 jjoshua Premium join:2001-06-01 Scotch Plains, NJ 1 edit | Finally Something reasonable. And legal. | |
|
 RadioDoc 58ef2c0 Premium,ExMod 2000-03 join:2000-05-11 | Re: Finally No kidding. And way late. Amazon, eMusic and 7digital (among others) had been doing this for quite awhile now. -- Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
|
 |   Count Zero MD2Be Premium join:2007-01-18 Warner Robins, GA
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
| Re: Finally said by RadioDoc :No kidding. And way late. Amazon, eMusic and 7digital (among others) had been doing this for quite awhile now. And the DRM-free part wasn't Apple's fault. Besides Apple's iTunes Store is still the single largest music sales force in the market PERIOD. | |
|
 beaups
join:2003-08-11 Hilliard, OH
| the 256kbs bitrate is exciting too. I could never imagine paying $1 for a DRM'd 128kbps song. I would think if you want people to pay for something when the competition is "free" then you better at least make sure the product is just as good. This is good. | |
|
 |  |
 quatrix Premium join:2005-02-11 Davie, FL | It was already legal, but I'm sure you knew that. | |
|
 |   canesfan2001
join:2003-02-04 Hialeah, FL | Re: Finally I think the point is, before the options were reasonable OR legal, now we have something that is both reasonable AND legal. -- OASAASLLS | |
|
 |
 |   Grail Knight Who Dares Wins Premium join:2003-05-31
·Verizon Online DSL
1 edit | Re: Finally quote: Considering most of the music is old and unpopular, I expect to be paying less for more.
What you consider unpopular more then likely is someone else's favorite music.
I listen to Classical & Symphonic music and have always paid dirt cheap prices only because others deem it unpopular.
IMO the price across the board should be a fixed rate of say .50¢ per song.
Edit* -- "The little things are infinitely the most important." | |
|
 |  |   Oleg Bellsouth Fastaccess Premium join:2003-12-08 Birmingham, AL | Re: Finally I am only into 80's and 90's music. | |
|
 |  |  |   Grail Knight Who Dares Wins Premium join:2003-05-31 | Re: Finally To each their own.  | |
|
 |  |   BF69
join:2004-07-28 Camden, TN
| said by Grail Knight : quote: Considering most of the music is old and unpopular, I expect to be paying less for more.
What you consider unpopular more then likely is someone else's favorite music. I listen to Classical & Symphonic music and have always paid dirt cheap prices only because others deem it unpopular. IMO the price across the board should be a fixed rate of say .50¢ per song. Edit* Really 69 cents is not that much. Hell 30 years ago I was paying $1 for a 45 single. That's about $2.50 in today money. | |
|
 |  |  |   Grail Knight Who Dares Wins Premium join:2003-05-31
·Verizon Online DSL
1 edit | Re: Finally As I said across the board as in one set price. Not .39 here and a buck and change there.
I really do not care if it is a dime or a buck something per song just level the playing field IMO.
Edit* -- "The little things are infinitely the most important." | |
|
 |  |  |  |   ialsoagreeee
@ameritech.net | Re: Finally I agree, 50 cents across the board for 256k mp3 is a fair price, considering it doesn't cost them anything since it is a "copy" and not a resource. Also this will attract more customers and spur demand. | |
|
 Surfinusa Premium join:2001-02-08 | said by jjoshua :Something reasonable. And legal. Agreed | |
|
  81399672 Premium join:2006-05-17 Los Angeles, CA | Hahahaha....like that will make a difference. | |
|
  Oleg Bellsouth Fastaccess Premium join:2003-12-08 Birmingham, AL | I may start using itunes again. | |
|
  KrK Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy Premium join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK | Question is now will they begin inching up the pricing. To me even $1.29 seems pretty high for an .mp3 | |
|
 |   Count Zero MD2Be Premium join:2007-01-18 Warner Robins, GA | Re: Finally Now that Apple has agreed to this pricing scheme expect it to become the norm in all of the online music stores in the near future. | |
|
  Xizer
join:2004-02-05 New York, NY
| said by jjoshua :Something reasonable. And legal. $1.29 for a lossy format audio file is unreasonable. | |
|
 |   insomniac84
join:2002-01-03 Schererville, IN | Re: Finally Interesting theory. I wonder how people justified buying records and cassette tapes. | |
|
 |  |   Xizer
join:2004-02-05 New York, NY
| Re: Finally said by insomniac84 :Interesting theory. I wonder how people justified buying records and cassette tapes. Are you proprosing that we actually regress when it comes to audio technology? That's absurd.
The technology for lossless audio is readily available and has been for many years. It is unacceptable for it to not be used. | |
|
 |  |  |   Ebolla
join:2005-09-28 Dracut, MA
| Re: Finally Think the point was that at the time when cassettes were king that people said "hmmm $x.xx is reasonable for this format" when they could also borrow tape and dub from a friend. I don't think his point was lets go back to a format that doesn't make sense due to technology advances. | |
|
 |  |
 |
|
 |