Perhaps the best in the franchise yet, and it wasn't even lead by either of the A or B teams...
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War - Our Full Review
The PS5 has landed a couple of timed exclusives so we look at Godfall from New(ish) Kids on the Block, Counterplay.
Godfall Review - Godly Ascension, or a Fall from Grace
We spoke to Lead Combat Designer Tomonori Kinoshita from Bungie to find out a little more about how the fight on Europa will go down.
Destiny 2: Beyond Light - We Chat to Bungie
Post by trog @ 09:10am 03/04/07 | 33 Comments
Finally, some good news:
Mr Jobs foreshadowed an expansion of the new format saying he expected "more than half of the songs on iTunes [to be available] in DRM-free versions by the end of this year".
There's a downside:
The new offerings will cost about a third more per track. Apple says US customers will pay $US1.29 per DRM-free track as opposed to the standard price of US99c, which will still apply to protected versions.
The full article has more information and is worth a read. It's a bit light on technical details - there's no real confirmation there that they'll be using the more accessible mp3, for example - but nonetheless, maybe it's a sign that big media companies are listening to consumers.



drmappleitunes





Latest Comments
Raven
Posted 09:15am 03/4/07
And of course now when noone buys them they're going to say "DRM-free tracks aren't selling anywhere near as well, clearly noone wants them, so we've decided to discontinue them". All of this will be because the price is too high, but of course they won't admit or accept this.
ara
Posted 09:40am 03/4/07

yeah, it is interesting that DRM-free cost more. The implication is that people who download DRM free are going to share them around, when in actual fact DRM free will be cheaper to produce due to no DRM licensing costs.
Jim
Posted 09:43am 03/4/07
And of course now when noone buys them despite having the primary 'justification' for piracy removed and only costing 30cents more, they're going to say the price is too high and blame the record companys again, but of couse they won't admit or accept this.
ara
Posted 09:53am 03/4/07

who are they in your comment above?
jmr
Posted 09:59am 03/4/07
F*** yeah thats top news, I actually have been using itunes store a bit lately, its up to date, and fast as hell. The only pain in the ass is having to authenticate every computer in the house to play the music
Dan
Posted 10:17am 03/4/07
when in actual fact DRM free will be cheaper to produce due to no DRM licensing costs.
I would have thought the licensing costs would be higher due to record companies wanting more dollars if they want to sell the tracks unprotected. I wouldn't think it would be Apple's choice to sell the unprotected tracks with a markup but the riaa's.
Term
Posted 11:56am 03/4/07
soo.... wonder if they will watermark them
Mr.Bumpy
Posted 12:08pm 03/4/07
How would they watermark music track?
dynamite
Posted 12:14pm 03/4/07
With water
scuzzy
Posted 12:14pm 03/4/07
soo.... wonder if they will watermark them
What like Aphex Twin?

Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us

http://www.bastwood.com/aphex.php
http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2002/05/52426
trog
Posted 12:18pm 03/4/07
I would have thought the licensing costs would be higher due to record companies wanting more dollars if they want to sell the tracks unprotected.
I guess the question is, do we (the consumer) deem the extra price reasonable as its basically "insurance" from the media companies as they balance the risk of releasing un-DRM'ed tracks.

So yes, we're paying extra even though their actual sheer money costs are decreased, but their perceived risk has increased so they're trying to balance it.

Jim's comment, for those that didn't get it, is basically saying "ok you stupid pirating jerks, now that they're selling un-DRM'ed media just like you've always whined about, are you actually going to put your money where your mouth is and buy some of it? Or will you keep being a jerk and stealing it anyway?" Which is a fair point - EXCEPT that they're charging more, I guess.
hardware
Posted 12:20pm 03/4/07
I'm honest. DRM or no DRM, I ain't paying for music. Arr.
paveway
Posted 12:28pm 03/4/07
i don't have an ipod and so i don't need itunes

wat about those people hey?
Raven
Posted 12:32pm 03/4/07
How would they watermark music track?

Haven't you ever heard a trombone played under water?
ara
Posted 12:34pm 03/4/07

itunes isn't just for people with ipods.

Just like media player has become, itunes is a music store first and foremost. Once you buy the un-DRM music you can then transfer it to which ever device you want via which ever means you choose.

