Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Chomolungma said:
I think you have many good points, however, to suggest that today's rock music is bloated and has excessive bass among others is absolutely a subjective opinion. If there is a such thing as subjective opinion :D . I think most genre of music needs to be on the cutting edge. We may not understand and appreciate new music just as we sometime do not appreciate cutting edge abstract art. Nonetheless, in due time, the bad new music will fade, and the good music will be incorporated into our culture. think of the alternative? What if rock cutting edge artist of today is e.g. the Rolling Stone. the like the Stones, but I don't think they are pusing the standard like they once had. Just my two cents.

Chomo

Anything that is new in the music industry is by definition cutting edge. Since average person doesn't have a measuring stick of how well composed the music is, how musical it is, what is music theory, etc... In those terms i just described, almost all of today's music is paltry compared to the classical era. As well, we subjectively depict what we think is good, or more appriopriately, what we like by the process of whether we like it or not. But this fails miserably when evaluating things formally. An objective evaluation would be based on prior knowledge of music, for example, someone who has been trained fully in music schools. This is a segment of the market where capitalism fails. There is no need for producing higher entertainment and well thought out, logical forms when despite how ridiculously simple and watered (dumbed)-down your material is, there is always some audience out there who was never educated in those faculties and will pay 20 dollars for something when they get 6.5 dollars an hour for their labour. Quite quickly, a lot of these new arts (highly unregulated and judged subjectively) fall to the lowest common denominators such as using beats to subsitute creativity, and using raging vocals to stimulate audience instead of well composed music, anyone can scream, but when you put that on a cd and charge an arm and a leg for it, it just isn't art. There is no such thing as commercial art, art originated as an expression form, a desire to create, to communicate and satisfy human's higher consciousness. These qualities can not, and will fundamentally never be able to become commercialized. Money is abstract, to prioritize money in a capitalistic system is central to the progress of the society, which by definition puts all other human qualities second, or even third to profit. It's only a progression that gets worse before it can be fixed or changed, that's why, relatively speaking, there was more good music in the 80's than there is now, and a lot more good music in the classical era than there is now. Putting your faith in time to clear away all things you disagree with including this one only makes you powerless against whatever confronts you now. In due time, we are all dead.
 
I am taking back what I said earlier. I don't know what came over me. Please forgive me, I will banish RealPlayer to the deep reigions known as forgetfulness.

I return to worshipping the iTMS and Apple. I will break my ties with supporting Harmony. Is it possible to remove your signiture from a petition? Ah dosen't really matter.

Although, just hurry up Apple and bring the iTMS to Australia dammit!
 
sinisterdesign said:
have you heard of region coding? most every DVD player made (i said "most") only plays DVDs of one region. in fact, pop a DVD from Europe into your Mac and see if your DVD player doesn't want you to lock in a region. the MPAA requires this so i don't start selling my DVDs on eBay in China (and i'm sure there are a hundred other reasons, but for simplicity sake).

Region coding is a much milder form of freedom control. That is NOTHING compared to being in the same north america on planet earth owning a device that can decode nearly all popular formats but never being able to play them you got online legally even if you paid. And even then, they are not tagging on any new algorithms on your DVD's to prevent you from playing them on any given generation DVD player. Besides, I can speak the following because I have been to China, I can tell you that the DVD machines sold there are, if not the majority, then at least near 50% are multi-region. As well as a lot of the TV's VCR's are NTSC/PAL compatible. THe RIAA doesn't reach as far as the east end of the globe, and has no right excerising their demonic idiocity on unsuspecting folks there.



sinisterdesign said:
what utopia do you live in?? <sarcasm>yeah, and Apple should have just bought all the music at their local Sam Goody, ripped it to their servers and offered it free to any iPod owner.</sarcasm> somehow i think the RIAA had a say in what copyright constraints THEIR music came with. i think Apple did a pretty good job negotiating fair usage rights.

I live in a place of good intentions, honesty, cultural values instead of commercial values and common sense as well as the un-common sense. This may not be a physical location as you may know, and definitely never will exist in north america, but the difference lies in striving for something worthwhile instead of lost hopes and giving up to the pressure of the immediate surroundings. There is a world outside of competing evil corporations, just like there is a world outside of United States. Feel free to roam the physical world as well as the intellectual world.
 
