Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Re: Re: Newsflash: Buy.com run by Morons

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Dear lord, backslashes in URLs??? What kind of web monkeys are running that site? :rolleyes:

You answered your own question.... Monkeys are.
 
Re: Re: Newsflash: Buy.com run by Morons

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Dear lord, backslashes in URLs??? What kind of web monkeys are running that site? :rolleyes:

Wow, I've gotten so used to cheating, I mean using Dreamweaver, I missed that :rolleyes: ....I need to do some straight coding once in a while, it is very rejuvenating....

--Waluigi
 
Originally posted by Iceman06
Why are they going to call it iMusic? Everyone knows that the "i" is used by Apple so that's just one more thing that there service is copying Apple on. If I didn't know that it was already made by Buy.com then I would have thought it was something by Apple if I would have just stumbled across it someday.

So far they have copied Apple's service on:
Commericals
"i" Name

Hmm...Wonder what else

Sounds like "iMusic", but it's "BuyMusic".
 
What does he mean "steve's on the wrong platform"? when did apple stop working with mp3's? They didn't, and I don't think MS is going to get away with a digital hub strategy on a proprietary format. What next, digital photo services that don't work with jpg's and tiff's?
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think the "wrong platform" he's referring to is the Apple computing platform...
 
well i was reading slashdot and it is only available to people in the US. the check your IP number.

iJon
 
not the apple guitar! no!!!
anyway, why are we caring so much about this when it's not even good. we already know
1-they took the ads and ruined them
2-that they have almost no songs at $0.75
3-took the iName and put it to shame
4-got to the windows market before apple
5-doesn't have beatles like every music service
6-will die and rot in hel for killing the AppleMusic guitar:mad:

also, if you're a beatles fan and want thier songs, you should either have them, or have the common sense to go on P2P and download them.
 
If they don't have figures on how many songs they've sold within 1 week, we will know that they have flopped...

Only Apple can create the effect of having a new product come out with a bang in the computer world. Everyone just rolls out their products, but Apple has a press conference, or a special event, or something that gets the media, and users all riled up.

This service just kinda appeared, without any real fanfare. I'd be surprised if many people actually know about it. I mean, if I got an e-mail advertising it, I would think it's a promotional gimmick, and promptly delete it. Unless I read the press release, I wouldn't have guessed that this store is anything like the iTunes Music Store.

The only reason why people know what the Apple one is, is that Apple doesn't send out spam, and have the advertising mess that is associated with sites like buy.com. People will actually take time to see what Apple's doing new, even if they don't use a mac.
 
Originally posted by G4scott
This service just kinda appeared, without any real fanfare. I'd be surprised if many people actually know about it. I mean, if I got an e-mail advertising it, I would think it's a promotional gimmick, and promptly delete it. Unless I read the press release, I wouldn't have guessed that this store is anything like the iTunes Music Store.

Funny though. Has everyone else noticed that people all know about the ITMS? Granted about 2/3 of them see my iPod or hear me talking about iTunes and say "Why do you pay $1 for every song you have?" And I have to explain that the iTMS is just a source for songs, and you can still rip and pirate (windows users like to know you can still use pirated audio on an iPod). Even so, misinformed people which are aware of the service is better than nothing.
 
Blum and Tommy Lee just were interviewed on CNBC -
Gawd, what a bunch of lurkers, unintelligible gibbersih out of Tommy Lee and Blum with a smile on his face as if he had just escaped from a mental asylum.
If SJ really has a secret deal with them as some rumor mongers wanted to see it, then even SJ is a brick short of a wall (and he definitely is not)- these two lurkers came across like some used car sales men - now let me correct this - these two guys would be an insult to any decent used car salesman
Man, it was bad - hope you all could see it too:D :D :D
 
i couldn't :(

However, I did just send a very insulting email to BuyMusic.com, which I ended by saying "Well, I'm off to buy music from the iTMS", which I promptly did, buying two new albums.

