... It's a much different experience than buying a CD at Target, where the fact that you bought it from Target and play it on your Sony CD player is more or less irrelevant.
It's mostly irrelevant with iTunes as well. 1/3 of the songs (the EMI tracks and some independents) are available without DRM, and will therefore play everywhere. Although there aren't many non-iPod portable players capable of playing AAC, there are many computer-based players and car stereos that support the format. And tracks without DRM can be converted to MP3 or other more popular formats, if necessary.
The DRM-wrapped tracks on iTunes can all be burned to CD, making them compatible with the rest of the world as well.
... This closed system and the fixed pricing are probably the biggest points of contention from the labels.
The labels are the ones demanding the closed system. EMI eventually came around and decided to offer tracks without DRM, but the other three major labels are quite adamant about making sure iTunes tracks remain as closed as possible.
As for fixed pricing, that's just greed, plain and simple. They are making a nice profit, and their customers are happy. But they think they can get more money if Apple would only let them squeeze the market a bit tighter. They're welcome to that opinion, but history has repeatedly shown that it is wrong. Higher prices (such as those they charge on other download services) result in less, not more, profit. Higher prices convince customers to stop buying - they end up going without new music or they download from illegal sources.
They were really happy with the money from Apple when they thought the service was going to be a failure. Now that it's a success, they want control over it. If Apple has any brains, they'll make sure the labels never get that kind of control - if they do, iTunes will be run into the ground, just like all of the other download services.
I still wonder if or when Apple will open up their system and how it will affect their business.
You mean like how they now offer to sell non-DRM tracks whenever the copyright holder gives permission?
It doesn't seem to have hurt them.
Or do you still think the best solution is to go DRM-everywhere, and give the DRM software to the rest of the world? The complete failure of protected-WMA download services should have eliminated that idea from the realm of plausibility by now.
Apple isn't as wonderful and innocent as so many posters seem to believe though. Apple is shrewd in their business dealings. Don't get me wrong, Apple makes very innovative and quality products and is deserving of accolades. However, Apple didn't "save music" or do anything with altruistic intentions that you seem to bestow on them. This is a fight for power and money, that is all - it's business.
Did anybody say otherwise?
But whatever their motivation, their business practices are more consumer friendly than everybody else. This is something that I, as a consumer, have no problem supporting.
In comparison, look at the record labels. They treat everybody else with total contempt and hatred - this includes the artists, the distributors, the retailers, and the customers. You buy their product, and they call you a pirate. You sign on as an artist, and you never see a penny profit. You try to sell CDs, and you have to obey their price-fixing schemes or risk having your supply cut off. Would you expect anybody to support this?
