Ebolla
join:2005-09-28
Dracut, MA
| reply to Xizer
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. |
|
Xizer
join:2004-02-05
New York, NY
| reply to insomniac84
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. |
|
DrModem
Premium
join:2006-10-19
USA
 ·EarthLink
 ·1and1
 ·PeoplePC
| reply to Xizer
said by Xizer :said by jjoshua :Something reasonable. And legal. $1.29 for a lossy format audio file is unreasonable. I have 256k MP3 files and can't hear the difference between them and an uncompressed WAV. 128k is another story altogether though. |
|
ialsoagreeee
@ameritech.net | reply to Grail Knight
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. |
|
insomniac84
join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN | reply to Xizer
Interesting theory. I wonder how people justified buying records and cassette tapes. |
|
Sly
Premium
join:2004-02-20
Johnson City, TN
clubs:
 ·Packet8
·Callcentric
 ·Comcast Formerly ..
2 edits | reply to beaups
What they charge for a song is what I pay for an album... One song? 18¢... DRM free and high variable bitrate.
»www.mp3count.com
One song? 18¢... DRM free and high variable bitrate.
--
"The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men."
- Plato - |
|
Grail Knight
Who Dares Wins
Premium
join:2003-05-31
·Verizon Online DSL
1 edit | reply to BF69
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." |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to Grail Knight
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. |
|
Count Zero
MD2Be
Premium
join:2007-01-18
Warner Robins, GA | reply to KrK
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. |
|
Count Zero
MD2Be
Premium
join:2007-01-18
Warner Robins, GA
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
| reply to RadioDoc
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. |
|
Xizer
join:2004-02-05
New York, NY
| reply to jjoshua
said by jjoshua :Something reasonable. And legal. $1.29 for a lossy format audio file is unreasonable. |
|
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | reply to jjoshua
Question is now will they begin inching up the pricing. To me even $1.29 seems pretty high for an .mp3 |
|
Grail Knight
Who Dares Wins
Premium
join:2003-05-31 | reply to Oleg
To each their own.  |
|
Oleg
Bellsouth Fastaccess
Premium
join:2003-12-08
Birmingham, AL | reply to Grail Knight
I am only into 80's and 90's music. |
|
Grail Knight
Who Dares Wins
Premium
join:2003-05-31
·Verizon Online DSL
1 edit | reply to N3OGH
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 | reply to jjoshua
I may start using itunes again. |
|
81399672
Premium
join:2006-05-17
Los Angeles, CA | reply to jjoshua
Hahahaha....like that will make a difference. |
|
Surfinusa
Premium
join:2001-02-08 | reply to jjoshua
said by jjoshua :Something reasonable. And legal. Agreed |
|
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Verizon Online DSL
1 edit | reply to jjoshua
Considering most of the music I like is old and unpopular, I expect to be paying less for more.
All I've got to say is if teenage girls start listening to Steely Dan and Oingo Boingo, I may have to get Medieval on someone quick....
Edit to add "I like"
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… |
|
sousademiami
join:2003-02-04
Hialeah, FL | reply to quatrix
I think the point is, before the options were reasonable OR legal, now we have something that is both reasonable AND legal.
--
OASAASLLS |
|