However, I hope they are smart enough to figure out what iTMS stands for...

1 more post to 100! yay!
 
hey, sorry to post twice in a row, but this really cracks me up.

So Long, Astoria by the Ataris is listed as one of the top full album downloads on BuyMusic.com, yet the full album is not available.

yay, one hundred posts.
 
Me Email

I just sent the following to BuyMusic.com's customer support. I hope to hear something back...

Dear BuyMusic.com,
I, along with many other computer users, have seen the press releases regarding your service. I decided to give things a look, and I'm fairly unimpressed. Your website is poorly designed, and the use of Windows Media Player 9 is distressing. Many of us are concerned about privacy, and having to use an application which utilizes Microsoft's flawed Passport system is not something we feel comfortable doing.

Your advertising boasts $0.79 per song. Of all the browsing I've done (about a half an hour now), possibly 15 to 20% of the tracks I've looked at carried the advertised $0.79 price tag. Pricing for your albums is also greatly skewed. Almost all of the albums I've viewed were priced at $11 and up. This is much more expensive than the advertised $7.95.

I find it interesting that your commercials borrow so heavily from Apple's iTunes Music Store campaign (headphone-wearing individuals singing their favorite song over a white background). The commercial showing Tommy Lee smashing a guitar that looks disturbingly similar to the one featured at Apple's website (see it at: http://www.apple.com/music/) and on their banners is not a subtle hint to Apple's users, and many of us have taken note. By taking a swing at Apple's users, you are only doing a disservice to the Windows platform. Wouldn't it be more productive to try to sway Apple's users to make the switch to the Windows platform by offering them a quality alternative rather than making childish pokes and prods at the company they're currently giving their money to? Because, after all, this is about money, right? If I were the head of Buy.com, I'd be more interested in making money instead of alienating potential customers. But, then again, I'm not Scott Blum.

Speaking of which, Mr. Blums' comments about Steve Jobs being "a visionary, but on the wrong platform" were highly ironic to me and many others when we realized that the BuyMusic.com music files will be incompatible with Apple's iPod. The iPod currently holds 50% of the portable mp3-player market. Who's on the wrong platform?

In closing, I hope this letter does not fall on deaf ears. Your service is subpar, your advertising is a sham, and your founder needs a lesson in originality. I see problems for your service in the not-so-distant future. Apple's iTunes for Windows is on track to be released by the end of the year. Here's hoping you didn't sink too much money into this venture.

Sincerely,
(my real name)
 
i just wanna say something, this is not the time to acknowledge that we hate them. by sending them countless emails, not only are you acknowledging to them that you think they are a competitor, but you are also making them seem like a big threat when in actuality they aren't.
 
Originally posted by Kid Red
Taken from their music page on the side-



Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the assumption that DVD-Audio was the highest quality source available today? (other then DAT of course)

DVD-Audio and SACD are both much higher quality than is currently available on standard CD. However, DVD-Audio is a higher resolution version of the PCM (Pulse Code Modulation) audio that comes on standard CDs whereas SACD uses a AD conversion process called DSD (Direct Stream Digital) which is 1 bit at a much higher sampling rate. It also bypasses a few of the filtering phases in traditional Analog to PCM back to Analog, and therefore is supposed to be a closer approximation of the original analog source. Although both formats have their proponents, SACD is generally considered superior quality by high end audiophiles and sound engineers. Hope this helps.
 
Originally posted by kenohki
DVD-Audio and SACD are both much higher quality than is currently available on standard CD. However, DVD-Audio is a higher resolution version of the PCM (Pulse Code Modulation) audio that comes on standard CDs whereas SACD uses a AD conversion process called DSD (Direct Stream Digital) which is 1 bit at a much higher sampling rate. It also bypasses a few of the filtering phases in traditional Analog to PCM back to Analog, and therefore is supposed to be a closer approximation of the original analog source. Although both formats have their proponents, SACD is generally considered superior quality by high end audiophiles and sound engineers. Hope this helps.

