friends (I mean to use in your car), 6) get acceptable quality (at least over downloading via P2P).
For most people; the quality is good enough, the DRM imposes no limitations whatsoever and iTunes offer the most convenient user experience ever. There is currently no reason why the iTMS should dramatically change its DRM (or other features) other than continue to develope the user experience and back catalogue.

As goes for the original argument that the DRM is too restrictive for some peoples needs - I accept that. But those people are in minority (like the Hi-Fi freaks), and they still have the option to buy CDs. There will always be some tough choices, and to twist your argument a little (to make it more viable in my opinion): Would you be willing to pay, let's say $1.50/track for an uncompressed, non DRM alternative over $0.99 for the regular iTMS available today? (figures just for illustration purposes - point: will people pay more for better quality over convenience (being smaller filesize) - given the choice).

Two things before I make my point:
1. I knew your like Burger King....how could you....disgusting....mayo does not belong on a hamburger...and they could at least keep it from mingling with the ketchup....
2. Yes I'd pay that 1.50 if two conditions were met: I didn't have dialup and I only wanted that one song. I always prefer to have the CD itself in most cases.


You're thinking of this in the right way except the demand of consumers is not linear. They don't always take the cheaper route. You have to consider various factors....and yes, a lot of the time people choose the cheaper alternative, however, they still would like to spend the least and get the most. This is always on a person's mind. Remember "give them a hand and they'll take the whole arm"? That's basically it.

Oh and yes, this is a fun game 🙂 and I prefer incubus, Hendrix, Clapton, and many, many, many other bands 😀