Maxx Power said:
Since average person doesn't have a measuring stick of how well composed the music is, how musical it is, what is music theory, etc...
I agree that the average person can't tell a well composed piece vs. garbage, but it's hard to do anything about it. Some people just don't have a certain appreciation for the arts. If classical music training was required just like math, maybe more people would realize that some stuff is just pure crap, and these people aren't even musicians. This kind of thing overlaps in a lot of areas though, like film. There is usually a difference between "star" and "actor." Most people don't really consider film art anyway, it's all "entertainment." There's really no stopping the things you're talking about, other than with education. But then if you think like that, you'll realize that the arts programs are always the first things to get cut in schools. In due time we're all dead?? Well, of course, but can't we at least try to enjoy something while we're here? I'm sure nothing I said made any sense. sorry, I can't even remember what thread this is... You think music was better in the 80's though? :confused: :D
 
Apple vs. Microsoft

Real doesn't matter.
Napster doesn't matter.
Sony doesn't matter.

I think this whole market is going to change when Microsoft finally launches. Real is certainly struggling; they're not even denying it. Napster probably has an ouside chance to survive a little while longer. Sony will keep pouring money into Connect and try to prop up its iPod *ahem* BULLSH**! *ahem* killer.

Microsoft needs for one of the manufacturers to step forward with a major, marque device to challenge iPod. I think a single, solid competitor would actually be great for Apple.
 
How could anyone say having a sale on music is negative???? That's not bad. It's not desperate either. It's just a way to promote their service. If you think real is being desperate, at least they are not giving their music away for free like Apple (via the Pepsi promotion).

I say having a music sale is better for costumers. There is no way this can be a bad thing
 
Maxx Power said:
Quite quickly, a lot of these new arts (highly unregulated and judged subjectively) fall to the lowest common denominators such as using beats to subsitute creativity, and using raging vocals to stimulate audience instead of well composed music, anyone can scream, but when you put that on a cd and charge an arm and a leg for it, it just isn't art.

The Impressionists suffered similar accusations when they first displayed their paintings. Many museum-goers complain that their children could create a Pollock, or a Rothko, and that art should be judged by how "realistic" it is, how representational. That's a vastly conservative view of art, and one with which most art critics and historians would disagree.

There is no such thing as commercial art, art originated as an expression form, a desire to create, to communicate and satisfy human's higher consciousness. These qualities can not, and will fundamentally never be able to become commercialized.

My apologies for going a bit off-topic, but this statement is simply unsupported by the vast history of art, almost all of which was made either for patrons who were paying the bills, or for sale. Michelangelo was hired to paint the Sistine Chapel. Most of Mozart's work was done on commission. Modern artists, including not only painters but even innovators like glass sculptor Dale Chihuly get paid for their work (a gallery in Toronto has one of Chihuly's monstrously large glass sculptures with a listed price of a cool $250,000 US). Artists are like everyone else -- they have to have food and shelter, and if they don't produce art that people buy, then they die of poverty. Van Gogh died poor, of course, selling only one painting in his life, and he produced wonderful work, but Monet sold many paintings and died relatively well off (in many cases, the extensive gardens he paints in his later works are his own). Is Van Gogh a better artist than Monet because he wasn't as "commercial"?

To bring this back on topic a bit, it ires me no end to see folks say that artists like musicians should only do what they do for love of art, and not for financial remuneration. You wouldn't ask a plumber to fix your toilet for free just because they may like doing plumbing, and we sure as heck don't expect professional athletes to play "for the love of the game". Why should music be any different? A huge number of non-musicians make money off of the products of musicians (from record label executives down to recording engineers and the folks that sweep up in the studio) -- why should musicians not also get a piece of that pie?

Artists who make art solely for art's sake usually starve. That's a pretty tough standard to hold folks to.
 
Basically, people will go where their players go. People buy a device FIRST and then use an online music store. Apple needs to get their ipods out to as many people as possible. If you own an ipod, then there is no competition. We all know that there is no better music store than iTMS.

Apple should license AAC to everyone BUT real!

I would laugh for months
 
ummm...

*sorry, I read about 30 of the posts and decided to skip the rest...*
2 questions?
Can you download Real music on a Mac? I looked at their sites (real.com, realnetwork.com, and their freedom site) and can find no link to music downloads...
When you download this music, can you burn a CD?
If I can download music from Real and burn it to a CD, I will buy the music for HALF PRICE and burn it to a CD and reimport it.
Some people are saying "ohh, it is just 50 cents." I choose to look at it as "half price!"
Also, I think that Apple would benefit to open it up to other people, but I think that Real is doing it all wrong.
For those of you that want to see the old petition, I found the link:
http://www.petitiononline.com/r4apple/petition.html
I couldn't get it to open in Safari, I had to use IE...
A few quotes from the petition:

Hi Rob! Nice to see you're reading your petition. I hope you notice many of these signatures are in vain. Steve will love this when they receive it. :) Good luck--you'll need it.

