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

iTunes Maintains Digital Music Dominance Despite Amazon's Discounts

I hate buying from iTunes because it means I have to go into that bloated app PLUS there are issues with authorized devices to run the software and be able to access. Yes, they are free AAC files, but if your media devices do not support AAC, there is no benefit.

Say what you will about an MP3, *ANYTHING* can play it. That appeals to me.

Additionally, both WebOS and Android have a dedicated Amazon MP3 app. From there I can buy direct and have it download to my phone anywhere, anytime. The songs are then accessible via mass storage (Another plus).

The only time I use iTunes is when I'm forced to - for example, if I get bored and decide to take my iPod Touch 4G with me and want some music on it, I'll use iTunes since I have no other alternative. But with the Samsung Fascinate I'm finding myself not using the Touch at all.
 
revelated said:
I hate buying from iTunes because it means I have to go into that bloated app PLUS there are issues with authorized devices to run the software and be able to access. Yes, they are free AAC files, but if your media devices do not support AAC, there is no benefit.

Say what you will about an MP3, *ANYTHING* can play it. That appeals to me.
Click to expand...

So buy it from iTunes, then immediately convert it to an mp3. Problem solved. Just right-click on the file in iTunes, the option is right there.

Or buy it from Amazon, if you have that option. Not all of us do (Amazon MP3s aren't available in Canada, for example.)
 
revelated said:
I hate buying from iTunes because it means I have to go into that bloated app PLUS there are issues with authorized devices to run the software and be able to access. Yes, they are free AAC files, but if your media devices do not support AAC, there is no benefit.

Say what you will about an MP3, *ANYTHING* can play it. That appeals to me.

Additionally, both WebOS and Android have a dedicated Amazon MP3 app. From there I can buy direct and have it download to my phone anywhere, anytime. The songs are then accessible via mass storage (Another plus).

The only time I use iTunes is when I'm forced to - for example, if I get bored and decide to take my iPod Touch 4G with me and want some music on it, I'll use iTunes since I have no other alternative. But with the Samsung Fascinate I'm finding myself not using the Touch at all.
Click to expand...

Like others said you can convert iTunes to MP3, it's not hard at all. I HATED using iTunes and now I love it. It's so convenient for me and it loads pretty fast along with the store on my Mac. Yesterday was the 1st time I got something from Amazon and it loaded right into my iTunes.. again very convenient for me.
 
If you buy an MP3 and convert it to AAC you are re-compressing an already compressed file, the quality will be further degraded. Same as if you open a Jpeg and re-compress it. If you are going to change the format to AAC you need to go back to the uncompressed original.

A good example of how Amazon promotes their services to keep loyalty: I recently bought a Berghaus coat (already reduced) from Amazon, they offered me a £10 voucher because they were dong a promo on all clothing purchases over £50. I spent the voucher on a £10.99 CD (getting it for 99p), they are also giving you a £2 mp3 voucher everytime you spend £10 or more on CD's, so I have just downloaded an MP3 album (which was originally a lot cheaper than iTunes) for less that £2, using the voucher, from them.
 
Theirs nothing wrong with iTunes. I used to use things like Limewire, but trying to find the song you wanted took ages, and I was on a Windows computer so it was pretty unsafe, and often the quality of the songs was poor. I finally went to iTunes and I've not really had a problem with it, though I'd like it if they kept a record of what you have download so you can re-dowload it, since I've lost a few of my reciepts. What is also a plus of iTunes if the gift cards, they are so easy to get, any supermarket, music shop, or even card shops sells them. I'm still one of those that doesn't like to buy on the internet, so pre-pay is a good for me. Because the cards are so easy to get they are often just bought as presents from people who don't know what to buy someone.
 
I have gotten music from both and even then it is rare. That being said iTunes has an advatage of it being on the player itself (iTunes) and the iPod. Also I found that the iTMS was a little easier to find what I wanted but Amazon was really not that hard either.

Draw back is iTMS has the advantage of impulse purchases . Amazon does not so that is going to do a huge ding on iTunes part. I have not bought music threw iTunes in several years. Now I have bought threw my iPod.
Now if there is something I want I go to amazon more often because mp3's will play on almost everything. aac not everything can play and I would need to re-encode it any how.
Add in the fact I am not a audiophob so I can not tell the differences.
 
TheMacPotato said:
If you buy an MP3 and convert it to AAC you are re-compressing an already compressed file, the quality will be further degraded. Same as if you open a Jpeg and re-compress it. If you are going to change the format to AAC you need to go back to the uncompressed original.
Click to expand...

