If iTunes Unlimited Is Real, Will You Subscribe?

[MICHAELSD]

For anyone that doesn't know about iTunes Unlimited, it's rumored to be announced next month and include:

-256 Kbps music; highest quality digital music subscription service ever
-50% of U.S. store available for iTunes Unlimited at launch, U.S.-only launch
-Available through iTunes or retail box a la MobileMe, funds applied through iTunes gift cards cannot be used towards subscription purchase
-$129.99 stand-alone or $179.99 with MobileMe, current MobileMe subscribers can add iTunes Unlimited for $99.99
-One-year subscription period
-Current a la carte options unchanged
-When signed in to subscription account, “Buy” is “Get”
-“Download and Play throughout iTunes Unlimited Subscription” or “Buy and Keep”
-“Buy and Keep” option available for downloaded subscription songs, purchased version replaces subscription version
- Late October launch with iTunes 7.8

If it's true, will you subscribe? I think I'd probably subscribe. 256kbp/s is a really good quality for music, and a real unlimited music catalog is the best way to find new music since you can just take recommendations (plus you get to browse through iTunes and download anything without any limits), download a few albums, and put your iPod/iPhone in shuffle to check out all of the music you've downloaded and see what you like and what you don't.

 

[NotFound]

Not a snowball's chance in hell.

 

[Victor ch]

IF they offered a Lossless version or at least 320kps I would, but then again is very unlikely so NO. No 256 for me, nor less OFC.

Victor

 

[c-Row]

IF they offered a Lossless version or at least 320kps I would, but then again is very unlikely so NO. No 256 for me, nor less OFC.

Same here. Except for the occasional download thanks to a huge pile of Coke codes, I will stick to "physical" CDs.

 

[kfordham281]

Nope. I like to "own" (because lets face it, you truly don't own it) my music. I only buy a handful of (less than 10) CD's a year so renting my music would be more expensive and if I quite paying then I'd lose access to it all.

 

[yrsonicdeath]

Nope. I like to "own" (because lets face it, you truly don't own it) my music. I only buy a handful of (less than 10) CD's a year so renting my music would be more expensive and if I quite paying then I'd lose access to it all.

Despite the enormous amount of space this is starting to take up in my one bedroom apartment, I feel this way too. Lossless audio is also a plus.

 

[GoCubsGo]

I wouldn't and I can now see why iTunes refuses to allow a very low-quality playback of the entire song as a preview. Who in their right mind can really get the true feel for a song in 30 seconds? Some maybe, but not me.

I prefer to own my music. I'll continue to download my music from iTunes so that I can own it. My other gripe is this BS they're doing where it's cheaper if you have MobileMe. Nice way of trying to shove MM down people's throats.

 

[BoyBach]

No.

EDIT: Silly poll options by the way. It should just be 'Yes' and 'No'.

 

[r.j.s]

Never, I dont see a point in renting music. What if I need to stop paying for whatever reason? Then I have no music. That and I don't listen to that much new music anyway.

 

[gazfocus]

No I don't think I would subscribe.

I agree with most on here. For me it's not so much about the quality or the actually owning a physical CD, but when I buy music off iTunes (usually as full albums), I like to burn them to CD. Also, as I don't currently own an iPod and have a different make MP3 player, when I buy an album off iTunes, I have to burn it to CD, then rip it back to the computer to get rid of the encryption so I can play it on my MP3 player. That wouldn't be possible with the subscription service.

If they offered a subscription where you could 'own' as many songs as you like for x amount per year (or even if they limited it to say 10 tracks or 1 album per day), then yeah I'd go for that.

 

[arkitect]

Will You Subscribe?

No.

I buy my music on CD and transfer it to iTunes in a lossless format.
Why on earth would I want to "rent" my music in a second rate format?

Perhaps if I listened to music with a shelf life of maximum 3 weeks… then… maybe.

 

[sushi]

No.

I'm not a streamer by nature. It bugs me to no end to have any type of interruption of music or video.

Here in Japan, I spend too much time in tunnels, trains, or on the road where reception would be limited. Plus, reception on the slopes is limited as well.

So I will continue to purchase from the iTMS or CDs.

 

[Pope Jawn Pawl]

Music subscriptions are the stupidest idea ever. Unless you don't care about music, then go for it.

 

[carve]

I would subscribe!

 

[alphaod]

For only $99 a year, sure.

 

[GGJstudios]

"I just don't understand how they caught me!" LOL

 

[rdowns]

I'd probably check it out.

 

[nick9191]

No most of the music I have is either ripped off a CD or an odd song is bought off iTunes.

Other than that theres a hell of a lot of music on Youtube, who needs to buy stuff. I can't tell the difference with my crappy speakers anyway.

 

[gcmexico]

I'd rather subscribe to unlimited movies

 

[Xavier]

As I don't spend a whole lot of money on the iTunes store as it is, I can't justify subscribing to a service I probably wouldn't use all that often. Of course, it would give me more insentive to go download more off the iTunes store.

 

[bit density]

Hell Yeah!

I would totally subscribe. There is tons of music that I want to listen to for a little while, and my mood changes as to what I want to listen to. There is just way to much stuff I would listen to under this scheme.

Yes I would still "buy" music, but I would only buy that stuff that stood the test of my time. Otherwise, heck yeah, crank up the itunes, 1 CD a month. Easy Peasy.