this service(real) is a sham. they illegally reversed engineered ipod technology to try to make money. thier crappy software and poor service will doom them, not apple's refusal to jump on thier sinking ship

Nice try!!!! Your software sucks, real

HAHA looks like this petition sure backfired
(and this was only #30 out of over 900!!! hehe)

Also to note... the petition that got bagged had 911 sigs on it... their new one, 724 (I don't know how long each has been open...)
Oh, ya, I signed up as a user at their Freedom website (using a fake e-mail, of course...) Anybody know what good comes out of this? The only thing I see you can do extra is change your settings and log out... lol
[/rambling] Any who, I thought I would point out these things, and if anyone could answer my questions, I would love you forever... but not like that...

Matthew
 
sjjordan said:
Basically, people will go where their players go. People buy a device FIRST and then use an online music store. Apple needs to get their ipods out to as many people as possible. If you own an ipod, then there is no competition. We all know that there is no better music store than iTMS.

Apple should license AAC to everyone BUT real!

I would laugh for months

As far as i can recall, AAC is not apple's. Psytel and some one else jointly developed this for public use, infact, the psytel encoder, one of the best aac/mp4 encoders avaliable is free.
 
Nobody ever uses big fonts in messages.

Today, we celebrate the first glorious anniversary of the iPod and the iTunes Music Store. We have created, for the first time in all history, a garden of pure ideology. Where each worker may bloom secure from the pests of contradictory and confusing truths. Our Unification of Thoughts is more powerful a weapon than any fleet or army on earth. We are one people, with one will, one resolve, one cause. We shall talk ourselves to death and we will bury them with their own confusion. We shall prevail!
 
"Nobody ever uses big fonts in messages."
lol

Any who, has anyone started a petition against Real, with nice legal sounding words like them?
I would sure sign that one!

Matthew
 
katanna said:
*sorry, I read about 30 of the posts and decided to skip the rest...*
2 questions?
Can you download Real music on a Mac? I looked at their sites (real.com, realnetwork.com, and their freedom site) and can find no link to music downloads...
When you download this music, can you burn a CD?
If I can download music from Real and burn it to a CD, I will buy the music for HALF PRICE and burn it to a CD and reimport it.
Some people are saying "ohh, it is just 50 cents." I choose to look at it as "half price!"
Also, I think that Apple would benefit to open it up to other people, but I think that Real is doing it all wrong.
For those of you that want to see the old petition, I found the link:
http://www.petitiononline.com/r4apple/petition.html
I couldn't get it to open in Safari, I had to use IE...

Real refuses to allow Mac users or Linux users to download music. Bye bye freedom of choice.

Some things to see:

https://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16240
https://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16239
http://www.bly.cc/realstore.jpg (iTunes ripoff)
http://www.bly.cc/real.jpg
https://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16242&stc=1
 

Attachments

  • iPod Compatability.jpg
    iPod Compatability.jpg
    60.4 KB · Views: 235
I agree, this is a very good move by real, its unfortunate apple is being very microsoft regarding this. Content just wants to be free, artists make money from shows, screw the middle man. Unfortunatly apple's being the middle man here trying to control the entire supply chain.
 
OK, I finally found the real Real website (not the watered down Mac version, that shows nothing...), and I really want to buy some of their songs (they are cheep... what can I say...)
Any who, I will not be able to get on a PC until next week. Any idea how much longer they are going to keep up these half price tracks??

Matthew
 
Someone said something about the influx in annoying filenames, it's killing me too.
.asx, .asf, .wmv, .wma and that's just Windows Media
.mp4, .mp3, .mpwhatever
Ick, too many.

Look, I don't think that Real made a good decision in allowing their files on the iPod, technically there are a lot of Windows people that would gladly see that happen.
If Real wants to sell it low, then they'll sell it low to get into the market and they way it sounds plenty of people will gladly switch from .99 to .49c it's just marketing tactics.

Every other online music store has just quickly thrown up a similair service with a similair price but with foreign formats to the iPod, if Real can supply a similair service with a lower price and higher compatibility they have a potential advantage.

But like I said, all Australia's got is the Big Pond Music and I will gladly see a better one coming.
 
katanna said:
Any who, has anyone started a petition against Real, with nice legal sounding words like them?
I would sure sign that one!

Hope this is legalese enough for you

http://www.petitiononline.com/notreal/

In fact it's so legalese that the last paragraph isn't English at all!