I still buy CDs and rip them to mp3s. Then the CD just sits on a shelf in my house with the occasional visit to my cars CD player.
Tepid
Posted 03:58pm 03/4/07
iTunes is limewire/torrents for dummies
Spook
Posted 04:06pm 03/4/07
yer, im not going to pay for music either

most of the music i listen to you cant buy anyway (dj sets)
spoon
Posted 04:09pm 03/4/07
No one would buy it anyway spook, thats why they don't sell it.
KungFuCamel
Posted 05:27pm 03/4/07
the drm-free music is also encoded in 256k aac instead of 128k which is what the normal itunes songs are... even though they are charging a small premium for it, it's still a big step towards drm-free legally purchased music available for downloading... hopefully this will get the other record labels on board as well.
trog
Posted 05:37pm 03/4/07
Once you buy the un-DRM music you can then transfer it to which ever device you want via which ever means you choose.
Only if a) it's in a format that your player supports or b) you have the right to transcode
infi
Posted 06:11pm 03/4/07
Haven't you ever heard a trombone played under water?


A trombone played underwater would go rusty.

Also I read an article in this week's Bulletin about Richard Branson saying he makes more money from running the V Festival than he could ever make from running a record label these days.

No money in selling music. That's so 20th century. recorded music should be treated like a teaser for the real thing.
Jim
Posted 07:36pm 03/4/07
brass doesn't rust!
trog
Posted 07:49pm 03/4/07
Also I read an article in this week's Bulletin about Richard Branson saying he makes more money from running the V Festival than he could ever make from running a record label these days.
Ohh, Arthur Fortune. One step ahead of the game. I was hoping he'd spearhead the revolution for DRM-free downloads because it seems like the sort of irreverent f***-you he'd do to the rest of the industry.
dranged
Posted 08:14pm 03/4/07
It could be adopted well. Can't pirate s*** for your whole life you know.

We all know it's pretty f***ed buying something with conditions pasted all over it. Like buying a CD where you could listen to it say on Mondays only. It'd be pretty cool knowing you could do whatever you wanted with a track you bought without guilt, professional or legal repurcussions.

Besides, if Jobs wants to tyre-wrench iTunes into the mobile market, Fairplay is a big entry barrier.. Removing DRM potentially might make iTunes more appealling as a bundled application on other Vendors phones.. ?
KungFuCamel
Posted 09:54pm 03/4/07
You do know that you can strip drm from current itune's songs by burning the playlist to cd and re-ripping it?
infi
Posted 10:00pm 03/4/07
steve jobs apparently knows that. he spoke about it in his response to criticism of the proposal and replied that they were offering a new product which would have higher bitrate and save people time by not having to rip, so the new format offered 20p more value.
Tepid
Posted 09:26am 04/4/07
itunes does nothing that you cant do with different programs. except put songs onto an ipod. and i dont have an ipod (nor do i want one).

i just have a flash-based mp3 player where you can drag/drop files directly into the "Removable Disk" drive in windows.

Isnt that miles easier than using a crappy third party program?
paveway
Posted 09:34am 04/4/07
i use winamp...
hardware
Posted 09:45am 04/4/07
winamp 2.78 for lyfe yo
Boxhead
Posted 03:53pm 04/4/07
Album prices remain the same.. So say the album was 15bucks with drm, it remains 15bucks without drm and at higher quality, you get a choice.. Coupled with the whole 'discount to complete an album' thing apple have been touting, it will see a rise in sales i feel...

Piracy won't really have an effect on this I don't think because there are already a variety of sources to get drm free music for free... (p2p etc), so anything they sell will be an increase in sales add ontop of that the audiophiles converting their library over to the higher quality, it'll all equal money for apple and emi, by the time that grace period is over and a real indication of sales is sort of felt, i'd say the other record labels may have joined in some form or another fearful of missing out on some cash

This decision is more of a coup for independant artists since from a economics stand point they can now get their music out there in a more mass media form, at a good quality and for little cost, plus they'll get a return for it, which is the kicker, allowing them to make more money, produce more etc...
Term
Posted 08:20am 18/4/07
A few people took the piss out of my watermark comment, I was making references to the tech developed by the biz that developed and licenses the MP3 format

See http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,124676-page,1/article.html
Sheila
Posted 01:00am 20/4/07
There was a discussion between Bill Gates and Steve Jobs to drop the DRM protection completly sometime in the future. It seems that iTunes is making the first steps in this direction.
DRM is only a hax to scare un-informed people. There are so many ways to get your free, clean copy of any protected file. From legit software that exploits the analog-hole principle to illegal software, that simply cracks DRM(depending on the person).
So in a way, it's the next logical step. Once they remove the DRM protection, there won't be any way to stop the files from "running around"
Commenting has been locked for this item.
33 Comments
Show