I was under the impression DVD-A and HDCD were both multichannel high def audio formats on DVD discs while SACD was a new form of audio created by Sony and was on regular CDs (not sure about that part). Of note, DVD-A is designed for anti-piracy, nothing except DVD-A players are allowed to decode the format, thus the sound can ONLY enter a receiver (or amp) via analog channels (thus the popularity of 6-channal analog input on new receivers)
 
Observations and Help page revelations

I've been navigating through this site for about a half hour and here are some observations:

-lack of band content
-extremely tight licensing of the tracks
-similar to Pressplay in that not all tracks may be available for listening or download
-preview quality is extremely poor (appear to be 16kpbs WMA?)
-ruthless copy cat ads
-ruthless self promotion of Tommy Lee's album as a 'top download'
-minority of the tracks are actually 79 cents
-burning is to be accomplished through WMP 9 (which I believe has only a limited recording speed version of the Roxio burn engine)

I think the idea behind this service is a good one but the implementation is poor and catered to the music industry. Pressplay followed this business model and didn't have much success.

Don't take my word for it, examine the Help pages (which amongst other things has Shipping information! What?)

http://www.buymusic.com/support/help.aspx#License_Downloading

"Make sure you mean to buy your music from your primary computer so that it contains your primary license. The licenses are non-transferable. You cannot buy your music on your work machine and then transfer your primary license to your home machine. The computer you buy from becomes the primary computer with the primary license for that song. "

Yeah, thanks for treating me like a child. I'll take my business elsewhere.

Now if only I could download my half hour of wasted life spent on their site....

zamis
 
Originally posted by MasterX (OSiX)
I was under the impression DVD-A and HDCD were both multichannel high def audio formats on DVD discs while SACD was a new form of audio created by Sony and was on regular CDs (not sure about that part). Of note, DVD-A is designed for anti-piracy, nothing except DVD-A players are allowed to decode the format, thus the sound can ONLY enter a receiver (or amp) via analog channels (thus the popularity of 6-channal analog input on new receivers)

Really? I find it highly suspect that people would be prevented from going out via Toslink to an amp/receiver for DVD-A output.
 
Of note, iTMS carries equal quantaty of Tommy Lee's music (unless you count the clean version as seperate). He didn't even give up any custom tracks? What a tool.

Anyone know about quality of WM9 audio? We all know it sucks for other reasons, but how is it vs MPEG-4?
 
I seriously doubt apple has any reason to sue, just as intel didn't with the BURNT bunny parody ads...Still, I say the the buymusic store is crap.
 

Attachments

  • bunny_poster.jpg
    bunny_poster.jpg
    35.5 KB · Views: 647
Originally posted by chewbaccapits
I seriously doubt apple has any reason to sue, just as intel didn't with the BURNT bunny parody ads...Still, I say the the buymusic store is crap.

But these ads aren't parodies, they're ripoffs - big difference.
 
Originally posted by bennetsaysargh
i just wanna say something, this is not the time to acknowledge that we hate them. by sending them countless emails, not only are you acknowledging to them that you think they are a competitor, but you are also making them seem like a big threat when in actuality they aren't.

heh... yeah - go buy some itunes music instead... :)

arn
 
Only one good thing so far

As much as the web interface may suck compared to iTunes, there is one nice thing about it.

Right now I don't have a Mac (still saving up). So far, I haven't found a way to look at what is available in iTMS, but with BuyMusic I can look on their website even though I have no intention of buying.
 
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Really? I find it highly suspect that people would be prevented from going out via Toslink to an amp/receiver for DVD-A output.

Its true unfortunately, unless your reciever has a builr in SACD or DVD-A player, the only way to hook it up is through seperate connectors for each channel, they don't allow optical or coaxial connectors as far as I know for copyright reasons...
attachment.php


Although Creative labs is supposed to come out (or has already come out with) a card + software that will play DVD-As.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.