;)

We are over 200 Signatures ahead of Real atm, would be nice to keep it that way

Mike
 
A last gasp

Real is losing money with this attempt to undercut iTunes pricing. This is not going to benefit customers, except that Windows users might be able to buy up songs at 1/2 price. But, even though you CAN get the songs from Real right now cheap, are people suddenly going to buy all their songs from Real? How many people are actually going suddenly start buying up songs. The prices will go back up and maybe some of those buyers will keep buying from Real, but it's not going to bring music prices down to any degree.

Apple refused to deal with Real because Apple has better, more lucrative plans (Motorolla, others?). Plus, if a Mac user can't get music downloads from Real, what good are they?

Real is having a fit now and trying to make a lot of noise because they know they need the iPod. I think they recognize that there is no serious competition to the iPod on the immediate horizon and that's putting them in a bind. Hacking DRM and petitioning Apple are acts of desparation.

Real is waiving the banner of consumerism, but they don't give a flying **** about the Mac community and are really just trying to keep the numbers looking good for their investors. Unfortunately for them, they're expecting to take a loss from their big FIRE SALE.

:rolleyes:
 
Ok...
I really thought what Real was doing wasn't so bad, except the the way they were going about it and the fact that they are Real, and I've not personally used anything from Real so far that impresses me. Real may make decent products, I just haven't seen them. That and it's not like they thought this could be kinda ok, they went about this the right way and Apple told them no, not "reverse engineer our stuff and start a big ad compain in a hissy-fit cause we didn't let you guys license our stuff", they told them no. But, do I think that Apple should license they're stuff to other companies, yes, for a few reasons-
1) If Apple sets it up right with the licensing contracts they will lose no control over they're technology, and even if noone uses, let's say the iTMS anymore, they still make $ off licensing fees from they're competitors.
2) Keeping your cards really close to your chest makes people want to see your hand even more. Example, DVD Jon, I don't think I need to say any more. I don't think Apple really has a lot to lose by loosening it's grip at least a lil bit.
I think Apple should do this, but not with Real. Real has blatantly made a serious pain in the arse of themselves and really not gained anyone anything, not even themselves. At the prices they're selling the songs at they have pitched themselves into a money losing situation, barring a sheer miracle. And then, just to make it obvious that they do not completely intend to give this proclaimed "freedom of choice" I see it mentioned in this thread that non-Windows platforms are not supported.. freedom of choice, eh? The other problem with this is, it's not like Real is blind to other platforms, I've used Real's products on Linux and Mac, they know they exsist they have simply made a concious decision to exclude them. So for all you out there that think 'hey the open source community is to benifit from the ability to be compatible with Apple's stuff', just remember that benifit was basicly a backhanded complement. When going to Real's site you might as well be begging for table scraps.
Ultimately, I think Real will get what they deserve and sink back to what they were before all this started, but Apple needs to realize it they keep up they're selfish, go-alone attitude or this will not be the last time this happens, and unless they want to be veiwed to a certain extent as being in the same category as our buddies from Microsoft, they need to loosen up a little.
 
Protest people, protest!

What people REALLY want is no DRM whatsoever! Now that would a great protest! And this also means a protest against copy protected CDs. We are the legal buyers of the music; we should NOT be punished in any way. The industry treats every legal buyer as a potential pirate. So people, start shouting that you don't want any DRM! Start petitions, boycott the music industry, and let our voices be heard! The music industry has caused this mess, so we should take our voices to the music industry.

People say that this protest would be futile, but if everybody would just stick with it. People believe that they cannot change the industry, but we can. This is what's wrong with the people: They are scared to let their real voices be heard and do something active to change things. Where are the rebels these days?

It is because nobody as a community or society has the guts to stand up to anything that the industry plays us like a fool! If we want to change things, we have to stand tall!

Aargh, what am I doing? I'm playing the idealist. I cannot change the people. Heck, I will not even listen to myself. Who will start the voice to boycott all DRM online music stores? Who will start the voice to boycott all copy protected CD's in shops? Not me, that's for sure. Maybe I’ll even buy a DRM protected song or two. This is what's wrong with the world: People are just like me!

P.S. Real also isn't really going to change things for the consumer.
 
I will NOT buy copy-protected CDs. CDs are the standard for music buying, and a boycott there can be valuable.

But I will also not try to kill downloadable singles. Apple's DRM is far broader than I need for my use, so I'll accept the necessary evil.
 
nagromme said:
I will NOT buy copy-protected CDs.
I won't either. If I'm going to spend $15-20 on a CD, I won't stand for it being copy-protected. iTMS songs however do allow more freedom, and considering I only use music from there for personal use anyway, I don't need to make lots and lots of copies.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.