Why would I want to convert it to AAC? The simple act of importing an MP3 to iTunes does not change the format to AAC--it stays an MP3. On the other hand, an AAC file downloaded from the iTunes store or ripped direct from CD can be easily converted to MP3 if you want to load it onto some third-party device.
 
Sky Blue said:
Wish Amazon sold aac or lossless. I'm not paying for mp3.
Click to expand...

There is no noticeable difference at 256kbps with a variable bit-rate between the two compressed formats (AAC and MP3) to the human ear. This has been proven time and again. That is because neither are distinguishable at that rate with a proper encoder from lossless. AAC pays off at lower bit-rates because it's more efficient, but there is a point of no return and both Apple and Amazon are selling at 256 variable as far as I know. Neither sells lossless tracks so that's a misleading statement as well. Many car players and portables will not play AAC files period, so you are at another dis-advantage there since you would then have to convert the AAC to MP3 and that could very well result in an audible loss since you are converting from an already compressed file instead of the master.

Regardless, in my opinion only a fanatic (or someone that is ignorant of the item/sale) would pay $10 for the same item going for $3 elsewhere online when both sellers are reputable but then we all know that we have plenty of the former on here so it doesn't surprise me a bit, really. Keep paying Apple more for the same thing everyone else is selling for far less.... Steve and the Apple share holders love you for it. ;)

Blue Velvet said:
Not sure whether it applies to the US, but on-topic of the subject of downloads and iTunes, there's a vaguely interesting piece in the Guardian today about:



To me, that's yet another reason for not spending money on iTunes.
Click to expand...

notjustjay said:
Why is this a problem? Do you intend to share your files around with complete strangers?
Click to expand...



Don't forget that you also often (not always) cannot resell digital media you have become tired of (e.g. embedding user name and e-mail into tracks ensures this since it you sold your track and deleted it, you'd still get blamed if the person you sold it to then spread it around torrent sites. It was even worse when they had protection on them since they wouldn't even play on other computers. The record companies love this. They don't want sales of used music going around. They want everyone to buy their own copy from them at full price. I remember when they used to put pressure on many stores to not carry used CDs for the same reason (like Microsoft used to put pressure for OEM PC makers to put only Windows on stock computers).
 
I'll continue to use private trackers and buy CDs until we get lossless downloads. I'm not paying full price for a lossy file. Also, people are seriously talking about AAC > MP3 conversions? Lossy to Lossy transcodes introduce artifacts, you shouldn't do it.
 
Stella said:
If Amazon offered music downloads in Canada I'd certainly look there.

I'd buy music from the best service, and the cheapest, whether that be iTunes or Amazon or otherwise. No need for blind loyalty, flexibility is better.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Amazon offering MP3 in select countries really hurts them.
 
When I want to buy music or TV shows and movies, I don't think of any place other than iTunes. It's just too convenient.

I can't tell you how many times I've remembered albums that I liked in the past and no longer have. I simply take out my iPhone and I have it five minutes later while at work.
 
drumcat said:
BINGO. This isn't all about which service is cheapest. I switched beck from Amazon when everything went DRM free and 256 aac. If Amazon started selling aac @ 256, I'd choose over price because then it would be, pardon the pun, :apple:2:apple:
Click to expand...

I would take mp3 at 320kbps over aac at 256kbps. Every time. Why pay more for less?
 
strang said:
Agreed. Amazon offering MP3 in select countries really hurts them.
Click to expand...

You realize if they offered anything they could find in every country, it would hurt them more. Because they would be sued due to distribution rights until they didn't sell any music at all. Probably ruin their CD sales, also.
 
JAT said:
You realize if they offered anything they could find in every country, it would hurt them more. Because they would be sued due to distribution rights until they didn't sell any music at all. Probably ruin their CD sales, also.
Click to expand...

They would do it all legally, being a huge company and all. It really comes down to licensing, and we know the recording industry is really slow to get their crap together when it comes to digital distribution.
 
emaja said:
They would do it all legally, being a huge company and all. It really comes down to licensing, and we know the recording industry is really slow to get their crap together when it comes to digital distribution.
Click to expand...

Exactly. So, they can't. You seem to suggest they can if they only "do it". They can't, or they would have already. Maybe someday. Kinda like Apple taking this many years to get the Beatles.
 
JAT said:
Exactly. So, they can't. You seem to suggest they can if they only "do it". They can't, or they would have already. Maybe someday. Kinda like Apple taking this many years to get the Beatles.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I actually meant to quote the post about yours. I agree with you completely. They need the rights and they do not have them. It is not really their decision.

This was the post I meant to quote...

strang said:
Amazon offering MP3 in select countries really hurts them.
Click to expand...
 
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